References:  UKAITUR HX067172003,
References:  UKAITUR HX066782003,
References:  UKAITUR HX065242003,
References:  UKAITUR HX063032003,
References:  UKAITUR HX060062003,
References:  UKAITUR HX034722003,
References:  UKAITUR HX028872003,
References:  UKAITUR HX009292003,
References:  UKAITUR HR152712003,
References:  UKAITUR CC563872002,
References:  UKAITUR CC265422003,
References:  UKAITUR TH336552001,
NIIT It is the unanimous decision of the tribunal that the dismissal of the claimant was unfair both on statutory procedural grounds and general procedural grounds. However, the tribunal also considered that there was very little chance that the claimant would have been retained in employment even had the full statutory procedures been observed. Accordingly, the tribunal has assigned a deduction of 95% from the compensation to be paid to the claimant to reflect that there was a very small chance that she would have been retained in employment, with a further deduction of 95% in respect of her contributory fault. The tribunal noted that the claimant’s claim was not received pursuant to Article 145(2)a before the end of the period of three months beginning with the effective date of termination, but found that it was received within a further period that the tribunal considered reasonable being satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of the period of three months. The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant £974.70 in compensation.Court: NIIT
References:  NIIT 02872_10IT,
The claimant’s claims of disability discrimination (direct discrimination, disability-related discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments), unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unlawful deductions from wages are dismissed.Court: NIIT
References:  NIIT 02451_10IT,
Trade Mark: OppositionCourt: IPO
References:  UKIntelP o35711,
A court may rely on post-contract correspondence when one has to determine what the terms of a contract are (rather than what those terms mean).Date: 01-Jan-2001
References:  2 Lloyd's Rep 649 (?)
The solicitor had sought an order to have set aside the Society’s intervention in his legal practice. His claim had been dismissed after considerable delay, but re-instated on appeal. The Society now appealed against the re-instatement. There had been default’s on his client account.
Held: The Society’s appeal succeeded.
Judges: Aldous, Carnwath LJJ, Sir Christopher Staunton
References:  EWCA Civ 39,  1 WLR 1059
The parties disputed the interpretation of a rent review clause, with an alternative claim for rectification.Court: ChD
Judges: David Mackie QC
References:  EWHC 78 (Ch),
The parties disputed the liability of the defendant health authority to pay the legal costs of the attendance of the claimant’s solicitor at the inquest after the successful professional negligence claim.Court: SCCO
Judges: Master Gordon-Saker
References:  EWHC 9007 (Costs),
Application for permission to appeal by the claimant against a decision which effectively precludes her from continuing with her proceedings against 19 named defendants who were members with her of the Gestalt Psychotherapy Training Institute at the relevant time.Court: CA
Judges: Latham LJ
References:  EWCA Civ 766,
Claim for unpaid commission and damages.Court: QBD
Judges: Elisabeth Laing J
References:  EWHC 3011 (QB),
Virgin had successfully taken a private prosecution against the defendants for copyright infringement. They sought an order for their costs to be paid from central funds. On taking confiscation proceedings, costs were now sought against the defendants. The court was asked what rates should apply.Court: CACD
Judges: Sir John Thomas LCJ, Raffrty LJ, Holroyde J
Statutes: Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 17, Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986
References:  EWCA Crim 1823,
- Practice Direction On Costs In Criminal Proceedings, CACD, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Crim 1632,  1 WLR 3255)
The applicants requested writs of habeas corpus as part of relief from extradition proceedings.Court: QBD
Judges: Kennedy LJ, Garland J
References:  EWHC QB 426,
McLellan -v- Bracknell Forest Borough Council; Reigate Borough Council -v- Benfield and Another; CA 16-Oct-2001
The tenant was issued with a notice to quit for unpaid rent, within the first year, during an ‘introductory tenancy.’ She sought judicial review on the basis that the reduced security of tenure infringed her human rights.
Held: Review was refused. The probationary regime was intended to protect other tenants and the local authority from anti-social and non-paying tenants. Additional procedural safeguards had been provided and gave adequate protection to the tenant.
Waller LJ considered the duties of a council under the introductory tenancy scheme: ‘If the council in providing reasons alleges acts constituting nuisance, and if the allegations themselves are disputed, that at first sight seems to raise issues of fact. But under the introductory tenancy scheme it is not a requirement that the council should be satisfied that the breaches of the tenancy agreement have in fact taken place. The right question under the scheme will be whether in the context of allegation and counter-allegation it was reasonable for the council to take a decision to proceed with termination of the introductory tenancy.’
Judges: Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Latham, And Lord Justice Kay
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 8.1
References: Gazette, 29-Nov-2001, Times, 03-Dec-2001,  EWCA Civ 1510,  QB 1129,  LGR 191
- Handyside -v- The United Kingdom, ECHR, Cited, (5493/72, (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Bailii,  ECHR 5, ECHR, , Bailii)
- Matthew Joseph Langton Denley George Allen, Regina (on the Application of Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another), Admn, Cited, (Bailii,  EWHC Admin 1047)
- The Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council -v- The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson, CA, Cited, (Times 02-Jan-03, Gazette 13-Mar-03,  EWCA Civ 1812)
- London Borough of Harrow -v- Qazi, HL, Cited, (Bailii, House of Lords,  UKHL 43, Times 01-Aug-03,  3 WLR 792, Gazette 02-Oct-03,  1 AC 983,  L & TR 9,  4 All ER 461,  3 EGLR 109,  Fam Law 875,  2 FLR 973,  1 P & CR 19,  HLR 75,  HRLR 40,  3 FCR 43,  UKHRR 974,  NPC 101)
- Kay and Another -v- London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council -v- Price and others and others, HL, Cited, (Bailii,  UKHL 10, Times 10-Mar-06,  2 WLR 570,  2 AC 465)
- Doran -v- Liverpool City Council, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 146,  1 WLR 2365)
- Orchard -v- Lee, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 295, Times)
- Salford City Council -v- Mullen, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 336,  NPC 43,  1 All ER 119,  15 EG 95 (CS),  BLGR 559,  HLR 35)
- Gaunt -v- OFCOM and Liberty, QBD, Cited, (Bailii,  EWHC 1756 (QB),  ACD 17,  HRLR 31,  1 WLR 663)
ECJ Judgment – Civil service – Frontex staff – Temporary staff – Non-renewal of a fixed term contract – Renewal procedure – Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right to be heard – Infringement – Influence on the content of the decisionCourt: ECJ
References: F-117/13,  EUECJ F-117/13
ECJ Order Of The Court – Appeals – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation) – Article 59 and Annex XIII – Identification of anthracene oil (anthracene paste) as a substance of very high concern, to be made subject to the authorisation procedure – Equal treatmentCourt: ECJ
Statutes: Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
References: C-290/13,  EUECJ C-290/13_CO
ECJ Appeals – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation) – Article 59 and Annex XIII – Identification of anthracene oil as a substance of very high concern, to be made subject to the authorisation procedure – Equal treatment)Court: ECJ
References: C-288/13,  EUECJ C-288/13_CO
Parva Investitsionna Banka And Others -v- Ear Proparti Developmant – v nesastoyatelnost; ECJ 9-Sep-2014
ECJ Order Of The Court – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 – Definition of ‘uncontested pecuniary claims’ – Insolvency proceedings – Extra-judicial enforcement order relating to a contested claim – Claim for payment out of the insolvency estate, on the basis of such an enforcement order – Situation falling outside the scope of Regulation No 1896/2006 – Court clearly lacking jurisdictionCourt: ECJ
Statutes: Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006
References: C-488/13,  EUECJ C-488/13_CO
ECJ Order Of The Court – Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Application for registration of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘METRO’ in the blue and yellow colors – Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark in color with the verbal element ‘GRUPOMETROPOLIS’ – Opposition rejected ‘Court: ECJ
References: C-509/13,  EUECJ C-509/13_CO
Cohen LJ considered the appropriateness of a claim for a set-off: ‘Before the Judicature Act, such claims were very often enforced by injunction, but it is plain from section 41 that an injunction would not be the appropriate way of giving effect to a set-off now and that effect should be given to it, under Section 38, as an equitable defence if so pleaded.’Court: CA
Judges: Cohen LJ
References:  1 KB 107,
- British Anzani (Felixstowe) Ltd -v- International Marine Management (UK) Ltd, ChD, Cited, ( QB 137, Bailii,  EWHC QB 2)
The judge below acceded to a submission of no case to answer without putting the defendant to his election.
Held: ‘At the time of this trial it was, it seems, common ground between counsel for both parties and the judge that under the CPR there was no need for a party making a submission of no case to answer to be put to his election. This has now been clarified by this Court in Boyce -v- Wyatt Engineering and Others  EWCA 692 per Mance LJ, so that certain limits are set on that proposition. But it is clear that on the basis of the learned judge’s judgment he concluded that in this case, in the light of the evidence given by the claimant, nothing in the defendants’ evidence could affect the view he had taken (see per Mance LJ at para 5 and the learned judge’s judgment at p.15D-F). In any event, the question of further evidence from the defendants never arose because the learned judge found that there was no case to answer. We have to decide whether that conclusion was right.’
Judges: Burton J
References:  EWCA Civ 1724,  EWCA Civ 692
- Mullen -v- Birmingham City Council, QBD, Applied, (Times 29-Jul-99)
- Michael John Miller (T/A Waterloo Plant) -v- Margaret Cawley, CA, Cited, (Times 06-Sep-02, Bailii,  EWCA Civ 1100)
- Benham Limited -v- Kythira Investments Ltd & Another, CA, Cited, ( EWCA Civ 1794, Bailii)
- Neina Graham -v- Chorley Borough Council, CA, Cited, (Times 20-Mar-06, Bailii,  EWCA Civ 92)
- , , Cited,
ecj Advocate General’s Opinion – Area of freedom, security and justice – Asylum and immigration – Rules on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third-country nationals or stateless persons as refugees and the content of the protection granted – Revocation of a residence permit under Article 24(1) of Directive 2004/83/EC – Conditions – Concept of compelling reasons of national security or public order – Participation of a recognised refugee in the activities of a terrorist organisationCourt: ECJ
Judges: Sharpston AG
Statutes: Directive 2004/83/EC 24(1)
References: C-373/13,  EUECJ C-373/13_O
ECJ Advocate General’s Opinion – VAT – Transitional arrangements for trade between Member States – Goods dispatched or transported within the European Union – Fraud in the Member State of arrival – Consideration of fraud in the exporting Member State – Exemption ‘Court: ECJ
Judges: M Maciej Szpunar
References: C-131/13,  EUECJ C-131/13_O
ECJ Advocate General’s Opinion – Area of ??Freedom, Security and Justice – Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Article 5, paragraph 3 – Jurisdiction ‘delict or quasi-delict’ – Historic Copyright – Criteria for determining the place where the damage occurred – – posted on the Internet Content Damage ‘relocated’ ‘Court: ECJ
Judges: MP Cruz Villalon AG
References: C-441/13,  EUECJ C-441/13_O
The tribunal finds, and so declares, the claimant’s claim against the first respondent for unauthorised deductions from his wages is well-founded and orders the first respondent to pay to the claimant the sum of £3,200.00, being the amount of the said deductions.Court: NIIT
References:  NIIT 00590_13IT,
The claimant sought damages from the defendant for having failed to diagnose his dysexia, resulting in educational failure. The respondent argued a reasonable peson would have sought help earlier. The council appealed a refusal to strike out of the claim.
Held: Given undiagnosed dysexia, it was unlikely that he would seek help. The fact that the condition also resulted in a low self esteem should properly be taken into account in deciding whether he should have realised his cause of action. Each case fell to be decided on its own facts, but the claimant’s state of mind precluded a simple question of whether he should have sought damages earlier.
Judges: Peter Gibson, Tuckey, Keene LJJ
Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 14
References: Times, 14-May-2003,  EWCA Civ 706, Gazette, 03-Jul-2003
- Robinson -v- St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council, CA, Cited, (Gazette 10-Oct-02,  PIQR P128, Bailii,  EWCA Civ 1099)
ECJ Advocate General’s Opinion – Preliminary reference – Agriculture – Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 – Protection of animals during transport – Transport of animals from one Member State to a third country – Article 14, paragraph 1 – Check the logbook to make by the competent authority of the place before starting the long journeys – Annex I, Chapter V – Provisions regarding maintenance of water and feed as well as journey times and rest – Applicability of these provisions in Regarding the part of the transport takes place outside the territory of the UnionCourt: ECJ
Judges: Bot AG
Statutes: Regulation (EC) No 1/2005
References: C-424/13,  EUECJ C-424/13_O
Renewed application for an extension of time and for permission to appeal. The claimants application to the tribunal had been out of time and was dismissed accordingly. The EAT had directed that any further appeal be lodged within a specified time limit. It had not been met.
Held: Leave refused.
Judges: Maurice Kay, Davis LJJ, Sir Stanley Burnton
References:  EWCA Civ 1794,
Singh -v- Bracknell Forest Borough Council (Formerly the Royal County of Berkshire) and Special Educational Needs Tribunal; Admn 24-Jul-1998
Gilliatt Parents of a child with autism appealed against the refusal of the LEA to nominate the school of their choice which was sympathetic to the Lovaas approach to the education of autistic children. On an examination of the tribunal’s reasoning, the court held that the tribunal could not be criticised. They had carried out the relevant process of reasoning albeit they had not referred to particular sections of the Education Act.Court: Admn
Judges: Mr Justice Scott Baker
References:  EWHC Admin 780,
The claimant said that he had been exposed him to excessive noise during the course of his employment, causing his deafness. He noticed his hearing problems in 2001. He was also aware that exposure to noise could cause hearing loss, but did not associate his own hearing problems with exposure to noise in earlier years. In 2006 a doctor attributed his hearing difficulties to ageing. In 2009 J saw a consultant who advised that he had noise induced hearing loss. He then issued proceedings. The trial judge dismissed J’s claim on limitation grounds.
Held: His appeal failed. A reasonable person in his position would have been curious about the cause of his deafness. He would have consulted his general practitioner. The doctor would probably have asked him about his employment history. This would have led to possible attribution of the claimant’s deafness to exposure to excessive noise at work. Allowing a year or so for consideration, J was fixed with constructive knowledge about the possible cause of his deafness by the end of 2002.
Judges: Hallett, Etherton LJJ, Dame Janet Smith
Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 11 14
References:  EWCA Civ 1505,  PIQR P7
- Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 717)
The mother of a soldier claimed after he had died in an attack while serving in Iraq. She asserted that if he had had proper equipment his life would not have been.
Held: Claims arising from the deaths of soldiers on active service abroad alleging breach of the right to life in article 2 of the Convention fell outside the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction under the Convention. However claims in negligence for failing to provide safe equipment and technology to serving soldiers who suffered death or injury would be justiciable here.
Judges: Lord Neuberger PSC, Moses, Rimer LJJ
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 2
Links: Bailii, WLRD,
References:  EWCA Civ 1365,  HRLR 2,  WLR(D) 281,  1 All ER 778,  2 WLR 27,  PIQR P3
References:  UKAITUR AA058372012),
Service ChargesCourt: LVT
References:  EWLVT CAM_LV_SVC_22UD_0
ICO The complainant requested information from South Hams District Council (the council) about concerns of a possible flood risk to his property. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR as it did not supply the information within 20 working days from the date of the request. As the council has now provided the information to the complainant, the Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. However, he feels it appropriate to highlight his concern about the length of time it took the council to provide all of the information to the complainant, that being 21 months, and that the final part of the information only came to light because of a separate investigation from the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO).
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld
References:  UKICO FER0504177,
The teacher’s job had been privatised. After retirement he sought to have his pension assessed on the basis as it would have been but for the restructuring. The Secretary appealed a finding in the teacher’s favour.
Held: The question was determined by assessing the ‘contributable salary’ under the Regulations. The formula created difficulties, but it had to be assessed by reference to the last salary actually paid, and the ombudsman’s decision was not supported in law.
Judges: Mr Justice Pumfrey
Statutes: Teachers' Pension Regulations 1997 (SI 97/3001)
References: Gazette, 16-Oct-2003,
ICO The complainant requested information concerning the network rationalisation of the DVLA, following the publication of a leaked document setting out the options for the network rationalisation. The public authority withheld the requested information by virtue of section 35(1)(a) of the Act. The Commissioner considered the withheld information and the DVLA’s application of section 35(1)(a) and concluded in this case that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosure of the information. The Commissioner has also found that the DVLA breached section 10(1) through its handling of the request. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 35 – Complaint Not upheld
References:  UKICO FS50378823,
ICO The complainant has requested Uttlesford District Council (‘the Council’) to release information relating to the planning applications submitted by Tesco and Sainsbury’s. The Commissioner’s decision is that Council appropriately relied upon regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR for the non disclosure of the emails between its planning officer and Counsel and the annotations Counsel made to two draft reports. However, in relation to contents of the draft reports themselves (with annotations redacted), the Commissioner has decided that although regulation 12(4)(d) applies to this information, the public interest in maintaining this exception is outweighed by the public interest in favour of disclosure. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: the Council should disclose the six draft reports identified in paragraph 9 of this notice, with any annotations made by Counsel redacted. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2011/0269 allowed.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: EIR 12.4.d – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.5.b – Complaint Upheld
References:  UKICO FER0379794,
ICO The complainant requested information regarding a next door neighbour’s extension which was affecting her property. Sefton Council disclosed information including a building site inspection report, but took 10 months to disclose the complete final page of the report. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sefton Council has breached regulation 5(2) in that it took longer than 20 working days to provide the complainant with the final page of the report. The Commissioner also considers that the Council has breached regulation 11(4) as it took longer than 40 working days to inform the complainant of the outcome of its internal review. The Commissioner does not require Sefton Council to take any further steps.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 11 – Complaint Upheld
References:  UKICO FER0454906,
The employee had been found to be unfairly dismissed. The company did not re-engage him, and he sought as part of his damages, the lost earnings up to the date of the hearing. The employer said these should be included within the overall damages cap.
Held: The award of arrears was not ring fenced so as to be outside the statutory cap on damages. Any cap on damages would adversely affect some individuals, and appear unfair. S124 was explicit as to the situations where the cap would not apply.
Judges: Mummery LJ, Kay LJ, Gage LJ
Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 114 124
References: Times, 04-Nov-2004,  EWCA Civ 1563
- National Westminster Bank Plc -v- Parry, EAT, Appeal from, (UKEAT/977/03)
- Selfridges Ltd -v- Malik, EAT, Cited, (Bailii,  UKEAT 1352_96_2404,  ICR 268)
- National Westminster Bank Plc -v- Parry, EAT, Appealed to, (UKEAT/977/03)
ICO The complainant has requested information about Porton Down veterans. The public authority relied on a previous ‘vexatious’ response to not respond to this request. The previous request was found to be vexatious by the Commissioner but the decision notice in that case was overturned by the First-tier Tribunal prior to this request being made. The Commissioner is therefore of the opinion that that the public authority was not entitled to rely on section 17(6) of the FOIA and he requires it to issue a fresh response to the complainant. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld
References:  UKICO FS50500634,
ICO The complainant requested copies of correspondence between a named developer and Mid Suffolk District Council (MSDC) regarding two planning decision notices which he alleged had been altered after publication. The Information Commissioner’s decision is that MSDC did not deal with the request under the correct legislation. Access to environmental information should be considered under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the ‘EIR’). The Information Commissioner, therefore, requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the EIR: provide the information requested in compliance with regulation 5(1), or; issue a valid refusal notice in compliance with regulation 12 or regulation 14.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld
Statutes: Environmental Information Regulations 2004
References:  UKICO FS50390240,
ICO The complainant has requested information about dependency and primary carers in relation to immigration. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has applied section 14(1) appropriately. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 14 – Complaint Not upheld
References:  UKICO FS50500202,
ICO The complainant requested Special Branch information relating to the late Cyril Smith. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) refused to confirm or deny whether it held this information and cited the exemptions provided by sections 23(5) (information supplied by, or relating to, security bodies) and 24(2) (national security) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS cited sections 23(5) and 24(2) correctly and so it was not required to confirm or deny whether it held this information.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 23 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 24 – Complaint Not upheld
References:  UKICO FS50488435,
The family sought judicial review of a decision not to hold an inquest into the death of the deceased. The child had died in hospital.
Held: The death had apparently been for natural causes, but the coroner had failed properly to ask himself whether the death was unnatural in the sense used in Regina -v- Poplar Coroner ex parte Thomas. His decision was flawed.
Judges: Ognall J
Statutes: Coroners Act 1988 8(1)
References:  EWHC Admin 174,
- Regina -v- Poplar Coroner ex parte Thomas, CA, Cited, (Gazette 10-Jun-92,  QB 610,  2 ALL ER 381,  2 WLR 547, Times 23-Dec-92, Independent 20-Jan-92, (1993) 157 JP 506,  COD 178, (1993) 157 JPN 349)
An undertaking has been signed by Manpower UK Ltd following a breach of the Data Protection Act where a spreadsheet containing 400 people’s personal details was accidentally emailed to 60 employees.Court: ICO
References:  UKICO 2012-45,
Income Support – European Union Law : Free MovementCourt: UTAA
Judges: Ward UTJ
References:  UKUT 154 (AAC),
In a case alleging indirect sex discrimination in the differing rules denying entitlement to redundancy payments for men over 65, the tribunal should be ready to look at a wide range of statistics. The test is whether the rule imposed some condition which could be met only by a substantially smaller proportion of one sex rather than the other, and where that difference was without objective justification. The tribunal had erred in law in not inviting the secretary of state to take part in the case, given the obvious possible existence of an objective justification.Court: EAT
Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President)
Statutes: EC Treaty 141, Employment Rights Act 1996 109 156
References: Times, 21-Aug-2001, EAT/1128/99,  ICR 123,  UKEAT 1128_99_1007
- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry -v- J D Rutherford S Bentley Harvest Town Circle Ltd (In Liquidation), EAT, See Also, (EAT/1029/02)
- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry -v- Rutherford and Another; Same -v- Bentley, EAT, Cited, (Times 08-Oct-03, Gazette 06-Nov-03)
- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry -v- J D Rutherford S Bentley Harvest Town Circle Ltd (In Liquidation), EAT, See also, (EAT/1029/02)
- John Rutherford and Another -v- Secretary of State for Trade & Industry, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 1186, Times 04-Nov-04,  ICR 119)
FTTTx PROCEDURE – Strike out application – MTIC appeal – Whether Tribunal has jurisdiction to strike out part of appellants’ case – If so whether appropriate to exercise its discretion to so under rule 8(3)(c) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Tax Chamber) Rules 2009Court: FTTTx
References:  UKFTT 319 (TC),
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Commission decision ordering the repayment of financial assistance – Annulment of the decision by the Court – Execution of the judgment – Calculation of interest on the amount to be repaidCourt: ECJ
Judges: M Yves Bot AG
References: C-336/13,  EUECJ C-336/13_O, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2170
The court looked at personal responsibility of the directors of a company for torts committed by the company: ‘If the directors themselves directed or procured the commission of the act they would be liable in whatever sense they did so, whether expressly or impliedly.’Date: 01-Jan-1924
Judges: Atkin LJ
References:  1 KB 1,
- MCA Records Inc and Another -v- Charly Records Ltd and others (No 5), CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 1441,  FSR 26,  BCC 650,  ECDR 37,  1 BCLC 93,  EMLR 1)
The direction set down extensive guidelines and standard forms for use in ex parte Mareva and Anton Piller applications.Court: QBD
Links: Times, Independent,
- Practice Direction (Ex Parte Mareva Injunctions and Anton Piller Orders), QBD, Cited, (Times 31-Oct-96)
Hussein Walji, Zulikar Walji, Mohammed Iqbal Walji, Hussain Walji -v- Mount Cook Land Limited; CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimants sought a new lease under the Act. They were assignees and sureties of an underlease of the premises, but a new underlease had been taken by a company through which the partnership had intended to trade. The partnership had paid rent in response to demands sent to the company. The company had been struck off. A new lease was agreed, but the renewal procedure continued.
Held: A tenancy, or lease, is an interest in land springing from a consensual arrangement between two parties: one person grants to another the right to possession of land for a lesser term than he, the grantor, has in the land. The parties had negotiated and agreed terms. Possession continued under the new arrangement despite being formally subject to lease. A quarterly tenancy had been created.
Judges: Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Mance and Mr Justice Charles
Statutes: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
References:  EWCA Civ 356,
- D'Silva -v- Lister House Development Ltd, , Cited, ( Ch 17,  1 All ER 858)
- Longrigg, Burrough Trounson -v- Smith, CA, Cited, ((1979) 251 EG 847,  2 EGLR 42)
- Javad -v- Aqil, CA, Cited, ( 1 All ER 243,  1 WLR 1007, Bailii,  EWCA Civ 1,  61 P & CR 164,  41 EG 61)
- JT Developments -v- Quinn & Another, CA, Cited, ( 2 EGLR 257, (1990) 62 P & CR 33)
An Asian member of the respondent association of taxi cab operators secretly recorded conversations with other members to gather evidence for a claim under the Act. He was expelled from the association for this conduct. He alleged race discrimination and victimisation.
Held: The issue was whether the act was an act of discrimination. The association was a trade organisation covered by the Act. Where a claimant alleges discrimination on the basis of a ‘protected act’ within the section, it is for him to establish the connection between the act of discrimination and the protected act. Section 2(1) requires a comparison between the treatment accorded to the person victimised and the treatment which would be accorded to another who has not done the protected acts at all. Parliament had not intended discrimination to be established:- ‘even though the evidence shows that the fact that the protected act had been done . . in no way influenced the alleged discriminator in his treatment of the complainant. In such a case, in our judgment, on the true construction of section 2 (1), if the necessary causal link is to be established, it must be shown that the very fact that the protected act was done by the complainant ‘under or by reference to’ that legislation influenced the alleged discriminator in his unfavourable treatment of the complainant.’ Each of the lettered paragraphs of s. 2 (1) ‘contemplates a motive which is consciously connected with the race relations legislation’.
Judges: Slade LJ
Statutes: Race Relations Act 1976 2(1)
References:  QB 463,  ICR 534,  2 All ER 860,  EWCA Civ 12
- Kirby -v- Manpower Services Commission, EAT, Cited, ( 3 All ER 334,  1 WLR 725,  ICR 420)
- Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police -v- Khan, HL, Approved, (House of Lords, Bailii, Times 16-Oct-01, Gazette 01-Nov-01,  UKHL 48,  ICR 1065,  1 WLR 1947,  4 All ER 834,  IRLR 830,  Emp LR 1399)
- 1 Pump Court Chambers -v- M Horton, EAT, Cited, (UKEAT/775/03, Times 14-Apr-04)
- Fosh -v- Cardiff University, EAT, Cited, (Bailii,  UKEAT 0412_07_2301)
The claimant sought damages, alleging misrepresentation.
Held: Damages under section 2(1) of the 1967 Act are assessed on the fraud measure. The court drew a distinction between a factor which is observed or considered by a plaintiff, or even supports or encourages his decision, and a factor which is sufficiently important to be called a real and substantial part of what induced him to enter into a transaction. The latter can establish a causative link between a negligent misstatement and loss, but the former will not do so. Rix J said: ‘a representation may be true without being entirely correct, provided it is substantially correct and the difference between what is represented and what is actually correct would not have been likely to induce a reasonable person in the position of the claimants to enter into the contracts.’ The answer only needs to have been given in good faith i.e. honestly.
Judges: Rix J
Statutes: Misrepresentation Act 1967 2(1)
References:  Lloyd's LR IR 535,  1 ALL ER Comm 573
ECJ Court of Pulic Employees – Public service – Temporary staff – Non-renewal of a fixed-term contract – agency staff – Downsizing – Multiannual Financial Framework ERA – Removal of two posts of the establishment plan – Compliance with the essential formalities – Right to be heard – Internal Guidelines – Interest of ServiceCourt: ECJ
References: F-120/13,  EUECJ F-120/13
Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Sixth VAT Directive – Article 5(7)(a) – Taxable transactions – ‘Supplies made for consideration’ – First occupation by a municipal authority of premises built for it on land belonging to it – Activities engaged in as a public authority and as a taxable personCourt: ECJ
References: C-92/13,  EUECJ C-92/13
The claimant was father to a new-born child. At the birth he was told that his baby son was dead before seeing his son and understanding that an error had been made. He sought damages asserting that he had suffered nervous shock. The Hospital said that he was not able to recover for psychiatric injury where no possibility of a physical injury was forseeable.
Held: He succeeded. As a primary victim a claim for psychiatric injury was possible even where no physical injury was risked. A real risk of suffering a recognised psychiatric disorder was sufficient.
Judges: Judge Bursell QC
References:  All ER (D) 17,
The parties, the plaintiff who was the equitable assignee of performing rights and the infringing defendant, joined specific issue on the absence of the legal owner of the rights.
Held: His absence was critical. Viscount Finlay said: ‘Except under very special circumstances the ordinary rule should be observed, that the legal owner should be a party to the proceedings . . But whatever may be the balance of convenience, the established rules of practice should be adhered to, even in cases, of which I think the present is one, when their observance in all probability will serve no useful purpose. The parties have joined battle on the applicability to the present case of this particular rule of practice, and we must decide according to law, however much we may regret that success in the action should depend on mere technicality which has no relation to the merits of the case.’
Viscount Cave LC said: ‘That an equitable owner may commence proceedings alone, and may obtain interim protection in the form of an interlocutory injunction is not in doubt; and is, I think, the rule of the Supreme Court, that, in general, when a plaintiff has only an equitable right in the thing demanded, the person having the legal right to demand it must in due course be made, a party to the action: Daniells’ Chancery Practice (7th ed), Vol 1, p 172. If this were not so, a defendant after defeating the claim the equitable claimant might have to resist like proceedings by the legal owner or by persons claiming under him as assignees for value without notice of any prior equity, and proceedings might be indefinitely and oppressively multiplied. No doubt the rule does not apply to a mortgagor at least since the passing of section 25(6) of the Judicature Act 1873; and there may be special reasons, were, it will not be enforced as in William Brandt’s Sons & Co v Dunlop Rubber Co  AC 454, where the defendant disclaimed any wish to have the legal owners made parties.’
Judges: Viscount Finlay, Viscount Cave LC, Lord Sumner
References:  AC 1,
- Barbados Trust Company Ltd -v- Bank of Zambia and Another, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 148)
- Roberts -v- Gill & Co and Another, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 803, Times 18-Aug-08,  1 WLR 531,  WTLR 1429,  PNLR 2,  CP Rep 3)
- Roberts -v- Gill & Co Solicitors and Others, SC, Cited, ( WLR (D) 130, WLRD, Bailii,  UKSC 22, SC, SC Summ, Bailii Summ,  PNLR 30,  WTLR 1223,  2 WLR 1227,  AC 240)
- Weddell -v- JA Pearce & Major, , Cited, ( Ch 26)
The claimant sought to enforce an arbitration award for construction work it had carried out for the defendant. The defendant denied that there had been a contract under which an arbitration could properly have been commenced, and was without jurisdiction.Court: TCC
Judges: Thornton QC J
References:  EWHC 1626 (TCC),
The judge should investigate any suspicions of jury tampering immediately, but must be careful not to enquire as to the jury’s deliberations. The common law rule against investigating events in the jury room has recognised exceptions, but these are confined to situations where the jury is alleged to have been affected by what are termed extraneous influences, eg contact with other persons who may have passed on information which should not have been before the jury.Court: CACD
Links: Ind Summary, Times,
References:  Crim LR 248,
A planning permission was given, with several references to it being temporary. Nevertheless no reference was made to the extent in time of the permission. Despite this, an application to remove the references to temporary status and to upgrade it to permanent was refused. There appears to be no power in equity to rectify a unilateral transaction consisting of a notification of a planning consent, even if it might be available for other unilateral acts. The notice was clearly intended to be temporary.Court: CA
Links: Times, Gazette, Gazette,
Ms Wilson had been found guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor after being convicted of offences of dishonesty and given 60 hours community service. The Law Society appealed against her suspension for twelve months saying that it was inadequate. In committing the offences, she had not done so for her own financial gain. She had been placed under pressure from her practice principal who had refused to ease her workload and who insisted that she personally attend all immigration hearings and conferences. She made false accounting returns, in respect of travel expenses for attendance at conferences and hearings she had not attended, in order that he would not find out she had she had not attended them.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and Ms Wilson was struck off the roll. The starting point for assessing Ms Wilson’s conduct was the decision in Bolton test. Jack J discussed the authorities saying that ‘they emphasise the need to protect the reputation of the profession by expelling dishonest persons from it and emphasising that mitigation personal to the solicitor has little relevance’
Judges: Lord Justice Keene Mr Justice Jack
References:  EWHC 1022 (Admin),
- Jideofo -v- The Law Society; Evans -v- The Solicitors Regulation Authority, , Cited, (Bailii,  EW Misc 3 (EWLS))
- Jideofo -v- The Law Society; Evans -v- The Solicitors Regulation Authority, , Cited, (Bailii,  EW Misc 3 (EWLS))
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2001/29/EC – Copyright and related rights – Exceptions and limitations – Article 5(3)(n) – Use for the purpose of research or private study of works and other subject-matter – Book made available to individual members of the public by dedicated terminals in publicly accessible libraries – Meaning of work not subject to ‘purchase or licensing terms’ – Right of the library to digitise a work contained in its collection in order to make it available to users by dedicated terminals – Making the work available by dedicated terminals which permit it to be printed out on paper or to be stored on a USB stick
‘Article 5(3)(n) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted to mean that it does not extend to acts such as the printing out of works on paper or their storage on a USB stick, carried out by users from dedicated terminals installed in publicly accessible libraries covered by that provision. However, such acts may, if appropriate, be authorised under national legislation transposing the exceptions or limitations provided for in Article 5(2)(a) or (b) of that directive provided that, in each individual case, the conditions laid down by those provisions are met.’
Judges: L. Bay Larsen, P
Statutes: Directive 2001/29/EC
References: C-117/13,  EUECJ C-117/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2196
Grand Chamber – The applicant alleged that his brother was arrested and detained by British forces in Iraq and was subsequently found dead in unexplained circumstances. He complained under Article 5-1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Convention that the arrest and detention were arbitrary and unlawful and lacking in procedural safeguards and under Articles 2, 3 and 5 that the United Kingdom authorities failed to carry out an investigation into the circumstances of the detention, ill-treatment and death.
Held: ‘ the powers of internment under the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, relied on by the Govern
Judges: Dean Spielmann, P
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
References: 29750/09 - Grand Chamber Judgment,  ECHR 936
ECJ Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 96/67/EC – Article 11 – Air transport – Groundhandling service – Selection of suppliersCourt: ECJ
Judges: A. Tizzano, P
Statutes: Directive 96/67/EC 11
References: C-277/13,  EUECJ C-277/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2208
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European market for marine hoses – Succession of legal entities – Attributability of unlawful conduct – Reduction of the fine by the General CourtCourt: ECJ
Judges: Wathelet AG
References: C-434/13,  EUECJ C-434/13_O
ECJ Opinion – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 260 TFEU – Failure to comply with judgments of the Court of Justice – Commission v Italy (C-135/05, EU:C:2007:250) and Commission v Greece (C-502/03, EU:C:2005:592) – Law on waste – Illegal landfills – Closure – Clean-up – Renewed permit pursuant to Directive 99/31/EC – Financial penalties – Imposition of a periodic penalty payment and a lump sum payment – Reduction of the periodic penalty payment in the event of partial complianceCourt: ECJ
Judges: Kokott AG
References: C-196/13,  EUECJ C-196/13_O, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2162,
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 260 TFEU – Failure to comply with judgments of the Court of Justice – Commission v Italy (C-135/05, EU:C:2007:250) and Commission v Greece (C-502/03, EU:C:2005:592) – Law on waste – Illegal landfills – Closure – Clean-up – Renewed permit pursuant to Directive 99/31/EC – Financial penalties – Imposition of a periodic penalty payment and a lump sum payment – Reduction of the periodic penalty payment in the event of partial complianceCourt: ECJ
Judges: Kokott AG
References: C-378/13,  EUECJ C-378/13_O, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2172
The claimants appealed against refusal of relief from an order for possession of their tenanted house on the grounds of anti-social behaviour.Court: CA
Judges: Etherton, Black LJJ, Sir Robin Jacob
References:  EWCA Civ 832,
The appellant had been seen to hit another car while parking in a Sainsbury’s car park, and to have driven off. She appealed her conviction for driving without due care and attention and of failing to report the accident. The court admitted as evidence a log of the report of the incident to the police. The defendant said that was hearsay evidence which should not have been admitted.
Held: ‘hearsay is inadmissible unless it can be brought within an exception defined in the legislation. ‘ The log was multiple hearsay being a record of what was said to the police operative of what was hearsay to the car owner. The magistrates had admitted the log as a business document. The test was whether the car owner’ had personal knowledge of the matter reported. They did not. The evidence should however have been admitted on other grounds under 114(2)
Judges: Scott Baker LJ, Leveson J
Statutes: Criminal Justice Act 2003 114-136
References:  EWHC 1271 (Admin),
Regina (on the application of Whitehead and Daglish) -v- Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset; Admn 2001
Criminal charges against the officers had been stayed. They subsequently faced disciplinary proceedings.
Held: An acquittal is a finding or determination that a defendant is not guilty of an offence. A stay does not involve such a finding. Section 104 refers to acquittal. The legislative intention was to refer to the case where there had been a finding of not guilty. In this case, no new evidence was adduced, the evidence was the same. The Judge had determined that the prosecution case at its highest, if all the witnesses were believed, did not establish the criminal charge. Any finding in disciplinary proceedings, if the charges were the same, would conflict with that determination. There was a real determination to the extent that on the evidence the charges could not be made out. The officer in the instant case was in the same position as if there had been a finding that he was not guilty of a criminal offence.
Judges: Richards J, Moses J
Statutes: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 104
References:  EWHC Admin 433,
- Regina (on the Application of Redgrave) -v- The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, CA, Cited, (Bailii,  EWCA Civ 4)