Ipcom Gmbh & Co Kg -v- HTC Europe Co Ltd and Others; PatC 24-Apr-2015

Claim for patent asserting priority from filing in Germany as to ‘Access of a mobile station to a random access channel in dependence of its user class’

Court: PatC
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Birss J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1034 (Pat),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property

Invocas Re Sequestrated Estate of William Rose; ScSf 4-Jun-2013

The Sheriff, having heard the applicant’s agent refuses warrant to serve the application.

Court: ScSf
Date: 04-Jun-2013
Judges: heriff Philip Mann
Links: Bailii,
References: [2013] ScotSC 42,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Scotland

In re P (A Minor); 1981

Date: 01-Jan-1981
References: [1981] 80 LGR 301,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children, Local Government

Ignatescu And Others -v- Romania; ECHR 17-Mar-2015

Court: ECHR
Date: 17-Mar-2015
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 32168/05 - Committee Judgment, [2015] ECHR 282

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

IA017112013; AIT 17-Nov-2014

Court: AIT
Date: 17-Nov-2014
Judges: Dawson UTJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] UKAITUR IA017112013,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

Honer -v- Wilson; SCS 19-Oct-2006

(Outer House – Court of Session)

Court: SCS
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Judges: Lord Glennie
Links: Bailii,
References: [2006] CSOH 166, [2006] ScotCS CSOH_166

Leave a Comment

Filed under Costs, Scotland

Honer As Individuals and As Guardians of Their Children -v- Wilson; OHCS 19-Oct-2006

Court: OHCS
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Judges: Lord Glennie
Links: ScotC,
References:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children, Scotland

Hikmet Yilmaz -v- Turkey; ECHR 4-Jun-2013

Court: ECHR
Date: 04-Jun-2013
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 11022/05 - Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 500

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Helsinki Committee Of Armenia -v- Armenia; ECHR 31-Mar-2015

Court: ECHR
Date: 31-Mar-2015
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 59109/08 - Chamber Judgment, [2015] ECHR 332

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Hanu -v- Romania; ECHR 4-Jun-2013

Court: ECHR
Date: 04-Jun-2013
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 10890/04 - Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 499

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Gros, Dr Smallwood and Hibbard (Patent); IPEC 24-Mar-2015

IPEC An application under rule 10(2) of the Patent Rules 2007 was filed by Dr Peter Vincent Smallwood to mention Dr Peter Vincent Smallwood and Jonathan Hibbard as joint inventors. Robert Timothy Gros, the patent proprietor and Jonathan Hibbard were invited to file a counterstatement in relation to the proceedings. Robert Timothy Gros filed written consent in support of the application. No response was received from Jonathan Hibbard. As such, the comptroller considered the application to be unopposed and found that Dr Peter Vincent Smallwood and Jonathan Hibbard should be mentioned as joint inventors along with Robert Timothy Gros in the published patent application and granted patent for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning Dr Peter Vincent Smallwood and Jonathan Hibbard as joint inventors be prepared for the published patent application and granted patent for the invention.

Court: IPEC
Date: 24-Mar-2015
Judges: Mrs S Eaves
Statutes: Patents Act 1977 1391)
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKIntelP o12015, GB 2501940

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property

Ferreira Alves -v- Portugal; ECHR 2-Apr-2013

Court: ECHR
Date: 02-Apr-2013
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 5340/11 - HEJUD (French text), [2013] ECHR 261

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

EDI Central Ltd -v- National Car Parks Ltd; SCS 27-Oct-2010

Court: SCS
Date: 27-Oct-2010
Judges: Lord Glennie
Links: Bailii,
References: [2010] ScotCS CSOH_141,
Cases Cited:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Contract, Scotland

Earl of Galloway -v- McConnell; 1911

Date: 01-Jan-1911
References: 1911 SC 846,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Scotland

Commotion Ltd -v- Rutty; EAT 13-Oct-2005

EAT Contract of Employment -&- Unfair Dismissal
This appeal gave rise to potentially important points on the flexible working sections in Part 8A of ERA 1996 and on the commencement and effects of the Dispute Resolution Regulations. The employee informally sought flexible working in order to care for her grandchildren; this was refused. She then made a formal application under s.80 F of ERA which was also refused. She then resigned and claimed constructive dismissal. S.32 of EA came into effect a few days before the result of the appeal was notified; she did not go separately through the grievance procedure before presenting her claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination and under the flexible working procedures. The Tribunal found that the employer’s grounds of refusal (s.50 G of the ERA) were not made out, that the employee had been constructively dismissed. Her presentation of the formal application of F.W was on the fault also the making of a grievance. Appeal dismissed. We held, inter alia, (1) that the Tribunal were entitled to examine and decide upon the factual correctness of the asserted ground for refusing the flexible working request, although not its fairness and reasonableness and (2) that it was not, in law, necessary for the employee to go through two sets of procedures in order to comply with the requirements of s32 and Schedule 2 of Employment Act and that it was open to the Tribunal to find that her flexible working application was also the presentation of a grievance.

Court: EAT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Judges: His Honour Judge J Burke QC
Links: Bailii, EAT,
References: [2005] UKEAT 0418_05_1310, UKEAT/0418/05

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Attorney Generals Reference No. 82 of 2005; CACD 13-Oct-2005

Court: CACD
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] EWCA Crim 2692,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Criminal Sentencing

Kuwait Oil Co (KSC) -v- Idemitsu Tankers KK, The Hida Maru; CA 1981

Court: CA
Date: 01-Jan-1981
References: [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep 510,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Litigation Practice

Colazzo -v- Italy; ECHR 13-Oct-2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Preliminary ojection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic proceedings); Violation of P1-1; Just satisfaction reserved.

Court: ECHR
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights P1-1
Links: Worldlii, Bailii,
References: 63633/00, [2005] ECHR 716,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

VV268302004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR VV268302004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

VA005732014; AIT 16-Jan-2015

Court: AIT
Date: 16-Jan-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKAITUR VA005732014,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

Tower Hamlets -v- Chavda and others; QBD 13-Oct-2005

Court: QBD
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Judges: Newman J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] EWHC 2183 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Benefits, Housing, Immigration

TH090772004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR TH090772004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

OA178962013; AIT 16-Jan-2015

Court: AIT
Date: 16-Jan-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKAITUR OA178962013,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

OA149572013; AIT 21-Jan-2015

Court: AIT
Date: 21-Jan-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKAITUR OA149572013,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

OA106452013 and Others; AIT 16-Jan-2015

Court: AIT
Date: 16-Jan-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKAITUR OA106452013,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

NS000122004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR NS000122004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

Miller -v- An Order and Judgment of Employment Appeal Trobinal; OHCS 13-Oct-2005

Court: OHCS
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Judges: Lord Drummond Young And Lord Kingarth And Lord Penrose
Links: Bailii, ScotC,
References: [2005] ScotCS CSIH_71,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment, Scotland

IM169812004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR IM169812004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

HX179152004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR HX179152004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

AS491982003 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR AS491982003,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

AS164282004 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR AS164282004,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

AS008012005 (Unreported); AIT 13-Oct-2005

Court: AIT
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Bailii,
References: [2005] UKAITUR AS008012005,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

OMahoney -v- Dickson; 1800

Date: 01-Jan-1800
Judges: Lord Redesdale LC
References: (1800) 2 Sch & Lef 408,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Landlord and Tenant

Kemble -v- Farren; CCP 13-Jun-1829

Where it appeared on the record, that an agreement sued on was made by the plaintiff, on behalf of himself and the other proprietors of a theatre, evidence of the declarations of one of such other proprietors was held admissible on the part of the defendant.

Court: CCP
Date: 13-Jun-1829
Links: Commonlii,
References: [1829] EngR 519, (1829) 3 Car & P 623, (1829) 172 ER 574 (A)
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Evidence

Kemble -v- Farren; 6-Jul-1829

The manager of Covent Garden sought damages from an actor (a principal comedian) in the form of liquidated damages for breach of a contract. He had contracted to perform for four seasons, but had refused to continue after the first.
Held: Liquidated damages cannot be reserved on an agreement containing various stipuations, of various degrees of importance, unless the agreement specify the particular stipulation or stipulations to which the liquidated damages are to be confined.
Tindall CJ said: ‘We see nothing illegal or unreasonable in the parties, by their mutual agreement, settling the amount of damages, uncertain in their nature, at any sum upon which they may agree. In many cases, such an agreement fixes that which is almost impossible to be accurately ascertained; and in all cases, it saves the expense and difficulty of bringing witnesses to that point.’
If the terms had been limited to breaches which were of an uncertain nature and amount, it would have been good. But the provision extended to any term including the payment of small amounts of money, or other trivial non-money breaches: ‘But that a very large sum should become immediately payable, in consequence of the nonpayment of a very small sum, and that the former should not be considered as a penalty, appears to be a contradiction in terms; the case being precisely that in which courts of equity have always relieved, and against which courts of law have, in modern times, endeavoured to relieve, by directing juries to assess the real damages sustained by breach of the agreement.’

Date: 06-Jul-1829
Judges: Tindall CJ
Links: Commonlii,
References: [1829] EngR 590, (1829) 5 Bing 141, (1829) 130 ER 1234
Cases Cited:
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Contract, Damages, Equity

Brandes Goldschmidt & Co Ltd -v- Western Transport Ltd; CA 1981

Brandon LJ said: ‘Damages in tort are awarded by way of monetary compensation for the loss or losses a plaintiff has actually sustained.’

Court: CA
Date: 01-Jan-1981
Judges: Brandon LJ
References: [1981] 1 QB 864,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Damages

OA170282013 & OA170322013; AIT 19-Jan-2015

Court: AIT
Date: 19-Jan-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKAITUR OA170282013,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

Rex -v- Lord Rusby; 1800

The common law, in being formed from time to time by the wisdom of man it grew and increased from time to time with the wisdom of mankind.

Date: 01-Jan-1800
Judges: Lord Kenyon
References: (1800) Pea (2) 189,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Constitutional, Crime

Ex parte Smith; 1800

Two partners, Strickland and Richardson, held property as joint tenants at law. Richardson committed an act of bankruptcy by absenting himself, and a commission was issued against him. The commissioners then declared Richardson bankrupt and executed a provisional assignment. Meanwhile Strickland, the solvent partner, had died. Richardson’s brother-in-law issued a second commission and Richardson was found a bankrupt under that commission. The petitioners under the first commission then petitioned that the second commission be superseded, ie. stayed. The Attorney General, seeking to uphold the second commission, argued that there having been no assignment before Strickland’s death the survivorship had taken place. He submitted that: ‘The date of the commission has no effect: but the relation to the act of bankruptcy is this: it avoids all acts to the prejudice of creditors; but has not the effect of preventing the bankrupt from acquiring property by survivorship.’ Counsel for the petitioners, arguing for a stay of the second commission, did not refer to the doctrine of relation back, submitting that the partnership was severed in Strickland’s lifetime by the issue of the commission: ‘The commission severs the partnership. When the commission issues, the property is out of the bankrupt and in the commissioners; and the assignees take from the commissioners.’
Held: Rejecting the argument of the petitioners, but it is not clear whether he accepted that of the Attorney General. ‘The issuing of the commission does nothing, unless he is found a bankrupt. The adjudication that he is a bankrupt is what severs the partnership. The first act is that declaring him a bankrupt, then all the property is out of him; and they make the assignment…I am satisfied that the first commission will do well enough. Let the first commission stand.’

Date: 01-Jan-1800
Judges: Lord Loughborough LC
References: (1800) 5 Ves Jun 296,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Insolvency

Beasley -v- DArcy; HL 1800

The House upheld the decision of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to grant the tenant relief from forfeiture. The landlord had cut timber on the land, and the tenant sought damages. The tenant came into Chancery to restrain the landlord’s proceeding for non-payment of rent, and insisted that damages demandable in this collateral way ought to be applied to discharge the rent. There had been an award ascertaining the damage; but it had been made after the time limited for making the award and therefore the matter still rested in damages. At a time when the ejectment was brought, this was the demand which the tenant had against the landlord, an unascertained, unliquidated demand arising from the act of the landlord, affecting the land in the occupation of the tenant. The tenant gave a consent to judgment admitting the rent demanded to be due; but he insisted that he was entitled to a certain sum for damages for cutting the timber. On the answer there was an injunction until the hearing, on the terms of lodging the rent in court, which terms were not complied with: The habere was executed in 1797; the cause was heard in 1798, and an issue directed to try whether the tenant had sustained any and what damage from cutting the timber. The jury found damage in the amount of £ 103 6s. A supplemental bill was then filed praying that the tenant might be restored to possession, and the value accounted for in the usual way. The answer insisted on the statute Geo. I stating that the ejectment was brought for non-payment of rent. The cause came on again in 1799, when the plaintiff was declared entitled to restitution, on paying what was due for rent after deducting the damages. That was a case in which the court proceeded, not on a question whether so much was due for rent or not; but there being a collateral demand on the person to whom the rent was to be paid, and the amount of that demand appearing to have been nearly equal to the rent, but the subject of the cross-action, and which could not by any possibility be set-off by way of defence in the ejectment whether this afforded a distinct ground for equitable relief.

Court: HL
Date: 01-Jan-1800
References: (1800) 2 Sch & Lef 403,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Landlord and Tenant

Dwijendra Narayan Roy -v- Jogesh Chandra Dey and Another; PC 10-Nov-1920

Fort William (Bengal)

Court: PC
Date: 10-Nov-1920
Links: Bailii,
References: [1920] UKPC 90,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commonwealth

Daytbegova And Magomedova -v- Austria; ECHR 4-Jun-2013

Court: ECHR
Date: 04-Jun-2013
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 6198/12 - Admissibility Decision, [2013] ECHR 1342

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Damodar Narayan Chowdhri -v- Dalgliesh and Others; PC 1-Feb-1911

Fort William (Bengal)

Court: PC
Date: 01-Feb-1911
Links: Bailii,
References: [1911] UKPC 1,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commonwealth

Cumbria County Council -v- M and F (Application for Rehearing); FC 24-Apr-2015

Application for Rehearing – following findings on the death of Poppi Worthington – fresh inquest ordered

Court: FC
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Peter Jackson J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWFC 35,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children

Combescot -v- Commission (Staff Regulations); ECJ 19-Oct-2006

ECJ Officials – Actions – Deadlines – Implied rejection – Failure to reopen appeal period by an explicit decision later notified – Interest in bringing proceedings – Inadmissible

Court: ECJ
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Links: Bailii,
References: F-114/05, [2006] EUECJ F-114/05

Leave a Comment

Filed under European

Colliers International Property Consultants (CIPC) and Another -v- Colliers Jordan Lee Jafaar Sdn Bhd; ComC 3-Jul-2008

Court: ComC
Date: 03-Jul-2008
Judges: Beatson J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2008] EWHC 1524 (Comm),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Collier, Regina -v-; CACD 20-Jan-2009

Court: CACD
Date: 20-Jan-2009
Links: Bailii,
References: [2009] EWCA Crim 160,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Crime

Colacrai -v- Italy (No 1); ECHR 13-Oct-2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Preliminary objection joined to the merits; Violation of P1-1; Just satisfaction reserved.

Court: ECHR
Date: 13-Oct-2005
Links: Worldlii, Bailii,
References: 63296/00, [2005] ECHR 715,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Bunge Sa -v- Adm Do Brasil Ltd and Others; ComC 24-Apr-2009

Court: ComC
Date: 24-Apr-2009
Judges: Tomlinson J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2009] EWHC 845 (Comm),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration, Transport

Buendia Sierra -v- Commission (Staff Regulations); ECFI 19-Oct-2006

ECJ Officials’ Promotion ‘Promotion year 2003′ Award of priority points

Court: ECFI
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Links: Bailii, Bailii,
References: T-311/04, [2006] EUECJ T-311/04, [2006] EUECJ T-311/04

Leave a Comment

Filed under European

Bubble (Trade Mark: Opposition); IPO 2-Apr-2013

Court: IPO
Date: 02-Apr-2013
Links: Bailii,
References: [2013] UKIntelP o14213,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property

Brady, Regina -v-; CACD 19-Oct-2006

Appeal agai nst conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Court: CACD
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Judges: Hallett LJ, Leveson, Simon JJ
Statutes: Offences Against the Person Act 1861 20
Links: Bailii,
References: [2006] EWCA Crim 2413,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Crime

Borekciocullari (Cokmez) And Others -v- Turkey; ECHR 19-Oct-2006

Court: ECHR
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 58650/00, [2006] ECHR 880,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Birmingham City Council -v- LB and Others; FD 21-Mar-2013

Court: FD
Date: 21-Mar-2013
Links: Bailii,
References: [2013] EWHC 4646 (Fam),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family

Birmingham City Council -v- DM FI and Others; FC 19-Mar-2015

The court held a welfare hearing in an application for a care order. An earlier fact finding hearing had concluded that the child was at risk.

Court: FC
Date: 19-Mar-2015
Judges: Russell J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWFC 25,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children

Berni Hambleton -v- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (Patent); IPO 15-Mar-2012

IPO Evidence, Revocation – The defendants in this case objected to the admissibility of the claimant’s evidence-in-reply on the grounds that it was not strictly in reply, and could have been filed at an earlier stage in the proceedings. The Hearing Officer found the evidence to be admissible but allowed the defendant an opportunity to file additional submissions in response.

Court: IPO
Date: 15-Mar-2012
Judges: Mr P Slater
Statutes: Patents Act 1977 72
Links: Bailii,
References: [2012] UKIntelP o11812, EP0665886

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property

Axa SA -v- Collieri; Nom 13-Aug-2011

(Summary Decision – Transfer)

Court: Nom
Date: 13-Aug-2011
Links: Bailii,
References: [2011] DRS 10023,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property

Ashton -v- Turner; QBD 1981

Court: QBD
Date: 01-Jan-1981
References: [1981] QB 137, [1980 3 All ER 870
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Negligence, Road Traffic

Re E-R (A Child); CA 24-Apr-2015

Appeal from a child arrangements order

Court: CA
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Laws, King LJJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWCA Civ 405,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children

Lancashire County Council -v- A (Burned Child); Admn 24-Apr-2015

Final hearing of the local authority application for Care and Placement Orders. These applications are granted with no active opposition. The contest was as to the trial of allegations that the child suffered physical abuse and in particular the issue of the identification of the person responsible.

Court: Admn
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Duggan HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1156 (Fam),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children

JC & RT, Regina (on The Application of) -v- The Central Criminal Court and Others; CA 20-Nov-2014

Laws LJ, with whom the other members of the court agreed, said that because s 39(2) creates a criminal offence ”the section is to be construed not necessarily restrictively but at least conservatively unless there is a pressing greater imperative.’ Though it may be desirable to continue the protection given to children, it was not open to the court to extend it. Laws LJ said: ‘it is worth recording the obvious: that we are not here to legislate but to construe section 39 of the 1933 Act.’

Court: CA
Date: 20-Nov-2014
Judges: Laws LJ
Statutes: Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] EWCA Civ 1777,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Media

Griffith and Another -v- Gourgey and Another; ChD 23-Apr-2015

The petitioners said that the responents had failed to comply with on order provide a proper answer to the petitioners Part 18 request for information. The respondents applied for relief from sanctions if necessary.

Court: ChD
Date: 23-Apr-2015
Judges: Simon J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1080 (Ch),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Litigation Practice

Fender (Administrator of FG Collier & Sons Ltd) -v- National Westminster Bank Plc; ChD 26-Sep-2008

The administrator sought declarations as to whether to treat the bank as a secured or unsecured creditor.
Held: The court directed the Administrator to recognise the Bank as a secured creditor, as if the Deed of Release had never been executed.

Court: ChD
Date: 26-Sep-2008
Links: Bailii,
References: [2008] EWHC 2242 (Ch),
Cases Cited:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Banking, Insolvency

CASE XLII 10 Jac Hob 29 Cowndons Case; 1220

Date: 01-Jan-1220
Links: Commonlii,
References: [1220] EngR 69, (1220-1623) Jenk 294, (1220) 145 ER 214 (B)

Leave a Comment

Filed under Wills and Probate

Tesco Stores Ltd and Others -v- Mastercard Incorporated and Others; ChD 24-Apr-2015

The claimant alleged breach by the several defendants of EU and domestic competion law in relation to the MasterCard Defendants’ imposition of multilateral interchange fees (‘MIFs’) in the course of operating the MasterCard credit card system. Four of the defendants now sought the summary striking out of the claim as being without hope of success and out of time.

Court: ChD
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Asplin DBE J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1145 (Ch),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commercial, Limitation

Pogorzelski -v- Regional Court In Warsaw, Poland; Admn 24-Apr-2015

Appeal against order for extradition to Poland.

Court: Admn
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Holroyde J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1076 (Admin),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Extradition

Cranford College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) -v- The Secretary of State for The Home Department; Admn 24-Apr-2015

‘rolled-up’ hearing of the Claimant’s application for permission for judicial review against decisions made by the Defendant to suspend and then revoke its Tier 2 and Tier 4 sponsor licences

Court: Admn
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Andrews DBE J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1090 (Admin),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Education, Immigration

The Secretary of State for The Home Department -v- SS (Congo) and Others; CA 23-Apr-2015

The court considered the proper approach to be adopted, in light of new Immigration Rules promulgated in July 2012, to applications for leave to enter the United Kingdom by persons who are family members of someone already present here.

Court: CA
Date: 23-Apr-2015
Judges: Richards, Underhill, Sales LJJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWCA Civ 387,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Immigration

Re W (Children); CA 24-Apr-2015

The court heard an appeal against orders made in public law proceedings after findings that the children of the family had been physically abused.

Court: CA
Date: 24-Apr-2015
Judges: Sir James Munby P FD, Black, Briggs LJJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWCA Civ 403,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Children

Dellal -v- Dellal and Others; FD 1-Apr-2015

The families disputed a claim under the 1975 Act. The defendants now sought summary dismissal of the claim.

Court: FD
Date: 01-Apr-2015
Judges: Mostyn J
Statutes: Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 907 (Fam),
Cases Cited:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family, Wills and Probate

European Securities and Markets Authority -v- DTCC Derivatives Repository Ltd; ChD 25-Apr-2015

The court set out the principles applicable in deciding whether the Authority should be given authority to enter the premises of a company regulated by it.

Court: ChD
Date: 25-Apr-2015
Judges: Rose J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1085 (Ch),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Financial Services

Feakins -v- Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Admn 20-Dec-2002

Court: Admn
Date: 20-Dec-2002
Judges: The Hon Mr Justice Goldring
Links: Bailii,
References: [2002] EWHC 2574 (Admin),
Cases Cited:
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Agriculture

Commissioners of Customs and Excise -v- Broomco (1984) Ltd (Formerly Anchor Foods Ltd); CA 17-Aug-2000

When an appeal is lodged in a VAT dispute, the discretion as to whether to require the appellant to lodge security for costs in the appeal, was a decision exclusively to be decided by the tribunal itself. A decision as to such security could not be challenged within enforcement proceedings.

Court: CA
Date: 17-Aug-2000
Statutes: Finance Act 1994 16(3)(b)
Links: Times,
References:
Cases Cited:
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Costs, VAT

Appendix; HL 1870

Memorandum as to the removaal of Colonial Judges

Court: HL
Date: 01-Jan-1870
Links: Commonlii,
References: [1870] EngR 3, (1870) 6 Moo PC NS 9, (1870) 16 ER 827

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commonwealth, Constitutional, Legal Professions

Inland Revenue Commissioners -v- Sema Group Pension Scheme Trustees; CA 19-Dec-2002

The taxpayers appealed a notice under section 703(3) to counteract the tax advantage received by them from a share buy-back scheme. The scheme was an approved pension scheme, under which the quoted company agreed to buy back its own shares.
Held: The excess paid over the market value by the company was to be treated as a qualifying distribution under section 231, creating a tax credit. Under Joiner section 703 was not primarily targeted at contrived transactions, but rather at all forms of tax avoidance within its scope. What had to be considered was the normality of the amount paid, but that was not judging a distribution as against a normal dividend, but a qualifying distribution of a different kind. The judge had asked himself the wrong question. Appeal allowed.

Court: CA
Date: 19-Dec-2002
Judges: Aldous, Jonathan Parker, Aikens LJJ
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 592 703(1) 704A 709
Links: Bailii,
References: Times, 17-Jan-2003, Gazette, 13-Mar-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1857
Cases Cited:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Company, Income Tax

Great Future International Limited and Others -v- Sealand Housing Corporation (in Liquidation) and Others; ChD 3-Dec-2002

The claimants were to be awarded damages, having been fraudulently induced to purchase shares. The defendant claimed that the increase in the value of the shares which had subsequently occurred should be taken to reduce the damages awarded because the claimant had opted to retain the shares.
Held: The interests of justice did not allow ma defendant to reduce the level of damages awarded in this situation. The damages were for a breach of warranty. The compensatory principle required the damage to be assessed at the date of the loss. He had adopted the transaction by retaining the shares, but the measure was the excess of consideration paid over the true value together with consequential expenses. The expenses and harassment suffered by the claimant at the hands of the Respondent were substantial. It was the responsibility of the defendants to establish that the claimants had acted imprudently in retaining the shares. That had not happened.

Court: ChD
Date: 03-Dec-2002
Judges: Lightman J
References: Times, 17-Dec-2002,
Cases Cited:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Damages

Customs & Excise -v- Anchor Foods Ltd (No.4); ChD 18-Oct-1999

Court: ChD
Date: 18-Oct-1999
Links: Bailii,
References: [1999] EWHC 835 (Ch),
Cases Cited:
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Costs, Litigation Practice

Alexander Child-Villiers -v- Secretary of State for Work & Pensions, Linda-Benedicte Barlow; CA 17-Dec-2002

The father appealed a finding of the Child Support tribunal against his assertion that he had day to day care of his child.
Held: The Regulations provided that where, as here, one party paid the school fees of a child attending a boarding school, that case had to be treated as a special case. The tribunal had erred in following too closely the award of residence to the mother. The Child Support scheme provided a self contained statutory system for making the decision. It had to decide what would be level of care provided against the actual background, if the child were not at boarding school.

Court: CA
Date: 17-Dec-2002
Judges: Kennedy, Chadwick, Potter LJJ
Statutes: Child Support Act 1991, Child Support (Maintenance Assessment) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 1815) 27
Links: Bailii,
References: Times, 28-Dec-2002, Gazette, 23-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1854

Leave a Comment

Filed under Child Support

S -v- S; 2002

Bracewell J considered the first of the conditions suggested by Lord Brandon in Barder for allowing an appeal against an order made by consent – that the circumstances giving rise to the appeal should be such as to undermine the order. He said that the first condition imports the requirement that the new event be not only unforeseen but unforeseeable, since if it was foreseeable at the time, it cannot be the kind of extraneous supervening event which can be said to destroy the basis of the original order.

Date: 01-Jan-2002
Judges: Bracewell J
References: [2002] 3 WLR 1372,
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Litigation Practice

Barder -v- Barder (Caluori Intervening); CA 1987

Court: CA
Date: 01-Jan-1987
References: [1987] 2 FLR 480,
Cited By:
  • Barder -v- Caluori, HL, Appeal from, ([1988] AC 20, [1987] 2 All ER 440, [1987] 2 WLR 1350, [1988] Fam Law 18)

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family

Barder -v- Caluori; HL 2-Jan-1987

In divorce proceedings, the husband had transferred his interest in the matrimonial home to the wife who had been awarded care and control of the two children of the family. The order was made on 20 February 1985 and on 25 March the wife unlawfully killed the two children and then committed suicide. The husband sought leave to appeal out of time, and to have the consent order set aside.
Held: The House considered the principles to be applied when looking at applications for leave to appeal out of time.
Lord Brandon: ‘My Lords, the question whether leave to appeal out of time should be given on the ground that assumptions or estimates made at the time of the hearing of a cause or matter have been invalidated or falsified by subsequent events is a difficult one. The reason why the question is difficult is that it involves conflict between two important legal principles and a decision which of them is to prevail over the other. The first principle is that it is in the public interest that there should be finality in litigation. The second principle is that justice requires cases to be decided, so far as practicable, on the true facts relating to them, and not on assumptions or estimates with regards to those facts which are conclusively shown by later events to have been erroneous.
In appeals from the High Court to the Court of Appeal, and from the Court of Appeal to your Lordships’ House, there is a discretion to admit evidence relating to supervening events where refusal to admit it would plainly cause serious injustice. This has been established by three cases in the field of actions for damages for death or personal injuries: Curwen -v- James [1963] 1 WLR 748; Murphy -v- Stone-Wallwork (Charlton Ltd [1969] 1 WLR 1023 and Mulholland -v- Mitchell [1971] AC 666.’
Lord Brandon considered the circumstances in which an unexpected supervening event might lead to an ancillary relief order being set aside: ‘There can, in my opinion, be no doubt that the consent order dated 20 February 1985 was agreed between the husband and the wife through their respective solicitors, and approved by the registrar, upon a fundamental, though tacit, assumption. The assumption was that for an indefinite period, to be measured in years rather than months or weeks, the wife and the two children of the family would require a suitable home in which to reside. That assumption was totally invalidated by the deaths of the children and the wife within five weeks of the order being made.’ and ‘My Lords, the result of the two lines of authority to which I have referred appears to me to be this. A court may properly exercise its discretion to grant leave to appeal out of time from an order for financial provision or property transfer made after a divorce on the ground of new events, provided that certain conditions are satisfied. The first condition is that new events have occurred since the making of the order which invalidate the basis, or fundamental assumption, upon which the order was made, so that, if leave to appeal out of time were to be given, the appeal would be certain, or very likely, to succeed. The second condition is that the new events should have occurred within a relatively short time of the order having been made. While the length of time cannot be laid down precisely, I should regard it as extremely unlikely that it could be as much as a year, and that in most cases it will be no more than a few months. The third condition is that the application for leave to appeal out of time should be made reasonably promptly in the circumstances of the case. To these three conditions, which can be seen from the authorities as requiring to be satisfied, I would add a fourth, which it does not appear has needed to be considered so far, but which it may be necessary to consider in future cases. That fourth condition is that the grant of leave to appeal out of time should not prejudice third parties who have acquired, in good faith and for valuable consideration, interests in property which is the subject matter of the relevant order.’

Court: HL
Date: 02-Jan-1987
Judges: Lord Brandon
References: [1988] AC 20, [1987] 2 All ER 440, [1987] 2 WLR 1350, [1988] Fam Law 18
Cases Cited:
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family, Litigation Practice

Archibald -v- Taylor; PC 1-Mar-1878

Nova Scotia

Court: PC
Date: 01-Mar-1878
Links: Bailii,
References: [1878] UKPC 10,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commonwealth

Archibald Nugent Robertson -v- The Balmain New Ferry Company Limited; PC 10-Dec-1909

Australia

Court: PC
Date: 10-Dec-1909
Links: Bailii,
References: [1909] UKPC 58,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Commonwealth

Altun -v- Turkey; ECHR 19-Oct-2006

Court: ECHR
Date: 19-Oct-2006
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
Links: Bailii,
References: 66354/01, [2006] ECHR 875,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Human Rights

Alk-Abello Ltd -v- Meridian Medical Technologies Dey Pharma Lp; PCC 9-Nov-2010

The court was asked whether the case should be transferred from the Patents County Court to the High Court Patents Court.

Court: PCC
Date: 09-Nov-2010
Judges: Birss QC HHJ
Statutes: County Courts Act 1984 42, Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 289(2)
Links: Bailii,
References: [2010] EWPCC 14, [2011] FSR 13

Leave a Comment

Filed under Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

W City Council -v- L; CoP 11-Feb-2015

Court: CoP
Date: 11-Feb-2015
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWCOP 20,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Health

Nursing and Midwifery Council -v- Lagah-Bona; Admn 19-Nov-2014

Court: Admn
Date: 19-Nov-2014
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] EWHC 4090 (Admin),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Health Professions

Moreno -v- The Motor Insurers Bureau; QBD 23-Apr-2015

Court: QBD
Date: 23-Apr-2015
Judges: Gilbart J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1142 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Personal Injury

British Airline Pilots Association -v- Jet2Com Ltd; QBD 23-Apr-2015

Dispute as to method of implementation of collective bargaining arrangements.

Court: QBD
Date: 23-Apr-2015
Judges: Supperstone J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1110 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Asghar and Another -v- Ahmad and Others; QBD 23-Apr-2015

The claimants elleged defamation by the defendants in the course of disputes as to the management of mosques in South Wales.

Court: QBD
Date: 23-Apr-2015
Judges: Jeremy Baker J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1118 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Defamation

Everclear Ltd (Bvi) -v- Agrest and Another; CA 9-Mar-2011

The former husband appealed against an order made on the basis that his transfer of a company shareholding was a sham.

Court: CA
Date: 09-Mar-2011
Statutes: Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 23
Links: Bailii,
References: [2011] EWCA Civ 232,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family

XYZ -v- Various; QBD 8-Apr-2015

Costs consequential on adjournment of hearing of PIP breast implant litigation.

Court: QBD
Date: 08-Apr-2015
Judges: Thirlwall DBE J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 1151 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Costs

Barnett -v- Medway NHS Foundation Trust; QBD 23-Feb-2015

The Claimant claims damages for pain, injury, loss and damage arising out of his medical treatment at the Medway Maritime Hospital

Court: QBD
Date: 23-Feb-2015
Judges: Brian Forster QC HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] EWHC 440 (QB),

Leave a Comment

Filed under Professional Negligence

Lamb -v- Transco Plc; EAT 15-Nov-2004

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Exclusions including worker – contributory fault
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Exclusions including worker/jurisdiction.

Court: EAT
Date: 15-Nov-2004
Judges: The Honourable Lord Johnston
Links: Bailii, EAT,
References: EAT/0030/04, [2004] UKEAT 0030_04_1511

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

L -v- L; FD 2-May-2006

Held: a final ancillary relief order that has been made by a District Judge by consent can in principle be reviewed by the court if there has been fraud, mistake or material non-disclosure.
A final ancillary relief order that has been made by a District Judge by consent can in principle be reviewed by the court if there has been fraud, mistake or material non-disclosure.
Munby J said: ‘There is an extensive jurisprudence analysing the means by which such applications can be brought before the court . . Much of this jurisprudence is both complex and, particularly where what is sought is to challenge a consent order made by a district judge, confusing and confused. It is, I venture to suggest, yet another area where there is a pressing need for legislative clarification and simplification. As Bracewell J pointed out in Benson v Benson (Deceased) [1996] 1 FLR 692, at 606, Ward J (as he then was) had commented as long as 1989 in B-T v B-T (Divorce: Procedure) [1990] 2 FLR 1 that the various procedures were unsatisfactory and cumbersome, yet, as she dryly observed, ‘the difficulties persist’. That was in 1995. In 2002 in S v S (Ancillary Relief: Consent Order) [2002] EWHC 223 (Fam), [2003] Fam 1, [2002] 1 FLR 992, at para [11], the same judge observed that the law was in ‘a most unsatisfactory state’. It is now 2006 and little has been done, and nothing effective, to remedy matters.’
and . . ‘it suffices to say that where it is sought to challenge a consent order in ancillary relief proceedings it is, or may be, possible to do so by one or more of the following:
(i) a fresh action to set aside the consent order;
(ii) an appeal;
(iii) an application to the judge at first instance’.

Court: FD
Date: 02-May-2006
Judges: Munby J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2006] EWHC 956 (Fam), [2008] 1 FLR 26
Cited By:

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family, Litigation Practice

Williams -v- Amey Services Ltd (Unfair Dismissal: Contributory Fault); EAT 16-Feb-2015

Unfair Dismissal: Contributory Fault – Polkey deduction
Employment Rights Act 1996 sections 122(2) (basic award) and 123(1) and (6) (compensatory award)
Unfair Dismissal – Compensatory Award – Polkey reduction

Court: EAT
Date: 16-Feb-2015
Judges: Eady QC HHJ
Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 122(2) 123(1) 123(6)
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKEAT 0287_14_1602,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Prime Healthcare UK Ltd -v- Brown (Practice and Procedure: Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity); EAT 9-Feb-2015

EAT Practice and Procedure: Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity – There appears to have been a substantial irregularity in that the Employment Judge refused to allow a witness called by the Respondent to give evidence, although he could have given highly material evidence.
It is also fairly arguable that the Employment Judge made findings which were not supported by any evidence.

Court: EAT
Date: 09-Feb-2015
Judges: Serota QC HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKEAT 0230_14_0902,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Moss -v- Reliance Mutual Insurance Society Ltd (Equal Pay Act: Material Factor Defence and Justification); EAT 22-Apr-2015

EAT Equal Pay Act: Material Factor Defence and Justification – SEX DISCRIMINATION – Direct – UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal
The Employment Tribunal upheld the Respondent’s genuine material factor defence to the Appellant’s equal pay claim. No error of law shown. The sex discrimination claim failed on the facts and on limitation grounds. The Employment Tribunal found permissibly that the Respondent was not in repudiatory breach of contract so that the constructive unfair dismissal claim also failed. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.

Court: EAT
Date: 22-Apr-2015
Judges: Peter Clarke HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKEAT 0135_14_2204,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Habinteg Housing Association Ltd -v- Holleron (Practice and Procedure); EAT 20-Feb-2015

EAT Practice and Procedure – An Employment Tribunal found in favour of the Claimant on one of the claims she made. It thought it just and equitable to extend time. On appeal the employer argued, successfully, that since there had been no evidence given by the Claimant to explain why she had been late in making a claim, and the reason was not obviously to be inferred, there was no proper basis for making the claim.

Court: EAT
Date: 20-Feb-2015
Judges: Langstaff P J
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKEAT 0274_14_2002,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment

Costello -v- Gloucestershire County Council and Another (Unfair Dismissal: Constructive Dismissal); EAT 26-Feb-2015

EAT Unfair Dismissal: Constructive Dismissal – The Employment Tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s claim that she had been constructively dismissed on the basis that her employer had breached the implied term of trust and confidence.
She appealed on the grounds that the Employment Tribunal had failed to make an objective assessment of the employer’s conduct but had considered their subjective intentions and beliefs. On analysis that submission was not well founded and the appeal was simply an attack on a factual finding of the Employment Tribunal that there had been no repudiatory breach by the employer.

Court: EAT
Date: 26-Feb-2015
Judges: Shanls HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2015] UKEAT 0386_14_2602,

Leave a Comment

Filed under Employment