(Hong Kong) The buyer brought an action for damages for breach of a contract for the sale of goods. The measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and the market value of the goods at the relevant date. The evidence called at trial was all directed to the market value of the … Continue reading Tai Hing Cotton Mill Limited v Kamsing Knitting Factory (A Firm): PC 27 Jul 1977
Solicitors sought to challenge an order disallowing a costs item for the administration of an estate which included a percentage of the estate. Held: Despite advances in time recording, ‘we see no reason to say that it is no longer appropriate for solicitors to make a separate charge based on value, provided always that one … Continue reading Jemma Trust Company Ltd v Liptrott, Forrester, Kippax Beaumont Lewis: CA 24 Oct 2003
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to be applied to avoid … Continue reading In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO obtained search warrants and executed them. The company challenged the release of the documents recovered to other government departments. They had … Continue reading Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004
The Commissioners appealed against a refusal of their application for a revocation of the defendant’s voluntary arrangement in that it had failed to comply with section 4. They complained that the arrangement was unfair to them. It had been agreed to pay football creditors in full at the expense of others, in order to avoid … Continue reading Commissioners of Inland Revenue v The Wimbledon Football Club Limited, Ellis, Earp: CA 28 May 2004
The company had gone into liquidation. They had sold consumer policies as extended warranties on behalf of the claimant. The company had insured its own joint liability under the contracts, and the claimant sought information from the company’s administrators to assist it identifying who might else be liable. Held: The claimant could rely upon the … Continue reading First National Tricity Finance Ltd v OT Computers Ltd; In re OT Computers Ltd (in administration): CA 25 May 2004
The court was asked whether what a defendant’s counsel had said in a plea in mitigation in one case could be proved and admitted as evidence in another trial. The objection was made that the evidence could not go before the jury until the prosecution proved that what counsel had said in mitigation was on … Continue reading Regina v Turner (Bryan): CACD 1975
The defendants appealed orders requiring them to produce evidence for use in the courts in the US. Held: It was the pleasure and duty of British courts to respond positively to a letter of request. Public interest required that a court should have before it all the evidence it required to fulfil its task. Unless … Continue reading United States of America v Philip Morris Inc and Others and British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd: CA 23 Mar 2004
The defendant, a solicitors’ clerk attending a trial, grew bored, and set out to release laughing gas into the court through a vent. He had been seen earlier and was caught before he achieved his end. He appealed his committal; for contempt, saying that his acts had not been in the face of the court. … Continue reading Balogh v St Albans Crown Court: CA 1975
The defendant appealed saying that the prosecution had broken the principle ‘that it is only once that an indictment can be preferred upon the basis of one committal’. Held: The trial had taken place upon an invalid indictment not properly founded on a committal nor preferred by leave of a High Court judge and the … Continue reading Regina v Thompson: 1975
The parties disputed the final resting place of the newly discovered body of King Richard III. The claimants argued for the burial to be in York, and said that the respondents had failed to consult adequately.The court set out the principles at common law: ‘(1) There is no general duty to consult at Common Law. … Continue reading Plantagenet Alliance Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Others: QBD 23 May 2014
Ministers May Act through Civil Servants The plaintiffs owned a factory which was to be requisitioned. They sought a judicial review of the lawfulness of the order making the requisition, saying that the 1939 Regulations had been implemented not by the Minister as required, but by an official within the Ministry of Works and Planning. … Continue reading Carltona Ltd v Commissioners of Works: CA 1943
The applicant contended that the 1991 Act infringed her human rights in denying her access to court to obtain maintenance for her children. Held: The applicant had no substantive right to take part in the enforcement process in domestic law which is capable in Convention law of engaging the guarantees in it. ‘Sympathetic though one … Continue reading Kehoe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 14 Jul 2005
The claimants complained of their segregation while in prison. Several preliminary questions were to be decided: whether damages might be payable for breach of a Convention Right; wheher the act of a prison governor was the act of the executive; whether time ran from the date of the first breach, whether want of proportionality is … Continue reading Somerville v Scottish Ministers: HL 24 Oct 2007
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the restraint which had been imposed infringed the human right of free speech. When the 1998 Act was brought in, … Continue reading Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others: HL 14 Oct 2004
The Secretary of State sought an interlocutory injunction under the Act to restrain the appellant from charging prices in excess of those fixed by a statutory instrument he had made. The appellant argued that the statutory instrument was ultra . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
A widow had thought that she was to receive the bulk of her husband’s estate by survivorship, but discovered, only out of time and after the six months limit, that this was not the case. She applied for leave to apply out of time to rectify the will, saying that the revocation of the necessary … Continue reading In Re the Estate of Ronald Ernest Chittock (Deceased); Chittock v Stevens and Others: ChD 5 Apr 2000
Citations: [1982] 3 FLR 280 Statutes: Administration of Justice Act 1975 4 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Distinguished – In Re the Estate of Ronald Ernest Chittock (Deceased); Chittock v Stevens and Others ChD 5-Apr-2000 A widow had thought that she was to receive the bulk of her husband’s estate by survivorship, but discovered, … Continue reading Escritt v Escritt: 1981
(Supreme Court of Ireland) The court looked at a law in which the choice of alternative penalties was left to the executive: ‘There is a clear distinction between the prescription of a fixed penalty and the selection of a penalty for a particular case. The prescription of a fixed penalty is the statement of a … Continue reading Deaton v Attorney General and Revenue Commissioners: 1963
The plaintiffs claimed large-scale copyright infringement, and obtained Anton Pillar orders. The House considered the existence of the privilege against self-incrimination where the Anton Piller type of order has been made. The Court of Appeal had decided that the court should abstain from making an order ex parte requiring immediate answers to interrogatories or disclosure … Continue reading Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre: HL 1 Mar 1981
AIC had used the 1920 Act to register a judgment obtained in Nigeria against the Nigerian Government. The underlying matter was a commercial transaction. Nigeria applied to set the registration aside, saying that registration was an adjudicative act and that Nigeria was protected by state immunity by reason of section 1 of the 1978 Act. … Continue reading AIC Limited v The Federal Government of Nigeria, the Attorney General of the Federation of Nigeria: QBD 13 Jun 2003
Proposed changes to the Legal Aid regulations were challenged as being invalid, for being discriminatory. If regulations are not authorised under statute, they will be invalid, even if they have been approved by resolutions of both Houses under the provisions of the relevant enabling Act. Held: The appeal succeeded as to the ultra vires issue.Lord … Continue reading The Public Law Project, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor: SC 13 Jul 2016
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to be disclosed during the hearing, but the court had had no power … Continue reading Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979
The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through the giving of the ‘wrongful undertakings’ Held: The joined party, who had not itself … Continue reading Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006
The appellants challenged the removal of a restrictive covenant on a neighbour’s house restricting further building on the land to allow further house in the garden. It was in a small close of houses all erected, and the covenant imposed, in 1952. It was in effect part of a building scheme. The tribunal had found … Continue reading Shephard and others v Turner and Another: CA 23 Jan 2006
The claimants were dependants of Iraqi nationals killed in Iraq. Held: The Military Police were operating when Britain was an occupying power. The question in each case was whether the Human Rights Act applied to the acts of the defendant. The question amounted to whether the officers acted under State Agent Authority within the convention … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Mazin Mumaa Galteh Al-Skeini and Others) v The Secretary of State for Defence: CA 21 Dec 2005
An indictment had not been signed despite a clear statutory provision that it should be. The defects were claimed to have been cured by amendment before sentence. Held: The convictions failed. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the 1933 Act which provided for a bill of indictment (which had of itself no legal standing save as … Continue reading Clarke, Regina v; Regina v McDaid: HL 6 Feb 2008
Claims were made for personal injury caused by asbestos. The re-insurers sought declaratory relief against the head insurers, and the administrators of the insolvent company. The administrators sought declarations in turn. Curzon insured the company for ultimate net loss, and then had re-insurance with Centre Reinsurance. Ultimate net loss meant all sums paid out less … Continue reading Freakley and Curzon Insurance Ltd v Centre Reinsurance International Company and Another; similar: CA 11 Feb 2005
The defendant was committed for trial on seven charges of fraud. An eighth was then added under a voluntary bill of indictment, and a circuit judge confirmed a new indictment with all the eight charges. He appealed. Held: His appeal succeeded. One indictment could be amended to include the other charges, but there was no … Continue reading Regina v Cairns: CACD 1983
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well and did not wish to return. The … Continue reading Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation: FD 25 Jul 2000
The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden anally. Held: The common thread in all the cases has been the search to … Continue reading Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001
Insolvency, at least per se, does not amount to a special circumstance exempting an employer from consulting employees on redundancy. Morritt J noted the distinction in the Directive between contemplated and projected redundancies and section 99 to an employer ‘proposing to dismiss’ and said: ‘The Union contends that both those sections should be construed to … Continue reading In Re Hartlebury Printers Ltd: 1992
Mrs Bradley was employed by Dart Mill several times from 1933 and 1970 and acquired byssinosis from inhaling cotton dust. The company was wound up in 1975 and dissolved in 1976. In 1984 she applied to the court for pre-action disclosure under section 33(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 and RSC Ord. 24 rule … Continue reading Bradley v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd: HL 1989
Mens Rea essential element of statutory Offence The appellant had been convicted under the Act 1965 of having been concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. This was a farmhouse which she visited infrequently. The prosecutor had conceded that she was unaware that the premises were used for that purpose. Held: The … Continue reading Sweet v Parsley: HL 23 Jan 1969
Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear words. The judge … Continue reading Swain v Hillman: CA 21 Oct 1999
In the course of the insolvent administration of the bank, substantial additional sums were received. Parties appealed against some orders made on the application to court for directions as to what was to be done with the surplus. Held: The Court considered the so called waterfall of distributions made on liquidation which proved to be … Continue reading LB Holdings Intermediate 2 Ltd, The Joint Administrators of v Lehman Brothers International (Europe), The Joint Administrators of and Others: SC 17 May 2017
Transgender Male to Female not to marry as Female The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible with the claimant’s … Continue reading Bellinger v Bellinger: HL 10 Apr 2003
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013
The deceased, a solicitor of long standing, was said to have signed his will without having read it, and had two witnesses sign the document without them knowing what they were attesting. He had remarried, and the will was challenged by his children. The judge had held the will invalidly executed. Held: The appeal succeeded. … Continue reading Sherrington v Sherrington: CA 22 Mar 2005
In case of doubt as to the desirability of the intended proceedings (whether as plaintiff or defendant), trustees may apply to the court for directions. This will protect the trustees from adverse costs orders. If given leave to sue or defend by the court, they are entitled to an indemnity for their costs out of … Continue reading In re Beddoe, Downes v Cottam: CA 1893
The appellant challenged the introduction in evidence of a previous inconsistent statement lodged on his behalf by counsel on a Plea and Case Management Form at a directions hearing. Held: The appeal was allowed. An advocate plainly has implied actual authority to do what is normally incidental, in the ordinary course of his profession, to … Continue reading Newell, Regina v: CACD 30 Mar 2012
The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be transferred only if the claimant’s brother paid all the Inheritance Tax. It was transferred … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against refusal of a strike out of the claim. The Court of Appeal said that it was … Continue reading Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers: SC 27 Jun 2012
The defendants considered publication of alleged financial irregularities by the claimant, who sought to restrain publication. The defendants argued that under the Act, prior restraint should not be used unless a later court would be likely to restrict publication. The court below held the test is not that of the balance of probabilities but rather … Continue reading Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and The Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Limited: CA 13 Feb 2003
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
