Search Results for: Civil Procedure Rules 31

Click the case name for better results:

Lord Ashcroft v Attorney General and Department for International Development: QBD 31 May 2002

The claimant was the subject of confidential reports prepared by the defendants which were leaked to newspapers causing him damage. He sought leave to amend his claim to add claims for breach of the Data Protection Act and for public misfeasance. Under the Civil Procedure Rules a new claim should be allowed if it is … Continue reading Lord Ashcroft v Attorney General and Department for International Development: QBD 31 May 2002

Bell Electric Ltd v Aweco Appliance Systems Gmbh and Co Kg (1501): CA 31 Oct 2002

The respondent sought to appeal. The claimant requested the court to order that as a pre-condition of being allowed to appeal, the respondent should pay into court, or give adequate security for, the costs awarded at first instance, even though there was no evidence that a vigorously followed enforcement would not succeed if the appeal … Continue reading Bell Electric Ltd v Aweco Appliance Systems Gmbh and Co Kg (1501): CA 31 Oct 2002

Compagnie Noga D’Importation et D’Exportation Sa v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. and others: CA 31 Jul 2002

If the court wishes to enable a party to appeal against a particular finding contained in the judgment, it may make a declaration embodying that finding. Citations: [2002] EWCA Civ 1142, [2003] 1 WLR 307, [2003] CP Rep 5 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: See Also – Compagnie … Continue reading Compagnie Noga D’Importation et D’Exportation Sa v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. and others: CA 31 Jul 2002

Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner West London v Channel 4 Television Corporation: QBD 31 Oct 2007

The coroner investigating the death of Prncess Diana sought an order for the production by Channel 4 of documents and materials in its possession. Held: Whilst the order should be made, it must be recognised that the Civil Procedure Rules were designed for use within an adversarial context, and not within the context of the … Continue reading Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner West London v Channel 4 Television Corporation: QBD 31 Oct 2007

Chantrey Vellacott v The Convergence Group Plc and others: ChD 31 Jul 2007

The claimants, a firm of accountants, sued their former clients for unpaid fees. The defendant company counterclaimed for professional negligence. The claimant had expended andpound;5.6m in costs. The claimants now sought a non-party costs order against former directors of the company, which had gone into administration. They said that the company’s counterclaim was built on … Continue reading Chantrey Vellacott v The Convergence Group Plc and others: ChD 31 Jul 2007

E I Du Pont de Nemours and Co v S T Dupont (1): ChD 31 Oct 2002

Parties appealed from decisions of the Trade Marks Registry, and requested leave to introduce new evidence. Held: It was not agreed what rules applied on appeals under the 1938 Act. The Trade Mark system had public interest effects as well as private law. The rules governing appeals were therefore different from other regimes. The courts … Continue reading E I Du Pont de Nemours and Co v S T Dupont (1): ChD 31 Oct 2002

Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo Spa and others: CA 31 Jul 2003

The parties went to arbitration to resolve disputes in a construction contract. The award appeared to have been made for payment in currencies different from those set out in the contract. The question was asked as to whether the award of interest was a matter of law or of procedure. Held: The issue of currency … Continue reading Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo Spa and others: CA 31 Jul 2003

Mohamad Ali Aoun v Hassan Bahri, Costas Angelou: CA 31 Jul 2002

The claimant wanted to appeal an order to pay the defendants’ costs already ordered, and to provide security for costs of the remaining action. The defendants requested security for the costs of the appeal. Throughout the matter the claimant had been inconsistent about his residence and connections with the UK. The claimant had been late … Continue reading Mohamad Ali Aoun v Hassan Bahri, Costas Angelou: CA 31 Jul 2002

Sengupta v Holmes and Others, Lord Chancellor intervening: CA 31 Jul 2002

The appellant had applied for leave to appeal to a single judge, who had refused the application. He appealed and was granted leave by two judges. He then objected when the single judge who had refused leave was included in the panel of judges to hear the substantive appeal. Held: There was no reason to … Continue reading Sengupta v Holmes and Others, Lord Chancellor intervening: CA 31 Jul 2002

Budgen v Andrew Gardner Partnership: CA 31 Jul 2002

The defendant firm of solicitors appealed an order for costs against it based upon a percentage calculation. They sought an issues based costs order. Held: Where there was insufficient information upon which to calculate an issues based costs order, it could be appropriate to make a percentage based order under subsection (f). Whilst issues based … Continue reading Budgen v Andrew Gardner Partnership: CA 31 Jul 2002

Fairmays (A Firm) v Palmer: ChD 31 Jan 2006

The defendant appealed against a decision not to set aside a judgment obtained against him by default. Whilst he retained a property in England, he lived in Ethiopia. The claim was served at the address in England, but was redirected to another address in Ethiopia. Held: The appeal suceeded. The proceedings had not been served … Continue reading Fairmays (A Firm) v Palmer: ChD 31 Jan 2006

Totty v Snowden; Hewitt v Wirral and West Cheshire Community NHS Trust: CA 31 Jul 2001

Where a party had served a claim form, but then failed to serve the particulars of claim within the appropriate time limit, the court had full discretion to allow an extension of time for service. It had been argued that the same rules applied both to the issue of the claim form, and the particulars … Continue reading Totty v Snowden; Hewitt v Wirral and West Cheshire Community NHS Trust: CA 31 Jul 2001

Police of The Metropolis v Brown: QBD 31 Jul 2018

‘The appeal concerns the operation of the qualified one-way costs shifting regime (known as ‘QOCS’) contained in Section II of Part 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’). The Judge decided that QOCS applied, automatically, to protect Ms Brown against any adverse costs order which might be made against her in the Police’s favour. The … Continue reading Police of The Metropolis v Brown: QBD 31 Jul 2018

R H Tomlinson (Trowbridge) Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another: CA 31 Aug 1999

Under the CPR, a company could now appear at court in person and without a legal representative. The old rule has not been carried forward. However the old rule had been clear and in a case under those rules, the order that the company was not properly before the court was properly made. Citations: Times … Continue reading R H Tomlinson (Trowbridge) Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another: CA 31 Aug 1999

Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Group): CA 31 Jul 2018

The court was asked important questions about (i) the powers of the court under the CPR and its inherent jurisdiction to permit access to documents by non-parties; (ii) the way in which the court’s discretion should be exercised where an application is within its powers; and (iii) the proper balance to be struck between the … Continue reading Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Group): CA 31 Jul 2018

Izzo v Philip Ross and Co (a Firm): ChD 31 Jul 2001

Whilst litigants in person should be allowed the assistance of a McKenzie friend, the duties of the friend should not normally include representation and advocacy. Nevertheless, each case should be viewed separately, and applications for permission should be attended to, even if only granted in exceptional circumstances. The litigant should understand that this is an … Continue reading Izzo v Philip Ross and Co (a Firm): ChD 31 Jul 2001

Kimondo, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Relevant Rules; AOS Requirements) (IJR): UTIAC 14 Nov 2014

(1) In judicial review applications transferred by the Administrative Court to the Upper Tribunal, the applicable procedural regime is that contained in the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008. The Civil Procedure Rules have no effect thereafter; although the procedural history may be significant, particularly as regards time limits. (2) The prohibition in rule 29(3) … Continue reading Kimondo, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Relevant Rules; AOS Requirements) (IJR): UTIAC 14 Nov 2014

Deripaska v Cherney: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court considered where the trial of the action should take place. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. Even though the rights sought to be protected were of a proprietary nature, where the rights could properly be said to have arisen under an English contract, the English court could use its discretion to assert jurisdiction. Though … Continue reading Deripaska v Cherney: CA 31 Jul 2009

IG Index Ltd v Cloete: CA 31 Jul 2014

In the course of unfair dismissal proceedings, the defendant had disclosed possession of confidential materials of his former employer. The employer began these proceedings based on the materials. Only at a later point when he appointed solicitors was a challenge to made to that use as contempt. The company now appealed against the strike out … Continue reading IG Index Ltd v Cloete: CA 31 Jul 2014

Harris v Academies Enterprise Trust and Others: EAT 31 Oct 2014

EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out/Dismissal : Postponement or stay Perversity The Claimant appealed the refusal of an Employment Tribunal to strike out the response. The exchange of witness statements had been ordered for 19 February 2014, 12 days prior to trial. In breach of this order, the Respondent did not serve 13 witness statements, … Continue reading Harris v Academies Enterprise Trust and Others: EAT 31 Oct 2014

London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and home. Held: Article 8 does not, in terms, give a right to … Continue reading London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Non-derogating control orders – HR Compliant MB and AF challenged non-derogating control orders made under the 2005 Act, saying that they were incompatible with their human rights. AF was subject to a curfew of 14 hours a day, wore an electronic tag at all times, could not leave a nine square mile area, and had … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Lucas v Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 23 Jul 2003

The claimant appealed an order requiring him to disclose to the defendants the terms of the instructions given to the expert witness. Held: Rule 35.10(4) restriction applied to prevent the defendant from obtaining an order for the inspection he sought. Judges: Waller, Mantell, Laws LJJ Citations: [2003] EWCA Civ 1102, Times 28-Aug-2003, Gazette 02-Oct-2003, [2004] … Continue reading Lucas v Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 23 Jul 2003

Earles v Barclays Bank plc: Merc 8 Oct 2009

The claimant had lost his claim against the bank, but resisted the amount of costs claimed. Held: The trial had been of a simple factual dispute, and the bank had failed adequately to disclose electronically held material in its possession. The bank had also, and despite having inhouse counsel, employed disproportionately expensive lawyers. The bank … Continue reading Earles v Barclays Bank plc: Merc 8 Oct 2009

A and Another v Somerset County Council: QBD 11 Oct 2012

Appeal against refusal of order for pre-action disclosure. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2012] EWHC 2753 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.16 Citing: Cited – In re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010 Proceedings had been brought to challenge the validity of Orders in Council … Continue reading A and Another v Somerset County Council: QBD 11 Oct 2012

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Namli and Another: CA 29 Nov 2011

An application was made to vary a disclosure order. The application raised a question as to the scope of CPR Part 33.6 and the relationship between that provision, Part 31.5(2) and Part 31.19, and the exercise of the powers conferred on the Court by Part 31.5(2) and Part 31.19. Held: CPR 31.5(2) empowers the court … Continue reading Serious Organised Crime Agency v Namli and Another: CA 29 Nov 2011

Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others: QBD 26 May 2011

The defendant, having been sued for defamation by the claimant social worker pleaded justification and now sought third party disclosure against the hospital involved and against the police of documents which might support the stories it had published. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2011] EWHC 1364 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.17 Defamation, Civil … Continue reading Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others: QBD 26 May 2011

Berezovsky v Abramovich: ComC 6 Aug 2010

The claimant sought an order for enhanced disclosure. Judges: Gloster DBE J Citations: [2010] EWHC 2010 (Comm) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.5(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.425307

Mireskandari v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 4 May 2010

The claimant sued in defamation, but had failed to make disclosure of documents as ordered. He asked for the ‘unless’ order to be set aside, and the action re-instated saying that he had not had notice of the application for it. He also argued that the Sharp J was biased. Held: The fact that a … Continue reading Mireskandari v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 4 May 2010

Marlton v Tectronix UK Holdings: ChD 10 Feb 2003

The court considered what was to be discovered under Part 31.4.1 of CPR. Pumfrey J expressly approved the commentary in the White Book: ‘A computer database which forms part of the business records for company is, in so far as it contains information capable of being received and converted into readable form, a document for … Continue reading Marlton v Tectronix UK Holdings: ChD 10 Feb 2003

Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 5 Mar 2009

The claimant police officer complained of an alleged defamation in an article published by the defendant. The defendant wished to obtain information from the IPCC to show that they were investigating the matter as a credible issue. The court considered applications relating to the disclosure of private materials given to the Independent Police Complaints Commission … Continue reading Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 5 Mar 2009

Barrier Ltd v Redhall Marine Ltd: QBD 30 Mar 2016

Application, issued on 2.7.15, of the Applicant for pre-action disclosure under CPR r.31.16 Judges: Behrens HHJ Citations: [2016] EWHC 381 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.16 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.562168

Environment Agency v Lewin Fryer and Partners: TCC 6 Jul 2006

The defendants had started but abandoned a request against third parties, and had to pay their costs. It now sought those and its own costs from the claimant, saying that the abortive application would have been unnecessary had the claimant complied with its own disclosure obligations. The claimant said the court did not have jurisdiction … Continue reading Environment Agency v Lewin Fryer and Partners: TCC 6 Jul 2006

Hughes v Carratu International Plc: QBD 19 Jul 2006

The claimant wished to bring an action against the defendant enquiry agent, saying that it had obtained unlawful access to details of his bank accounts, and now sought disclosure of documents. The defendant denied wrongdoing, and said it had returned all papers to solicitors. Held: The proposed respondents had not been fully candid, and a … Continue reading Hughes v Carratu International Plc: QBD 19 Jul 2006

Real Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd and others: ChD 15 Dec 2006

The defendant company resisted disclosure of documents saying that they had been supplied by the Financial Services Authority in confidence, and that to disclose them would be an offence. Held: The information had already in principle been known to the defendants before the FSA investigation, and were not protected from disclosure. Judges: David Richards J … Continue reading Real Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd and others: ChD 15 Dec 2006

PHD Modular Access Services Ltd v Seele, Gmbh: TCC 8 Aug 2011

An application by a scaffolding sub-contractor for disclosure and pre-claim disclosure under CPR Part 31.16. Judges: Akenhead J Citations: [2011] EWHC 2210 (TCC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.16 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 19 June 2022; Ref: scu.443854

Marlwood Commercial Inc v Kozeny: CA 25 Jun 2004

Letters of request. The claimants brought an action for fraudulent misrepresentation. The documents disclosed by the defendants indicated there had been criminal conduct including bribery of the Azeri authorities. The Director of the SFO served notices under section 2 of the CJA 1987 requiring both parties to produce the relevant documents to the SFO. The … Continue reading Marlwood Commercial Inc v Kozeny: CA 25 Jun 2004

Rose v Lynx Express Ltd. and Bridgepoint Capital (Nominees) Ltd: CA 7 Apr 2004

In an request for pre-action discovery it was plainly wrong for the court to seek to decide in advance any element of the virtues of the case. Held: The appeal should be allowed. The case was arguable and should be allowed to proceed.Peter Gibson LJ said: ‘We have reservations about the approach adopted by the … Continue reading Rose v Lynx Express Ltd. and Bridgepoint Capital (Nominees) Ltd: CA 7 Apr 2004

Mohamad Al Fayed v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 29 May 2002

During an action, advice from counsel had been inadvertently disclosed to the claimants. The defendant sought to restrain use of the papers in the trial. It was accepted that the papers attracted legal professional privilege, but the police also sought public interest immunity. Held: A solicitor considering documents released to him owes no duty to … Continue reading Mohamad Al Fayed v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 29 May 2002

Lilly Icos Ltd v Pfizer Ltd (No 2): CA 23 Jan 2002

The respondent sought an order to maintain the confidentiality of documents disclosed during patent revocation proceedings. It now appealed an order refusing confidentiality. Held: Under normal circumstances, a party requesting such an order must provide clear reasons for it to be granted. The court should recognise the lack of protection which would attach to a … Continue reading Lilly Icos Ltd v Pfizer Ltd (No 2): CA 23 Jan 2002

HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd: ChD 13 Jan 2006

The claimant had for many years kept private journals, whose contents were circulated within a small circle of friends. He now sought to claim confidentiality and copyright in them when the defendant sought to publish them. Held: There was an arguable case that confidence existed in some part of the journals. The order for restraint … Continue reading HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd: ChD 13 Jan 2006

Sally Rall v Ross Hume: CA 8 Feb 2001

A surveillance film of a claimant was a document within the rules. The rules make no specific provision for the admission of such material for the purposes of cross examination of a claimant. A party proposing to use such material was under all the obligations which would apply to other documents as to disclosure and … Continue reading Sally Rall v Ross Hume: CA 8 Feb 2001

Bermuda International Securities Ltd v KPMG (A Firm): CA 27 Feb 2001

The case management powers of judges allowed a judge to order extensive pre-action discovery of documents. It is not appropriate at this stage in the development of the case management approach to lay down restrictive rules, and it must be for judges to use their discretion. The power only extended to documents which might be … Continue reading Bermuda International Securities Ltd v KPMG (A Firm): CA 27 Feb 2001

Frankson and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Johns v Same: CA 8 May 2003

The claimants sought damages for injuries alleged to have been received at the hands of prison officers whilst in prison. They now sought disclosure by the police of statements made to the police during the course of their investigation. Held: The court ordered the police to disclose witness statements obtained during a criminal investigation, because … Continue reading Frankson and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Johns v Same: CA 8 May 2003

Black v Sumitomo Corporation: CA 3 Dec 2001

The claimants proposed pre-action discovery which was resisted. Held: A purpose of pre-action disclosure is to assist those who need disclosure as a vital step in deciding whether to litigate at all or to provide a vital ingredient in the pleading of their case. The rules required first that disclosure would be desirable in the … Continue reading Black v Sumitomo Corporation: CA 3 Dec 2001

Twin Benefits Ltd v Barker and Another: ChD 13 Feb 2017

The claimant sought disclosure of documents held by a third party, a solicitor who had the documents after acting in another matter. The documents related to the setlement terms of an action relating to a trust which also the current matter also concerned. Held: Disclosure was ordered subject to provisions for maintaining certain elements of … Continue reading Twin Benefits Ltd v Barker and Another: ChD 13 Feb 2017

Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca Ab: ChD 8 Nov 2016

The parties had agreed to work tgether in the development of new drugs, but came to dispute whether certain projects were subject to the agreement. The claimant sought details of the defendant’s internal documents justifying that conclusion. The defendant then refused access to certain documents asserting legal professional privlege. The claimants now sought an order … Continue reading Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca Ab: ChD 8 Nov 2016

IG Index Plc v Cloete: QBD 11 Dec 2013

The defendant applied to have struck out the claim, saying that it was based upon a misuse of documents disclosed during an employment tribunal case, and was an abuse since the claimants had not sought the permission of the Tribunal for a second use of disclosed information. The defendant said that the information had been … Continue reading IG Index Plc v Cloete: QBD 11 Dec 2013

Anglia Research Services Ltd and Another v Finders Genealogists Ltd and Another: QBD 17 Feb 2016

The parties were competing companies. The claimant sought to usePre-action disclosure procedures after proceedings had already been issued. Held: ‘the Claimants have made out a clear and strong case for the exercise of the Court’s discretion to order pre-action disclosure in their favour, and I so order.’ Moloney QC HHJ [2016] EWHC 297 (QB) Bailii … Continue reading Anglia Research Services Ltd and Another v Finders Genealogists Ltd and Another: QBD 17 Feb 2016

Arsenal Football Club plc and Others v Elte Sports Distribution Ltd: ChD 10 Dec 2002

The claimant alleged that the respondent had unlawfully made use of photographs of its footballers in a calendar. The respondent asked the court to strike out the claim as merely speculative, and the claimant sought pre-action disclosure. Held: The intention of Parliament had been to restrict the people who were able to pursue a claim … Continue reading Arsenal Football Club plc and Others v Elte Sports Distribution Ltd: ChD 10 Dec 2002

Tchenguiz and Another v Director of The Serious Fraud Office: ComC 29 Apr 2014

In an associated action, documents had been disclosed by the current respondent. The claimant sought an order allowing the documents to be released to a lawyer in support of consideration of taking action against third parties. The third party involved, having been given notice had no objection to the proposed release. Eder J [2014] EWHC … Continue reading Tchenguiz and Another v Director of The Serious Fraud Office: ComC 29 Apr 2014

Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd and Others: CA 2 Feb 2021

‘These appeals raise questions as to the jurisdiction and the discretion of the court in relation to disclosure provided under CPR Part 31,[1] where senior officers, employees and ex-employees of companies have or may have used their personal electronic devices to send and receive work-related messages and emails.’ Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Asplin, Green LJJ … Continue reading Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd and Others: CA 2 Feb 2021

Alphasteel Ltd v Shirkhani and Another: CA 23 Oct 2013

The Court was asked whether the court should give permission, pursuant to CPR 31.22(1)(b), for the use of disclosed documents other than for the purpose of the proceedings in which they were disclosed, in circumstances where those proceedings have been settled before trial, the documents have not been read to or by the court or … Continue reading Alphasteel Ltd v Shirkhani and Another: CA 23 Oct 2013

White v Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust and Another: QBD 1 Apr 2011

The claimant doctor sued in defamation for letters written by the defendants to the Fitness to Practice Directorate. She now sought to appeal against a finding that she could not rely upon one letter which had come to her attention through disclosure in other proceedings and also that material was privileged. Held: The defendant was … Continue reading White v Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust and Another: QBD 1 Apr 2011

Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

The claimant sought unredacted disclosure of documents by the second defendant so that he could pursue an action against the first, who, he said, were thought to have intercepted his mobile phone messages, and where the second defendant had documents which he said would support his claim. The second defendant sought to argue public interest … Continue reading Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

Three Rivers District Council and Others, HM Treasury, v HM Treasury, The Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 4): CA 7 Aug 2002

The claimants had suffered having lost deposits with the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. They claimed their losses from the respondents as regulators of the bank, for negligence and misfeasance in public office. The action was based upon the Bingham report, and they sought disclosure of documents provided to the Enquiry. They appealed findings … Continue reading Three Rivers District Council and Others, HM Treasury, v HM Treasury, The Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 4): CA 7 Aug 2002

Durham County Council v Dunn: CA 13 Dec 2012

The claimant wished to begin a claim alleging historic sexual abuse while he had been at an institution run by the defendants. The claimant sought pre-trial disclosure of various documents and the court now considered the principle applicable, and in particular the roles of Data Protection law and the Civil Procedure Rules. Held: The Council’s … Continue reading Durham County Council v Dunn: CA 13 Dec 2012

Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009

References: [2009] EWHC 2500 (Mercantile), [2009] WLR (D) 309 Links: Times, Bailii, WLRD Coram: Judge Simon Brown, QC The claimant had lost his claim against the bank, but resisted the amount of costs claimed. Held: The trial had been of a simple factual dispute, and the bank had failed adequately to disclose electronically held material … Continue reading Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009

TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd and Others: CA 2 Jul 2020

Third in a rapid succession of Court of Appeal cases concerning the effect of the automatic stay imposed by Practice Direction 51Z Judges: Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court Citations: [2020] EWCA Civ 833 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) (Coronavirus) Rules 2020 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 31 … Continue reading TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd and Others: CA 2 Jul 2020

Barnes (T/A Pool Motors) v Seabrook and Others: Admn 23 Jul 2010

In each of three cases, the former defendants sought leave to bring claims for contempt of court in respect of what it said were fraudulent claims by the respondents. The defendants argued that a party had first to go to the Attorney General. Held: ‘Notwithstanding the language of Rules 32.14 and 31.23 and, in particular, … Continue reading Barnes (T/A Pool Motors) v Seabrook and Others: Admn 23 Jul 2010

Aoot Kalmneft v Glencore International Ag and Another: ComC 27 Jul 2001

When asking whether the time for appeal against an arbitrator’s award should be extended, the court should look at several circumstances, including the length of the delay; whether the party was acting reasonably in all the circumstances in delaying; whether the other party had contributed to the delay; whether other party would suffer irremediable prejudice … Continue reading Aoot Kalmneft v Glencore International Ag and Another: ComC 27 Jul 2001

Michalak v General Medical Council and Others: SC 1 Nov 2017

Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in her favour. The GMC now said that the availability of judicial review excluded her right to commence proceedings … Continue reading Michalak v General Medical Council and Others: SC 1 Nov 2017

Smit International (Deutschland) Gmbh v Josef Mobius Baugesellschaft Gmbh and Co: ComC 7 Jun 2001

Application by Defendants to set aside a default judgment entered against them pursuant to CPR Part 12.10, by reason of the Defendant’s failure to acknowledge service within time. Judges: The Hon Mr Justice Morison Citations: [2001] EWHC 531 (Comm) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 12.10 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 04 … Continue reading Smit International (Deutschland) Gmbh v Josef Mobius Baugesellschaft Gmbh and Co: ComC 7 Jun 2001

De Molestina and Others v Ponton and Others: ComC 16 May 2001

Important point as to the strength of the case on the merits to be established in order to obtain leave to serve out of the jurisdiction and its relationship to the strength of the claim to be established to avoid being struck out under CPR 3.4 or 24.2. Judges: Mr Justice Colman Citations: [2001] EWHC … Continue reading De Molestina and Others v Ponton and Others: ComC 16 May 2001

Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992

No Judicial Review of Decisions of Private Body Despite the wide range of its powers, the disciplinary committee of the Jockey Club remains a domestic tribunal. Judicial review is not available to a member. The relationship is in contract between the club and its member. Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘No serious racecourse management, owner, … Continue reading Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992

Expandable Ltd and Another v Rubin: CA 11 Feb 2008

The defendant’s witness statement referred to a letter written to him by the defendant’s solicitor. The claimant appealed refusal of an order for its disclosure. Held: The appeal failed. The letter was protected by legal professional privilege, and its mention in a statement did not automatically amount to waiver of that privilege. The rules referred … Continue reading Expandable Ltd and Another v Rubin: CA 11 Feb 2008

Knowsley Housing Trust v Revell; Helena Housing Ltd v Curtis: CA 9 Apr 2003

The local authority landlord commenced proceedings for possession, but then transferred the properties to a registered social landlord. The tenants objected that the new landlords could not continue the proceedings. Held: The transfer moved tenants from the secure tenancy regime to the assured tenancy regime, with different notices and procedures. The notices were not significantly … Continue reading Knowsley Housing Trust v Revell; Helena Housing Ltd v Curtis: CA 9 Apr 2003

St. Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Barnes: CA 25 Oct 2006

The claimant had delivered his claim form to the court, but it was not processed until after the limitation period had expired. The defendant appealed a finding that the claimant had brought the cliam within the necessary time. Held: The claim was brought within the necessary time limit. ‘the courts have given claimants the full … Continue reading St. Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Barnes: CA 25 Oct 2006

P and O Nedlloyd BV Aktieselskabet Dampskibsselskabet Svendborg v Utaniko Limited/East West Corporation (No 2): CA 19 Feb 2003

The claimants had made a Part 36 offer at first instance, but the matter was appealed. Having won at appeal they sought their costs on an indemnity basis of the appeal also. Held: If a party wished to protect itself by a Part 36 offer, it must be made both at first instance, and again … Continue reading P and O Nedlloyd BV Aktieselskabet Dampskibsselskabet Svendborg v Utaniko Limited/East West Corporation (No 2): CA 19 Feb 2003

Scammell and Others v Dicker: CA 21 Dec 2000

A part 36 offer can be withdrawn at any time before it is accepted or expires. The rules can not force an offer to be left open. Clear words would have been required within the rules to impose such an obligation. The actual words referred to offers ‘expressed’ to be open for 21 days, but … Continue reading Scammell and Others v Dicker: CA 21 Dec 2000

Nield and Another v Loveday and Another: Admn 13 Jul 2011

The court considered the institution of proceedings for contempt of court based upon an allegation that a document filed in court proceedings and supported by a statement of truth was false. In this case the defendant argued that the first claimant had grossly exaggerated his injuries. The second claimant had come to admit the falsity … Continue reading Nield and Another v Loveday and Another: Admn 13 Jul 2011

Regina on the Application of Pharis v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 25 May 2004

The claimant appealed refusal of judicial review of the respondent’s decision to remove him to Nigeria. Held: The appeal was refused. The court said that in future the lodging of a notice of appeal should automatically stay any process of removal pending the appeal. This informal practice had been subject of considerable abuse, with spurious … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Pharis v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 25 May 2004

Regina v Alan Martin (On Appeal From Her Majesty’s Courts – Martial Appeal Court): HL 16 Dec 1997

A civilian who was subject to military law whilst abroad was properly tried by a court-martial for a murder committed whilst abroad. The accused was the son of a serving soldier, and living with him, and subject to martial law. There was no inherent abuse of process, and the procedure had been explicitly adopted by … Continue reading Regina v Alan Martin (On Appeal From Her Majesty’s Courts – Martial Appeal Court): HL 16 Dec 1997

Ali v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 27 Jan 2010

The claimant sought damages in defamation, saying that a combination of publications identified him. Held: Eady J briefly discussed the effect of hyperlinks in the context of a dispute about meaning or reference in a defamation case. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2010] EWHC 100 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Swain … Continue reading Ali v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 27 Jan 2010

Orbital 2 Limited and Urs Viktor Giger (Patent): IPO 29 Jan 2010

EAT This was a request for strike-out of an entitlement reference, prior to the formal evidence rounds, on the grounds that the statement of case provided by the claimant did not clearly identify the inventive concept in dispute. The patent applications have not yet been granted, and the defendant says the claims were deliberately drafted … Continue reading Orbital 2 Limited and Urs Viktor Giger (Patent): IPO 29 Jan 2010

L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

The court was asked as to whether the on-line marketplace site defendant was liable for trade mark infringements by those advertising goods on the web-site. Held: The ECJ had not yet clarified the law on accessory liability in trade mark infringement, and the legislation remained unclear. Many of the direct sellers were held to be … Continue reading L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

Storm (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 4 Jul 2007

Interlocutory Hearing re the filing of part of Form 8, Counterstatement and exhibits by way of email Result Incomplete documents filed in defence of registration by email: Appeal allowed. Registered Proprietor allowed to defend its registration Points Of Interest The filing of documents by email is allowed Summary An application for revocation of the mark … Continue reading Storm (Trade Mark: Revocation): IPO 4 Jul 2007

In re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy): FD 9 Dec 2008

The court considered the approval required for an order under the 2002 Act. Held: Welfare considerations were important but not paramount: ‘Given the permanent nature of the order under s.30, it seems reasonable that the court should adopt the ‘lifelong’ perspective of welfare in the Adoption and Children Act 2002 rather than the ‘minority’ perspective … Continue reading In re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy): FD 9 Dec 2008

Meakin v British Broadcasting Corporation and Others: ChD 27 Jul 2010

The claimant alleged that the proposal for a game show submitted by him had been used by the various defendants. He alleged breaches of copyright and of confidence. Application was now made to strike out the claim. Judges: Arnold J Citations: [2010] EWHC 2065 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 24.2 Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Meakin v British Broadcasting Corporation and Others: ChD 27 Jul 2010

Smith v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc: ChD 23 Feb 2005

The respondent declined to produce information held about the claimant saying that it was not held within a filing system so as to bring it within the Act. Held: ‘the legislature has taken a policy decision not to bring unstructured files within the general scope of the Directive. ‘ Judges: Laddie, The Hon Mr Justice … Continue reading Smith v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc: ChD 23 Feb 2005

ABC Ltd v Y: ChD 6 Dec 2010

There had been proceedings as to the misuse of confidential information. X, a non-party, now sought disclosure of papers used in that case. The case had been settled by means of a Tomlin Schedule, and that, subject to further order, non-parties might not obtain documents on the court file. Held: The applicant X was entitled … Continue reading ABC Ltd v Y: ChD 6 Dec 2010

Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given oral evidence, and the Registrar contended that any further appeal to the High court should … Continue reading Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston and Another (No 4): QBD 4 Mar 2009

Orders were sought to strike out part of the defendants defence of justification to an allegation of defamation. Held: Where there remains the possibility of a jury trial, it becomes especially important to identify the issues the jurors are to resolve and the facts they are invited to find. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2009] EWHC … Continue reading Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston and Another (No 4): QBD 4 Mar 2009