Accessory Liability in Tort The court considered the concept of accessory liability in tort. Activists had caused damage to vessels of the respondent which was transporting live tuna in cages, and had caused considerable damage. The appellant company owned the ship from which the attacks were made, but denied direct involvement in or responsibility for … Continue reading Sea Shepherd UK v Fish and Fish Ltd: SC 4 Mar 2015
The Royal Mail appealed a grant of judicial review of the decision of the Post regulator not to penalise the company for its failure to meet its service conditions as regards enforcement of credit terms for bulk mail customers. Held: The natural meaning of clause 20(b) of the statutory licence is that Royal Mail is … Continue reading Royal Mail Group Plc v The Consumer Council for Postal Services: CA 7 Mar 2007
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, raised the issue at a consumer level, with a separate issue under the … Continue reading Cavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis: SC 4 Nov 2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she had been rehoused outside the Borough and that the Coucil had … Continue reading Nzolameso v City of Westminster: SC 2 Apr 2015
ECJ Judgment – References for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2004/39/EC – Articles 4(1) and 19(4), (5) and (9) – Markets in financial instruments – Concept of ‘investment services and activities’ – Provisions to ensure investor protection – Conduct of business obligations when providing investment services to clients – Obligation to assess the suitability or … Continue reading Banif Plus Bank Zrt v Marton Lantos: ECJ 3 Dec 2015
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 93/13/EEC – Article 2(b) – Concept of ‘consumer’ – Credit agreement concluded by a natural person who practises as a lawyer – Repayment of a loan secured on a building owned by the borrower’s law firm – Borrower who has the necessary knowledge to assess the unfairness … Continue reading Costea v SC Volksbank Romania SA: ECJ 3 Sep 2015
ECJ Advocate Generals Opinion – Consumer protection – Definition of consumer within the meaning of Article 2(b) of Directive 93/13/EEC – Credit agreement concluded by a natural person who practises as a lawyer – Loan secured on a building owned by the borrower’s law firm – Effect of knowledge and profession on the status of … Continue reading Costea v SC Volksbank Romania SA: ECJ 23 Apr 2015
Appeal from the decision of Bradford and Leeds County Courts concerning the application of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (‘the Act’, as amended by the Consumer Credit Act 2006) to an agreement dated 8th July 2010 (‘the Credit Agreement’), under which the Respondent to this appeal, being the Claimant below, provided bridging finance to the … Continue reading McMullon v Secure The Bridge Ltd: CA 5 Aug 2015
Longmore. Richards, Gloster LJJ [2015] EWCA Civ 751, [2016] Bus LR 232, [2015] WLR(D) 334 Bailii Consumer Credit Act 1974 England and Wales Banking Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550495
Appeal against award of sums remaining due under a mortgage after redemption. Tolson QC HHJ [2015] EW Misc B4 (CC) Bailii Consumer Credit Act 1974 140A England and Wales Contract, Consumer Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.545101
The plaintiffs as representatives sought to restrain Amstrad selling equipment with two cassette decks without taking precautions which would reasonably ensure that their copyrights would not be infringed by its users. Held: Amstrad could only be liable as a joint tortfeasor. If they were not a joint tortfeasor they would be under no tortious liability. … Continue reading CBS Songs Ltd v Amstrad Consumer Electronics Plc: HL 12 May 1988
The appellant had overstayed the permitted period of free parking in a retail park by nearly an hour. The parking was managed by the respondent who had imposed a charge of 85.00 pounds. The judge had found that the appellant was in breach of a contract entered into when parking. The charge had been a … Continue reading Parkingeye Ltd v Beavis: CA 23 Apr 2015
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
Estate Agents – failure to publish fees Citations: [2018] UKUT 271 (AAC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Consumer Credit Act 2015 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622485
The claimant company was engaged in tuna fish culture off shore to Malta. The defendant ship was owned by a charity which campaigned against breaches of animal preservation conventions. Fish were being transporting live blue fin tuna in towed underwater cages. The defendant ‘attacked’ the cages causing much damage, on the basis that the fish … Continue reading Fish and Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and Another: AdCt 25 Jun 2012
The appellant had entered into a Consumer Credit Agreement with the respondent, but the form signed by him was not the same as that signed by the bank, and it was unenforceable. He fell into arrears. Judges: Lord Dyson MR, Beatson, Briggs LJJ Citations: [2014] EWCA Civ 1413, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 465, [2015] … Continue reading Grace and Another v Black Horse Ltd: CA 30 Oct 2014
Austlii High Court of Australia – Banker and customer – Penalty doctrine – Consumer and commercial credit card accounts – Honour fee – Dishonour fee – Late payment fee – Non-payment fee – Over limit fee – Whether those fees penalties – Whether penalty doctrine limited to circumstances where there is breach of contract – … Continue reading Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd: 6 Sep 2012
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
Identification of Company’s Directing Mind In a prosecution under the 1968 Act, the court discussed how to identify the directing mind and will of a company, and whether employees remained liable when proper instructions had been given to those in charge of a local store. Held: ‘In the expression ‘act or default’ in section 23 … Continue reading Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass: HL 31 Mar 1971
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a friend, … Continue reading Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson: HL 26 May 1932
(Opinion) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Consumer credit contracts relating to immovable property for residential use – Payment or savings account – Obligation for the borrower to domiciliate his income in a payment account for a period fixed by the contract loan – Individualized advantage – Directive 2007/64 / EC – … Continue reading Association Francaise Des Usagers De Banques v Minister of Economy and Finance: ECJ 27 Feb 2020
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at the defendant’s premises. The Court of … Continue reading Robertson v Swift: SC 9 Sep 2014
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the breach of the overdraft limits. Held: The relevant terms were not exempt from assessment … Continue reading Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others: ComC 24 Apr 2008
The navigators of two ships had committed two separate torts or one tort in which they were both tortfeasors. Held: Three situations were identified where A might be jointly liable with B for B’s tortious act. Where A was master and B servant; where A was principal and B agent; and where the two were … Continue reading The Koursk: CA 1924
The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could be used neither by the OFT, nor by individual consumers to object to their charges. Held: … Continue reading Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others: SC 25 Nov 2009
The court was asked to consider whether there was any implied term limiting the power of a mortgagee to set interest rates under a variable rate mortgage. Held: A loan arrangement which allowed a lender to vary the implied rate of interest, included an implied term not to impose an unreasonable or extortionate rate, nor … Continue reading Paragon Finance plc v Nash etc: CA 15 Oct 2001
Internet Search Engine – Name Removal ECJ Grand Chamber – Personal data – Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of such data – Directive 95/46/EC – Articles 2, 4, 12 and 14 – Material and territorial scope – Internet search engines – Processing of data contained on websites – Searching for, indexing and … Continue reading Google Spain Sl v Agencia Espanola De Proteccion De Datos (AEPD), Gonzalez: ECJ 13 May 2014
Onerous Contract Terms Unclear – Not Incorporated The claimant said that he had won a substantial sum on the online gaming platform operated by the defendants, but that they had refused to pay up. The defendants said that there had been a glitch in the game. The court faced a request for summary judgment for … Continue reading Green v Petfre (Gibraltar) Ltd (T/A Betfred): QBD 7 Apr 2021
The House was asked whether a contractual provision for interest to run after judgment as well as before in a consumer credit contract led to an unfair relationship. Held: The term was not covered by the Act, and was not unfair under the Regulations. It was by way of a default condition, rather than a … Continue reading Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank: HL 25 Oct 2001
Transactions were entered into under which loans were made to enable the borrower to acquire and develop certain properties were held to be unenforceable under the 1927 Act. The effect was to enrich the borrower, who had fallen into arrears of payments of interest and moneys due but was successful in his defence that all … Continue reading Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd: HL 1977
Sympathetic construction of national legislation LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC Directive designed to protect companies and third parties from the adverse effects of the doctrine of nullity. … Continue reading Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990
Inducing breach of contract is a Tort An opera singer (Miss Wagner) and the defendant theatre owner were joint wrongdoers. They had a common design that the opera singer should break her contract with the plaintiff theatre owner, refuse to sing in the plaintiff’s theatre and instead sing in the defendant’s theatre. The plaintiff’s cause … Continue reading Lumley v Gye: 1853
The claimant company sought damages after their transport of live tuna was attacked by a protest group. They now appealed against a decision that the company owning the attacking ship was not liable as a joint tortfeasor.
Held: The appeal was . .
