Mr Justice Neuberger [1999] EWHC 835 (Ch) Bailii England and Wales Citing: See also – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No 2) ChD 24-Mar-1999 The claimant intended to seek recovery of a very substantial sum from the defendant. On learning of the defendant’s intention to sell its assets, it sought an … Continue reading Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No.4): ChD 18 Oct 1999
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 market’s planning permission does not give any rights beyond that permission.Planning Permission did not imply waiver of statutory rights re market by LA. Citations: Ind Summary 27-Feb-1995, Times 09-Feb-1995 Statutes: Food Act 1984 50 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Planning Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.79895
The Court was asked whether the Crown is bound by the prohibition of smoking in most enclosed public places and workplaces, contained in Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Health Act 2006. Held: However reluctantly, the claimant’s appeal was dismissed. Parliament must be assumed to have intended that the Crown be not bound by … Continue reading Black, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 19 Dec 2017
Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999
EAT The company decided to close two branches and make redundancies. They presented the closure itself as a fait accompli to the union representatives. The Tribunal found that this involved a failure to consult about ways of avoiding redundancies because the decision to close had been determined prior to any meeting with the union. Held: … Continue reading Securicor Omega Express Ltd v GMB (A Trade Union): EAT 7 Apr 2003
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
The applicant had left care, but still received assistance. She was arrested and the police asked the attending social worker to arrange secure accommodation overnight. The respondent refused. The court was asked what duty (if any) is owed by local authorities to provide ‘secure accommodation’ for arrested juveniles whom they are requested to receive under … Continue reading M, Regina (on the Application of) v Gateshead Council: CA 14 Mar 2006
An order had been made restraining the defendant trades unions from taking industrial action. The unions said the UK court had no jurisdiction. Held: ‘It is at first sight surprising that the English Commercial Court should be the forum in which a dispute between a Finnish company and a Finnish Trade Union and an international … Continue reading International Transport Workers’ Federation and Another v Viking Line Abp and Another: CA 3 Nov 2005
The appellant had been convicted of an offence under the section in that as a bankrupt, he ‘in the two years before the petition, materially contributed to, or increased the extent of, his insolvency by gambling or by rash and hazardous speculations’. The actus reus – the bankruptcy petition and the bankruptcy to which it … Continue reading Regina v Muhamad: CACD 19 Jul 2002
Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying that the notice could be given under the … Continue reading Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017
The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion. Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not obligatory, but following it would generally ensure that a patient’s rights were not infringed. It recognised … Continue reading Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested;: CA 16 Jul 2003
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either regularly or from time to time, as overnight accommodation, and several larger tents … Continue reading City of London v Samede and Others: QBD 18 Jan 2012
The claimant sought damages for the losses it had suffered as a result of price fixing by the defendant companies in the vitamin market. The European Commission had already fined the defendant for its involvement. Held: In an action for breach of statutory duty the court can in appropriate circumstances make a restitutionary award, that … Continue reading Devenish Nutrition Ltd and others v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) and others: ChD 19 Oct 2007
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
Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any assumption of a duty of care to a third party when purely … Continue reading Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd: HL 28 May 1963
The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had been made (ineffectively) to assist the dispossessed islanders, but an … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of Appeal. Held: The questions which applied when looking for an interim injunction in patent … Continue reading American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd: HL 5 Feb 1975
The respondents appealed against imposition of assessments for the diversion of alcohol products from bonded warehouses without payment of duties. Pretence had been made of deliveries abroad, but the goods were later diverted. The company was insolvent even without the impositions, but sought to delay the winding up to resolve its appeal against the impositions. … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anglo German Breweries Limited: ChD 29 Nov 2002
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the plaintiffs’ claims as employees. An employer has a duty to protect his employees … Continue reading White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998
The defendant had been involved in price fixing arrangements, and the claimant sought damages for breach of its proprietary rights. The claimant appealed refusal of an award an account of profits for what was akin to a breach of statutory duty. Held: The appeal failed. An account of profits should be available in a cartel … Continue reading Devenish Nutrition Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Sa (France) and others: CA 14 Oct 2008
The claimant challenged new conditions imposed on licences to operate his salmon fishery in the Severn Estuary, which operated to defeat his tenancy of the fishery. Held: The request for review succeeded. The decisions to impose the catch conditions were irrational, as the Report did not provide a reasonable basis for the view that the … Continue reading Mott, Regina (on The Application of) v The Environment Agency and Another: Admn 13 Feb 2015
The claimants alleged that a connection between a member of the Restrictive Practices Court, who was to hear a complaint and another company, disclosed bias against them. She had not recused herself. Held: When asking whether material circumstances in a case might give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, the test was whether objectively … Continue reading In Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2); Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Proprietary Articles Trade Association: CA 21 Dec 2000
The court was asked whether, as the appellants contended, a claimant who is seeking to maintain an action in passing off need only establish a reputation among a significant section of the public within the jurisdiction, or whether, as the courts below held, such a claimant must also establish a business with customers within the … Continue reading Starbucks (HK) Ltd and Another v British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc and Others: SC 13 May 2015
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this. Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not proved that the smoking of cigarettes was the cause of the lung cancer, and it was … Continue reading McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd: OHCS 31 May 2005
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
Right to be Forgotten is not absolute The two claimants separately had criminal convictions from years before. They objected to the defendant indexing third party web pages which included personal data in the form of information about those convictions, which were now spent. The claims were in Data Protection and the common law tort of … Continue reading NT 1 and NT 2 v Google Llc: QBD 13 Apr 2018
The appellants sought leave to appeal against an order for possession of Parliament Square on which the claimants had been conducting a demonstration (‘the Democracy Village’).
Held: Leave was refused save for two appellants whose cases were . .
Extent and consequences of duties of ‘equal treatment’ or ‘fairness’, said to have been owed by the Office of Fair Trading to those subject to investigation under the Competition Act 1998. The respondent had entered negotiations with several parties . .
References: [1986] AC 965, [1986] 2 WLR 1051, [1986] 2 All ER 409 Coram: Lord Goff of Chieveley A claim had been made against charterers by the ship owners, and in turn by the charterers against their sub-charterers. Notice of motion were issued after arbitration awards were not accepted. When heard, costs awards were made, … Continue reading Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The ‘Vimeira’): HL 1986
