On an application under the 1936 Ac, provided that the field benefited council tenants (which it clearly did) it did not matter that it also benefited other people within the local community. Denning J said: ‘The next question is whether the order [that was the compulsory purchase order] is invalid because, in addition to houses … Continue reading HE Green and Sons v Minister of Health (No 2): 1948
In a domestic tribunal such as that a disciplinary hearing, all that is required is that the three basic requirements of natural justice be fulfilled; namely (1) that the person should know the nature of the accusation against him or her; (2) that . .
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
The court was asked whether a vendor of property had satisfied an obligation to provide the purchaser with the right to run foul and surface water from the land sold to a public sewer. The vendor contended that this obligation was satisfied by the right of the purchaser to connect a 12 inch diameter pipe … Continue reading Beech Properties v GE Wallis and Sons Ltd: 1977
The claimants sought to have registered as a town or village green land in Whitby which had been provided as a playing field by the Local Authority since 1934. The inspector had found that the use had not been ‘as of right’ as required by the 2006 Act. The field, which he said: ‘has all … Continue reading Barkas, Regina (on The Application of) v North Yorkshire County Council and Scarborough Council: Admn 20 Dec 2011
The question was whether the council held land as open space, either under the Public Health Act 1875 or under the Open Spaces Act 1908. The title deeds under which the council acquired the land in 1936 did not state the purpose for which it had been acquired. The council relied on a subsequent deed … Continue reading Malpass, Regina (on The Application of) v The County Council of Durham: Admn 25 Jul 2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject matters were reserved to the UK Parliament under the 1998 Act. Second that the Act … Continue reading Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate: SC 12 Dec 2012
The Court was asked as to the registration of a playing field as a ‘town or village green’. Local residents asserted that their use of the land, having been ‘as of right’ required the registration. They now appealed against rejection of that argument. Held: The basic issues was ‘where land is provided and maintained by … Continue reading Barkas, Regina (on The Application of ) v North Yorkshire County Council and Another: SC 6 Mar 2014
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 Court was asked whether interest payable under rule 14.23(7) of the Insolvency Rules 2016 is ‘yearly interest’ within the meaning of section 874 of the Income Tax Act 2007. If so, the administrators must deduct income tax before paying interest to creditors. Lehmann Brothers had become insolvent, but in the administration a substantial surplus … Continue reading Revenue and Customs v Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe): SC 13 Mar 2019
Overloading caused the corporation’s foul sewer to erupt through a manhole and discharge ‘deleterious and malodorous matter’ into Mr Smeaton’s garden. Held: The authority were not liable for the connections with the sewer and discharge of their sewage into it. The court denied the possibility of pursuing a claim for damages in nuisance where there … Continue reading Smeaton v Ilford Corporation: ChD 1954
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit her enjoyment of her land. Held: The interference with TV reception by an … Continue reading Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997
