The court was asked whether a breach of an undertaking gave rise to the same consequences under RSC Order 45 rule 5 as the breach of an order. Citations: [1973] Ch 281 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Distinguished – Sectorguard Plc v Dienne Plc ChD 3-Nov-2009 The claimant alleged misuse of confidential information in … Continue reading BIBA Limited v Stratford Investments Limited: 1973
The claimant complained of an irregularly obtained judgment. The defendant had obtained an amendment to a writ of sequestration in the course of a bitterly fought dispute bewteen the defendant and the owner of the claimant. The judge had found the irregularity proved, but declined to set the order aside. The claimant now said that … Continue reading Tombstone Ltd v Raja and Another; Raja v Van Hoogstraten and others (No 9): CA 17 Dec 2008
It was alleged that a Mr Guerin had committed a fraud on the arms manufacturer Ferrari. Held: The constructive trust provision in RSC Order 11, r 1(1)(t) applied only if all the acts necessary to impose liability were committed in England, and that accordingly it applied to knowing participation by acts in a fraudulent breach … Continue reading ISC Technologies Limited v Radcliffe: 7 Dec 1990
The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent. Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position should not generally be expected to pay the costs of an appeal against an order … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham: CA 27 Feb 2004
The plaintiff company had contracted to make and export to the defendant an aluminium extrusion press. The defendant re-assured the plaintiff that it would be lawful for him to import the plant, but asked that the plant be described falsely on the invoice as ‘parts for rolling mill’. Payment was made by promissory notes. After … Continue reading Fielding and Platt Ltd v Selim Najjar: CA 17 Jan 1969
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
References: Unreported, December 7, 1990 Coram: Millett J It was alleged that a Mr Guerin had committed a fraud on the arms manufacturer Ferrari. Held: The constructive trust provision in RSC Order 11, r 1(1)(t) applied only if all the acts necessary to impose liability were committed in England, and that accordingly it applied to … Continue reading ISC Technologies Limited v Radcliffe; 7 Dec 1990
The parties disputed ownership of a customer database. An interim order had been made prohibiting the defendants’ from its use pending trial. A mandatory order had been made for the disclosure of a list of contacts made, and the claimant complained in contempt as to non-compliabe with the order. The defendant said that the order … Continue reading Hydropool Hot Tubs Ltd v Roberjot and Another: ChD 4 Feb 2011
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
The Court of Appeal emphasised that an order that prescribes unpleasant consequences unless a particular act is done is an order that ‘requires a person to do an act’ within the meaning of RSC Ord. 42,r.2. (2) Rule 2(1) requires that (subject to important exceptions mentioned in paragraph 7 below) such an order must make … Continue reading Practice Note: CA 1986
The claimant alleged that the defendants had funded the purchase of various properties by secret and unlawful commissions taken by them whilst in power in Pakistan. They sought to recover the proceeds. They now sought permission to serve proceedings on the defendant companies abroad, outside a Lugano Convention country. Held: The claim should proced. ‘There … Continue reading Islamic Republic of Pakistan v Zardari and others: ComC 6 Oct 2006
(Federal Court of Australia) The court has a discretion to enforce a breach of an order by committal despite the absence of a formal penal notice. The discretion conferred by RSC.Ord.45 r.7(6) applied not only when there had been no service at all of a copy of the court order but also when there had … Continue reading Sofroniou v Szgetti: 25 Jul 1990
A policy of insurance was granted, ‘subject to the conditions on the back hereof, which are to be taken as part of this policy.’ These provided that when the company did not claim to avoid its liability on the ground of fraud or unfulfilment of the conditions of the policy, any difference arising as to … Continue reading Caledonian Insurance Co v Gilmour: HL 16 Dec 1892
The court ruled that under RSC Order 55 Rule 8, the tribunal could not appear in the High Court because they were not a party to a statutory appeal from one of their decisions, but added: ‘But the court has ample power to permit the tribunal to appear and be heard in appropriate matters. Where, … Continue reading S v Special Educational Needs Tribunal and the City of Westminster: QBD 1996
(St. Christopher and Nevis) The government of Canada requested the extradition of the respondent. The Attorney General sought special leave to appeal against the order for his discharge from custody, which had been on the grounds of the prejudice through long delay. The Board was concerned as to its jurisdiction. Held: No appeal lay against … Continue reading The Attorney General for St Christopher and Nevis v Rodionov: PC 20 Jul 2004
Disapplication of Without Prejudice Rules The House was asked whether a letter sent during without prejudice negotiations which acknowledged a debt was admissible to restart the limitation period. An advice centre, acting for the borrower had written, in answer to a claim by the lender for the sum still due after the sale of the … Continue reading Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid: HL 12 Jul 2006
The court considered the interpretation of the 1882 Act, which was said to be a codifying Act. Held: An Act is to be ascertained in the first instance from the natural meaning of its language and is not to be qualified by considerations deriving from the antecedent law.Lord Watson said: ‘The decision of the Queen’s … Continue reading Bank of England v Vagliano Brothers: HL 5 Mar 1891
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified. Held: A judge must adopt the same ‘parallel analysis’ leading to the same ‘ultimate balancing test’, as described … Continue reading Norfolk County Council v Webster and others: FD 1 Nov 2006
The plaintiff had applied for disclosure of assets under the Rules of the Supreme Court in support of a Mareva freezing order. The rules were held not to provide any such power: disclosure of assets could not be obtained as part of discovery as the documents concerned did not relate ‘to matters in question in … Continue reading A J Bekhor and Co Ltd v Bilton: CA 6 Feb 1981
Fair Comment Crticism of Newspaper Publisher The plaintiff alleged that the headline to an article written by the defendant which criticised the behaviour of the Beaverbrook Press, and which read ‘Lower than Kemsley’ was defamatory. The defendant pleaded fair comment. The plaintiff appealed. An application on the RSC Order 19 rule 27 and RSC order … Continue reading Kemsley v Foot: HL 25 Feb 1952
The first claimant sought committal of the first defendant for contempt of court, alleging breach of a freezing order, saying that the defendant had created a sham debt and repaid it. Held: There had been no genuine loan agreement, and the defendant had been involved in an elaborate arrangement to give it credence. It was … Continue reading ABC and Others v CDE and Others: QBD 3 Nov 2009
The claimant alleged misuse of confidential information in the form of its customer list, and its charges to them. The defendant company was run by former employees of the claimant. A later allegation was made of accessing the defendant’s private emails. The defendant said that the claimant was racially motivated and should not have conduct … Continue reading Sectorguard Plc v Dienne Plc: ChD 3 Nov 2009
