Parker v Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary: CA 25 Jun 1999

The claimant sought damages after his arrest by armed police. The defendant appealed a substantial award of damages.
Held: The section required the officer to have reasonable grounds for suspecting the arrestees to be guilty of the offence. The constable must suspect both that an arrestable offence has been committed and that the citizen he is arresting is guilty, and in addition he is required to have reasonable grounds for these suspicions.
Held: The state of mind of the officer at the time of the arrest reflected a degree of uncertainty, or to use Lord Devlin’s words, a state of ‘conjecture or surmise’. This state of mind, suspicious but uncertain, was based on reasonable grounds, and the arrest was lawful.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Judge

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1685

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 24(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedJarrett v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 14-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages for false imprisonment and assault after her wrongful arrest. She had waived her handbag at an officer investigating a disturbance and been arrested. The police said the arrest was lawful, she being suspected of common . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146600

Christofi v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 28 Jun 1999

A bank is under no obligation of confidence to its customer so as to prevent it disclosing to another party a fact which was ascertainable from inspection of public registers, namely in this case that a caution against registration having been warned off had subsequently been removed.

Citations:

Times 01-Jul-1999, Gazette 21-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1695

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromElli Christofi v Barclays Bank Plc PatC 19-Jan-1998
A bank’s duty of confidentiality did not arise as regards information received but already known pursuant to statutory duty. The claimant’s writ and statement of claim were struck out as disclosing no cause of action. As regards the allegation of an . .
CitedTournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England CA 1924
The court considered the duty of confidentiality owed by a banker to his client. Bankes LJ said: ‘At the present day I think it may be asserted with confidence that the duty is a legal one arising out of contract, and that the duty is not absolute . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146610

Demite Limited v Protec Health Limited; Dayman and Gilbert: CA 24 Jun 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1668

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromDemite Ltd v Protec Health Ltd ChD 1998
A sale by a receiver potentially fell within the scope of section 320. The receivers were the agents of the company and their act was the company’s act. The section expressly excluded from its scoe an arrangement made in the course of a winding up . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Company

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146583

Dr Adoko v Jemal: CA 22 Jun 1999

Where a notice of appeal had been lodged, which was intended to be against the order of one judge, but was in terms identifying a different court, and ample opportunity had been given to amend it after the mistake had been pointed out, the Court of Appeal would not allow an amendment at the hearing. Much court time had been wasted because papers were not in order.

Citations:

Times 08-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1643

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146558

Demirkaya v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 23 Jun 1999

Whether an asylum applicant had a well founded fear of persecution if he returned home, is always a question of fact and degree, and could not be made a question of law. Even so where there was a clear risk of repeated rather than single beatings if the applicant returned, it was likely that the fear would be well founded. The tribunal had accepted the applicant’s account of his torture, but referred to it as being arrested and released, making no reference to being beaten, starved, slashed with a bayonet, made to lie in iced water, being hung out of a window through broken glass until he lost consciousness. This amounted to persecution.

Citations:

Times 29-Jun-1999, [1999] INLR 441, [1999] EWCA Civ 1654, [1999] Imm AR 498

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v The Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another ex parte Rajendrakumar CA 11-Oct-1995
The three Tamil applicants had left the area of Sri Lanka controlled by the Tamil Tigers and gone to live in Colombo. It was asserted that in Colombo they had a well-founded fear of persecution because they were young male Tamils and were therefore . .
CitedKagema v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 15-Aug-1996
The word ‘persecution’ must be given its ordinary and natural meaning when considering an application for asylum based on a fear of persecution.
Aldous LJ said: ‘Mr Ashford-Thom, who appeared for the Secretary of State, submitted that the word . .
CitedBrutus v Cozens HL 19-Jul-1972
The House was asked whether the conduct of the defendant at a tennis match at Wimbledon amounted to using ‘insulting words or behaviour’ whereby a breach of the peace was likely to be occasioned contrary to section 5. He went onto court 2, blew a . .
CitedLavarevic v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1997
. .
CitedAdan v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 6-Apr-1998
A fear of persecution which was justified only historically, was insufficient to justify an asylum claim. The applicant must show justification for contemporary fears. The applicant had been granted exceptional leave to remain in the UK, but wanted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146569

Aravco Ltd and Others, Regina (on the application of) v Airport Co-Ordination Ltd: CA 23 Jun 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1660, [1999] EuLR 939

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Airport Co-Ordination Limited ex parte Aravco Limited; Dravidian Air Services Limited; Falcon Jet Centre Limited; Gama Aviation Limited; Heathrow Jet Charter Limited; Metro Business Aviation Limited and Siebe Plc Admn 14-Jul-1998
. .
Appeal fromRegina v Airport Co-Ordination Limited ex parte Aravco Limited; Dravidian Air Services Limited; Falcon Jet Centre Limited; Gama Aviation Limited; Heathrow Jet Charter Limited; Metro Business Aviation Limited and Siebe Plc Admn 14-Jul-1998
. .

Cited by:

CitedEisai Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Shire Pharmaceuticals Limited and Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (Interveners) CA 1-May-2008
The applicant pharmaceutical companies challenged the decision of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to to list certain drugs saying that the procedure adopted was unfair. NICE had revealed that results of calculations it had made . .
CitedEisai Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Shire Pharmaceuticals Limited and Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (Interveners) CA 1-May-2008
The applicant pharmaceutical companies challenged the decision of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to to list certain drugs saying that the procedure adopted was unfair. NICE had revealed that results of calculations it had made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, European

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146575

London Underground Limited v Noel: CA 29 Jun 1999

Where an employee is dismissed, his right to claim damages for unfair dismissal is not lost because of the making of an offer of re-employment. Because of this time continues to run for the lodging of a complaint, and if the re-engagement falls through for whatever reason, the original three month time limit is not disapplied, and the claim had expired.

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-1999, Gazette 11-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1712

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146627

Shanley v Mersey Docks and Harbour Company General Vargos Shipping Inc: CA 28 Jun 1999

The claimant appealed the calculation of damages for future losses of earmings.
Held: The cross appeal on general damages failed, the effect of the injury of the plaintiff’s general enjoyment of life justified the award. As to the future earnings, the accident had been followed many months later by a strike, which the judge had held the plaintiff would have taken part in. 80% of the strikers had been dismissed. The judge restricted his losses accordingly. The claimaint had argued that a settlement was in train which would lead to a cash sum being offered to each sacked striker. After judgement this was fixed at andpound;28,000. In this case he had been discouraged from pursuing this point at trial, and the court had been inadvertently misled. Given this, the court should exercise its discretion to act upon evidence becoming available after the trial, and award the additional sum.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Judge

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1704

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146619

Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999

The appellants refused the authority’s offer of accommodation under Part VI of the 1996 Act, saying it was not suitable. After the authority had informed them that if they did not accept the offer, the authority’s duty to house them would cease, requested a review under section 202(1)(b) of the authority’s decision that its duty to house the appellants had ceased. The review panel upheld the authority’s decision. The County Court dismissed his appeal finding no jurisdiction to entertain it because there was no provision in section 202 to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered under Part VI.
Held: The tenant’s appeal succeeded. The judge not given due weight to the width of section 202(1)(b). Section 202(1)(b) is directed to the question whether a duty arises The result of the review was that the local authority was confirming a decision that there was no longer any duty owed to the appellants under section 193, or otherwise under Part VII of the Act. A county court was given jurisdiction by the Act to hear an appeal against a determination by the local authority that it had satisfied its obligation toward an applicant for housing under the homelessness provisions and had no further obligation to assist. The process had two stages, the request for a review by the authority itself, and then an appeal to the County Court.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

Gazette 14-Jul-1999, Times 21-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1691, [2000] 1 WLR 969

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 204 202(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThe Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Rahanara Begum CA 11-Feb-2005
The applicant sought housing as a homeless person. Temporary accommodation was provided, and an offer of permanent accommodation was made but rejected. The council then sought possession of the temporary accommodation. The applicant responded that . .
CitedSlater v London Borough of Lewisham CA 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was heavily pregnant when she was offered a first floor one bedroomed flat. She rejected it.
Held: When a housing authority reviewed its decision on the applicant’s decision not to accept the accommodation offered, that review . .
AppliedRavichandran and Another v London Borough of Lewisham CA 2-Jul-2010
The claimant appealed against an order confirming a review of the decision that the local authority owed no futher duty to her under section 193. She had rejected the house offered as unsuitable for medical reasons.
Held: The tenant’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146606

Millington v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and Regions v Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council: CA 25 Jun 1999

The fact that a new product was made on agricultural land from produce grown elsewhere on the land did not make that production process non-agricultural. The making of wine is capable of being agricultural use, and being thus free from planning control. The court considered the Secretary of State’s reaction to the judges comments at first instance on planning conditions: ‘The Secretary of State takes exception to those comments by the judge. We have not heard full argument on those points having indicated to the parties that we were not prepared to do so in the context of this appeal. The judge had in front of him argument in relation to what was a positive rather than a negative condition and so his comments in relation to negative conditions were not necessary for his decision. . . . We do not regard it as appropriate to lengthen our judgments by a consideration of a difficult question which has already troubled the House of Lords and the resolution of which was not necessary for the judge nor is it for us.’

Judges:

Schiemann LJ

Citations:

Gazette 07-Jul-1999, Times 29-Jun-1999, (2000) JPL 297, [1999] EWCA Civ 1682

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 55(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWilliams v Minister of Housing and Local Government QBD 1967
The appellant land-owner had bought it with an established business selling by retail from it vegetables and fruits and flowers grown on the land. He made minor alterations to the shop and began to sell also a number of oranges bananas and lemons . .
CitedWealden District Council v Secretary of State for Environment and Colin Day CA 1988
Land was in an area designated to be of outstanding natural beauty. The Council sought the removal of a caravan used to provide weatherproof storage for cattle food and shelter for the farmer, saying that this amounted to a material change of use. . .
CitedFarleyer Estates v Secretary of State for Scotland IHCS 1992
An Enforcement Notice alleged unauthorised use of land as a timber storage and transfer area. The land so used was 1500 metres from forestry plantations. The appellant argued that it was concerned with ‘the use of land for the purposes of forestry’ . .
Appeal fromMillington v Secretary of State for the Environment QBD 1999
The court commented on provisions in a circular as to the correctness of imposing planning conditions where it was thought that they might not be fulfilled: ‘I think that that footnote is mistaken. Certainly the case leaves it open to the Secretary . .

Cited by:

CitedDouglas John Merritt v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Mendip District Council Admn 5-Aug-1999
The applicant appealed refusal of planning permission for residential development of a small plot of land. The said that the inspector had wrongly rejected the application of a Grampian condition on the basis that it would not be fulfilled and also . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Agriculture

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146597

Osman v Elasha: CA 24 Jun 1999

The court was asked to make an order for return of three children from the Sudan.
Held: The court emphasised ‘the importance of according to each state liberty to determine the family justice system and principles that it deems appropriate to protect the child and to serve his best interests’ and ‘the further development of international collaboration to combat child abduction may well depend upon the capacity of states to respect a variety of concepts of child welfare derived from differing cultures and traditions. A recognition of this reality must inform judicial policy with regard to the return of children abducted from non-member states.’

Judges:

Thorpe, Stuart Smith and Pill LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1669, [2000] Fam 62

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRe J (A Child), Re (Child returned abroad: Convention Rights); (Custody Rights: Jurisdiction) HL 16-Jun-2005
The parents had married under shariah law. They left the US to return to the father’s home country Saudi Arabia. They parted, and the mother brought their son to England against the father’s wishes and in breach of an agreement. The father sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146584

Oliver v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 23 Jun 1999

In a malicious prosecution case, there is no automatic right to have it tried before a jury. If that is to be applied for, the application must be made at the earliest possible directions hearing. Where, as in this case other factors suggested that a jury trial is not appropriate, then one need not be ordered.

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1656

Statutes:

County Courts Act 1984 66

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146571

Sheriff v Klyne Tugs (Lowestoft) Ltd: CA 24 Jun 1999

The Claimant complained to an industrial tribunal of unlawful racial discrimination. He had suffered a nervous breakdown and was certified as unfit for work due to stress. The employer had compromised all claims justiciable by the Employment tribunal.
Held: The employment tribunal had similar powers to the county court when hearing cases alleging the tort of racial discrimination, and the employment tribunal therefore had the power to award damages for personal injuries suffered because of the tort. Having claimed at the industrial tribunal it was therefore an abuse of process to bring a later claim on the same facts in the county court for damages the ET could have awarded. Section 57(4) adds a head of injury for which compensation is payable since at common law a claimant cannot as a rule recover damages for injuries for feelings, save in defamation and false imprisonment.

Judges:

Stuart Smith LJ

Citations:

Gazette 07-Jul-1999, Times 08-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1663, [1999] ICR 1170, [1999] IRLR 481

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 56 57(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedJohnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Damages

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.136028

MP v Dainty: CA 21 Jun 1999

The defendant sought leave to appeal out of time against an award of damages for sexual assault. He had been unable to recover his file of papers from his former solicitors.
Held: The delay had nevertheless been excessive, and the prejudice to the claimant of a new trial would be overwhelming. Though there was no express reference to In re H, the judge will have been bound to have applied its standards. Leave refused.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1632

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedIn re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146547

Starke and another (Executors of Brown decd) v Inland Revenue Commissioners: CA 23 May 1995

The deceased had owned a site of 2.5 acres on which were built a large farmhouse, and other outbuildings.
Held: The court identified the identify the three separate dimensions to the definition of agricultural property under the Act. The phrase ‘agricultural land’ in section 115(2) did not include buildings, and so the site could not be characterised as agricultural land or pasture. ‘It is as though the draftsman had started with the land and then dealt with what should be treated as going with it’.

Judges:

Morritt L J

Citations:

Gazette 14-Jun-1995, Independent 23-May-1995, [1996] 1 All ER, [1995] STC 689

Statutes:

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 115(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromStarke and Another (Executors of Brown Deceased) v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 24-Feb-1994
Mr Brown, the deceased, had owned a site on which was built a substantial farmhouse, with six bedrooms, and various outbuildings. The site formed part of a farm and the issue was whether the site was ‘agricultural land or pasture’ within the meaning . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.89503

Gan Insurance Company Limited and Another v Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited: CA 28 May 1999

appeal from refusal to set aside service out of jurisdiction

Judges:

Mance LJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1524, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 472, [1999] CLC 1270, [1999] 2 All ER (Comm) 54

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoGan Insurance Company Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Ltd (No 3) CA 1-Mar-2002
Tai Ping had placed facultative insurance with Gan. The substantial risks were re-insured through various agencies. When a claim arose it was repudiated alleging misrepresentation. Gan asserted that Tai Ping had failed to co-operate in the . .
See AlsoGan Insurance Co Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd CA 3-Jul-2001
A reinsurance contract which contained a clause which provided that no settlement or compromise of a claim could be made or liability admitted by the insured without the prior approval of the reinsurers. The court considered how the discretion to . .

Cited by:

See AlsoGan Insurance Co Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd CA 3-Jul-2001
A reinsurance contract which contained a clause which provided that no settlement or compromise of a claim could be made or liability admitted by the insured without the prior approval of the reinsurers. The court considered how the discretion to . .
See AlsoGan Insurance Company Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Ltd (No 3) CA 1-Mar-2002
Tai Ping had placed facultative insurance with Gan. The substantial risks were re-insured through various agencies. When a claim arose it was repudiated alleging misrepresentation. Gan asserted that Tai Ping had failed to co-operate in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Jurisdiction

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146439

Thorn EMI Plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners: CA 5 Jun 1995

VAT on services for business and entertainment is apportionable between them.

Citations:

Ind Summary 05-Jun-1995, Gazette 07-Jun-1995

Statutes:

VAT (Special Provisions) Order 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromThorn EMI Plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners QBD 20-Jun-1994
Supplies for mixed business entertainment and other uses are to be apportioned. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.89879

London Borough of Bromley v Morritt: CA 21 Jun 1999

The defendants appealed against orders relating to the construction of a sewage pipe through their garden under powers given under the Act. The defendant had later blocked the pipe and the authority sought to recover the costs of repair. He claimed that the pipe was a drain, not a sewer, and had therefore been laid unlawfully.
Held: Whether it was a sewer or a drain depended upon the intention at the time it was constructed, and not its current use. A sewer would serve more than one property. That had been the intention, and the judgment was correct. In a second appeal, the defendant had constructed a wall enclosing land, and claimed ownership by limitation. The land enclosed included land over which there was a public right of way, and accordingly no acquisition by adverse possession was possible.
Mummery LJ said: ‘In my judgment, this appeal does fail. On the judge’s finding of fact the land enclosed by the fence and the wall was part of the public highway. As a matter of law, an adverse possession or squatter’s title cannot be acquired to land over which a public right of way exists. The only question is the exercise of discretion to make a mandatory order.’

Judges:

Swinton Thomas, Mummery LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1631, [1999] 78 P and CR D37

Statutes:

Public Health Act 1936 15(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBeckenham Urban District Council v Wood 1896
The court considered at what point a drain became a sewer: ‘The general rule, as I understand, is, that where a drain receives the sewage of two or more houses it is a sewer; where it receives the sewage of one house only it may still remain a . .
Application for leaveLondon Borough of Bromley v l Morritt CA 20-Jul-1998
The defendant sought an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal. He had been ordered to remove a wall which the claimant said enclosed what was part of the highway, and which the defendant said he had acquired by adverse possession.

Cited by:

CitedSmith, Regina (on the Application of) v The Land Registry (Peterborough Office) Admn 13-Feb-2009
The applicant sought judicial review of the cancellation of his application for first registration of land by adverse possession. The application had been rejected because a public right of way existed through it, and the claimant had not shown the . .
CitedSmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Land Registry (Peterborough Office) and Another CA 10-Mar-2010
The appellant had lived in a caravan on the verge of a byway and had been here for more than twelve years. He appealed against rejection of his request for possessory title. He said that there was no support in law for the maxim that adverse . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation, Utilities

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146546

Kuwait Oil Tanker Company Sak; Sitka Shipping Incorporated v Al Bader;Qabazard; Stafford and H Clarkson and Company Limited; Mccoy; Kuwait Petroleum Corporation and Others: CA 28 May 1999

The defendants having been found to have acted dishonestly to the tune of pounds 130,000,000 sought a stay of execution pending an appeal. The judge had found that the appeal was arguable.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1528

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedArab Monetary Fund v Hashim and Others (Number 9) ChD 29-Jul-1994
There were two foreign defendants who were each liable to the plaintiff.
Held: The English court had jurisdiction to allocate the damages between them. Execution should not be stayed because the plaintiff should be allowed to retain the . .
See AlsoKuwait Oil Tanker Co SAK and Another v Al Bader and Others (No 2) ComC 19-Dec-1995
ComC Leave to serve writ outside jurisdiction under RSC Ord 11 r1(1)(c) – whether required to serve on another defendant before leave obtained – retrospective validation . .
See AlsoKuwait Oil Tanker Company S A K ; Sitka Shipping Incorporated v Al Bader; Qabazard and Stafford CA 24-Mar-1997
. .

Cited by:

See AlsoKuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and Another v Al Bader and Others CA 18-May-2000
The differences between tortious conspiracies where the underlying acts were either themselves unlawful or not, did not require that the conspiracy claim be merged in the underlying acts where those acts were tortious. A civil conspiracy to injure . .
CitedKuwait Oil Tanker Company Sak and Another v Al Bader and others ComC 17-Oct-2008
The claimants had succeeded in an action based on fraud, and now sought to enforce their judgment. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146443

Worby, Worby and Worby v Rosser: CA 28 May 1999

Three potential beneficiaries sought payment from a solicitor of the costs of resisting the grant of probate to a will, saying that he had owed them a duty of care to ensure that the testator did not execute a later will in circumstances in which he lacked testamentary capacity and was subject to the malign influence of a third party. They succeeded, and sought their costs direct from the solicitor.
Held: The estate had suffered no proven loss. A solicitor, following his client’s instructions on the drafting of a new will, carried no duty of care to the expectancies of beneficiaries under an earlier will which was to be revoked by the new one. An estate facing an unmeritorious claim could not recover its costs from a solicitor who did not have a duty to the claimants.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Chadwick

Citations:

Times 09-Jun-1999, Gazette 16-Jun-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1520, [2000] PNLR 140

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWilkinson v Corfield PD 26-Jan-1881
A legatee who has propounded a codicil and succeeded is entitled to the same costs as an executor under similar circumstances.
The defendant, the executor of the will of RC, had proved the will only.
The plaintiffs propounded a codicil. . .
CitedSutton v Drax 1815
. .
CitedMidland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Hett Stubbs and Kemp (a firm) ChD 1978
A solicitor had failed to register an option as a land charge over property. The court was asked what steps should have been taken by a solicitor in the conduct of a claim: ‘Mr Harman [leading counsel for the plaintiff] sought to rely upon the fact . .
CitedCarr-Glynn v Frearsons (a Firm) CA 29-Jul-1998
The solicitors had failed to advise the testator to issue a notice of severance of a joint tenancy, with the result that the house passed outside the will.
Held: The plaintiff did have a remedy. ‘The duty owed by the solicitors to the testator . .
CitedWhite and Another v Jones and Another HL 16-Feb-1995
Will Drafter liable in Negligence to Beneficiary
A solicitor drawing a will may be liable in negligence to a potential beneficiary, having unduly delayed in the drawing of the will. The Hedley Byrne principle was ‘founded upon an assumption of responsibility.’ Obligations may occasionally arise . .
CitedRoss v Caunters (a firm) ChD 1979
The court upheld a finding of negligence against a firm of solicitors for failing to ensure the correct attestation of a will, and also the award of damages in favour of a disappointed beneficiary.
A solicitor owes a duty of care to the party . .
CitedLindop v Stuart Noble and Sons Ltd OHCS 25-Jun-1998
In Scottish receivership an employee was not entitled to claim for preference of payment of claim for wages for absence of notice when the company went into receivership. Scottish receivership distinct process. . .

Cited by:

CitedMartin v Triggs Turner Bartons (A Firm) and Others ChD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant sought damages alleging professional negligence against her solicitors for herself and her late husband’s estate. She said that the will should have allowed advances of capital for all but pounds 100,000 of the estate, rather than the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Wills and Probate, Legal Professions

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146435

Bajwa v British Airways plc; Whitehouse v Smith; Wilson v Mid Glamorgan Council and Sheppard: CA 28 May 1999

In personal injury cases, a judge deciding on the award of costs after a payment in, and where a benefits recovery was to take effect, was to judge the issue of costs by measuring the offer against the payment in or written offer, aggregated with the effect of the benefits to be deducted.

Citations:

Times 01-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1519

Statutes:

Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages, Costs

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146434

Matthews v Tarmac Bricks and Tiles Limited: CA 14 Jun 1999

Where parties wished to fix court dates to suit their own convenience, there is a duty on them, under the new rules, to co-operate in order to allow the matter to proceed quickly, and, where a date became unavailable, they were to provide convincing reasons for such unsuitability.

Citations:

Gazette 14-Jul-1999, Times 01-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1574

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.135837

Worldwide Corporation Limited v Marconi Communications Ltd (Formerly Gpt Limited) and Gpt (Middle East) Limited: CA 21 Jun 1999

Counsel, giving assurances in open court on behalf of his client, bound that client. This applied even though counsel might have been negligent, and / or might, in turn, be immune from suit. Courts must be able to rely, and act, upon assurances given by counsel. Decisions may be made as part of a litigation strategy which cannot be unwound.

Citations:

Gazette 14-Jul-1999, Times 07-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1636

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedArthur J S Hall and Co (A Firm) v Simons etc CA 14-Dec-1998
The court considered the limits on liability for professional negligence for lawyers in conduct associated with litigation, but outside the courtroom.
Held: Though the court must balance the need for protection against negligence by lawyers . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.90611

Themehelp Ltd v West and Others: CA 2 May 1995

Guarantor’s obligations not affected save by matters outside the guarantee. The beneficiary of a guarantee was restrained from enforcement of it whilst an allegation of fraud remained unresolved.

Citations:

Ind Summary 26-Jun-1995, Times 02-May-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.89853

Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bannister and Another: CA 26 Jul 1995

A court’s discretion to stay a disqualification order is to be used only in exceptional cases, but it does retain an has inherent power to stay disqualification of director pending an appeal.

Citations:

Independent 11-Aug-1995, Times 26-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.89121

Secretary of State for Social Security v Fairey: CA 22 Jun 1995

A deaf person can be entitled to disability living allowance for the care needed in order to live a reasonable life.

Citations:

Independent 27-Jun-1995, Times 22-Jun-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toCockburn v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another and Secretary of State for Social Services v Fairey HL 21-May-1997
The provision of an interpreter for a deaf person was included in range of care needed for attendance for Disability Living Allowance. Dealing with his soiled laundry was not so included: ‘In my opinion it is not enough to ask whether the act in . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromCockburn v Chief Adjudication Officer and Another and Secretary of State for Social Services v Fairey HL 21-May-1997
The provision of an interpreter for a deaf person was included in range of care needed for attendance for Disability Living Allowance. Dealing with his soiled laundry was not so included: ‘In my opinion it is not enough to ask whether the act in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.89092

Sampson v John Boddy Timber Ltd: CA 17 May 1995

A barrister should not liable for wasted costs when he pursues arguable point for his client. Unless a party makes plain its intention that a settlement offer is made on an open basis, it remains covered by the cloak of the without prejudice rule

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR

Citations:

Independent 17-May-1995, (1995) CAT 552

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBrown v Rice and Another ChD 14-Mar-2007
The parties, the bankrupt and her trustee, had engaged in a mediation which failed at first, but applicant said an agreement was concluded on the day following. The defendants denied this, and the court as asked to determine whether a settlement had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.88994

Mond and Another v Hammond Suddards and Another: CA 15 Jun 1999

The court does not have power to order the payment of a liquidator’s costs which had not been properly incurred. The costs of unsuccessful litigation were not recoverable in priority to a secured creditor in priority to the charge. As to rule 7.47(1) of the Rules: ‘But, since the point has been raised and may be of importance in other contexts, it is appropriate that I indicate that I can see no basis why the words used in rule 7.47(1) should not be given the very wide effect which, as a matter of language, the meaning which they naturally bear would indicate that the rule-making body intended. The rule is in terms which are indistinguishable from the parallel provision applicable in bankruptcy: see section 375(1) of the Insolvency Act 1986; and, in that context, there is no reason to doubt that Parliament intended to preserve the unlimited jurisdiction to conduct a rehearing which, as Sir James Bacon C.J. observed in Ex parte Keighley; In re Wike (1874) L.R. 9 Ch.App. 668n., was ‘of very considerable antiquity’ and which had been enshrined in successive Bankruptcy Acts: see section 71 of the Act of 1869 (32 and 33 Vict. c. 71), section 104(1) of the Act of 1883 (46 and 47 Vict. c. 52) and section 108(1) of the Act of 1914. As Hoffmann J. pointed out in In re Calmex Ltd. [1989] 1 All E.R. 485, 486, the power is expressed in completely general terms. But, although I would hold that, as a matter of jurisdiction, the power to review conferred by rule 7.47(1) is unfettered, it is, of course, a power which is to be exercised judicially. It would, in my view, be inappropriate – save in the most exceptional circumstances – for a judge to exercise that power in order to substitute his own decision for that of another judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction reached on the same material after a full consideration of the arguments. The power to review is not to be used in order to hear an appeal against a judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction. The exercise of the power should be confined, as a matter of discretion, to cases in which there has been some change in circumstances (which may, perhaps, include the consideration of material which was not previously before the court) since the original order was made: see the observations of Millett J. in In re A Debtor (No. 32-SD-1991) [1993] 1 W.L.R. 314, 318-319.’

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

Times 18-Jun-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1586

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 127

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThe Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Jonkler and Another ChD 10-Feb-2006
The applicant had given an undertaking to the court to secure discontinuance of company director disqualification procedings. He now sought a variation of the undertaking.
Held: The claimant had given an undertaking, but in the light of new . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83801

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council Ex Parte Grillo: CA 13 Jun 1995

There was no general onus on Local Authorities to give reasons for their decisions in the absence of any explicit or particular duty.

Citations:

Independent 13-Jun-1995, (1995) 28 HLR 94

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 25-Nov-2008
The claimant appealed refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decisions to sell arms to the Israeli state. He lived in Palestine and said that Israel had destroyed his farm, and that licences broke the criteria under the 2002 Act. He said that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.87057

Regina v Wandsworth London Borough Council Ex Parte Beckwith: CA 29 Jun 1995

Local Authority may cease to provide any care of a particular class if alternative voluntary arrangements can be made available.

Citations:

Gazette 06-Sep-1995, Times 29-Jun-1995

Statutes:

Community Care Act 1990 1, National Assistance Act 1948

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Wandsworth London Borough Council Ex Parte Beckwith QBD 21-Apr-1995
A Local Authority must maintain some facilities to provide each type of social care it was required to supply. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Wandsworth London Borough Council Ex Parte Beckwith HL 15-Dec-1995
The applicants had contended that Wandsworth was under a duty to maintain some accommodation for the elderly in premises under its own management.
Held: The applicants claim failed. Local Authorities may provide all care for elderly by outside . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.88247

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Friends of the Earth and Another: CA 7 Jun 1995

The Secretary of State can accept an undertaking from water companies instead of making an order to satisfy the obligations under the European directives.

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-1995, Independent 07-Jun-1995

Statutes:

Water Industry Act 1991 68(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Utilities, European

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.87792

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Slough Borough Council and Another: CA 23 May 1995

A challenge to planning permission where the development had exceeded the application was to be made promptly. Where an area covered by the permission is not specified, it was not determined by the application. An unambiguous planning permission is to be read so as to stand on its own; no reference should be made to the application which generated it.

Citations:

Times 23-May-1995, Independent 14-Jun-1995, Gazette 14-Jun-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedReid, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Transport and Local Government and Another Admn 7-Oct-2002
Planning permission was granted subject to conditions. Later one condition was lifted on a renewed application. It referred to the earlier permission, but not the earlier conditions explicitly.
Held: The permission was not clear, and therefore . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.87719

Re Dennis (A Bankrupt): CA 22 May 1995

A joint tenancy was severed (under the former law) on the event of an act of bankruptcy, and not only by the later actual adjudication of bankruptcy. The vesting of the debtor’s property in the trustee which occurred on adjudication was automatic; the trustee had no choice in the matter. ‘the debtor’s interest in the property was divested on the commission of the act of bankruptcy, in which event the joint tenancy was severed.’ ‘It was a peculiarity of the former law of bankruptcy that the effect of an act of bankruptcy on a joint tenancy depended on whether it was followed by adjudication or not. But it did not depend on whether it was the solvent or the insolvent joint tenant who died before adjudication.’

Citations:

Ind Summary 22-May-1995, [1995] 3 All ER 171, [1995] 3 WLR 367

Statutes:

Bankruptcy Act 1914 37

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCooper v Chitty 1756
An action of trover was brought by the assignees of the bankrupt against the Sheriffs of London who had taken and sold the bankrupt’s goods under a writ of fi. fa. The debtor committed an act of bankruptcy on 4th. December 1753. On the 5th. December . .
Appeal fromRe Dennis ChD 15-Jul-1992
Property was held in joint names. The husband failed to comply with a statutory demand, and so committed an act of bankruptcy. The wife later died, and the husband was then made bankrupt a month later.
Held: An act of bankruptcy did not . .
CitedFox v Hanbury 1776
One of two partners committed an act of bankruptcy. The solvent partner later disposed of partnership property to the defendant. A commission was afterwards issued against the bankrupt partner, and the plaintiffs as assignees under the commission . .
CitedFraser v Kershaw 1856
It was settled law that the bankruptcy of one of two partners puts an end at once to the partnership and that the one partner being bankrupt, his assignee, the trustee, became tenant in common with the other. . .
DisapprovedEx parte Smith 1800
Two partners, Strickland and Richardson, held property as joint tenants at law. Richardson committed an act of bankruptcy by absenting himself, and a commission was issued against him. The commissioners then declared Richardson bankrupt and executed . .
CitedSmith v Stokes 1801
After a bankruptcy goods belonging to his partnership were received by the defendant Stokes. The commission in bankruptcy then issued. His partner died and his will was proved by Stokes and another. The assignees under the commission then brought an . .
CitedDoe d Lloyd v Powell 1826
A lessee executed a deed by which he conveyed all his real and personal property to trustees for the benefit of his creditors. This was an act of bankruptcy. A commission was issued against him and he was declared bankrupt. He then sought to forfeit . .
CitedMorgan v Marquis 2-Nov-1853
The defendants had possession of some flour for sale under instructions from Perrin. The jury found that the sale was to be for the account of Perrin and one Shute and not Perrin alone, and that Perrin and Shute were joint tenants. Perrin committed . .
CitedRe Bonham ex parte the Postmaster-General 1879
A bankrupt presented his own petition. It was contended that the relation back of the title of the assignees in bankruptcy to the anterior act of bankruptcy did not affect the rights of the Crown was altered by the 1869 Act
Held: The Act made . .
CitedTitterton v Cooper CA 1882
The bankrupt was a lessee. His trustee did not disclaim the lease, and the question was whether he was personally liable for the rent which had fallen due between the date of his appointment and the date on which he elected not to disclaim.
CitedRe Lewis ex parte Helder CA 26-Jul-1883
An agent, in obedience to a previous instruction of his principal, paid away money of the principal which was in his hands knowing, before he made the payment, that when completed it would constitute an act of bankruptcy on the part of his . .
CitedRe Chapman ex parte Edwards CA 4-Aug-1884
The solicitor for the petitioning creditor was liable to account to the trustee for money which he had received from the debtor after he (necessarily) had notice of the act of bankruptcy on which the petition was founded and which he had paid to his . .
CitedRe Badham ex parte Palmer 1893
The debtor made payments to creditors after the bankruptcy petition had been presented, and after the act of bankruptcy. After the debtor had been adjudicated bankrupt the trustee in bankruptcy sought to recover the payments as fraudulent . .
CitedRe Pollitt CA 1893
The debtor had put his solicitor in funds to meet future costs. The solicitor then prepared a deed of assignment for the benefit of the creditors which the debtor executed. The debtor was afterwards adjudicated bankrupt, the act of bankruptcy being . .
CitedRe Hirth CA 1899
The debtor, already in financial difficulties, transferred his business to a limited company which he had formed for the purpose. Within three months he committed an act of bankruptcy by failing to comply with a bankruptcy notice. He was adjudicated . .
CitedMontefiore v Guedalla 1901
The bankrupt had a protected life interest in a trust fund under the will of his late father which was defeasible inter alia if he should do or omit to do or should suffer to be done any act whereby the income of the trust fund if payable to himself . .
CitedStein v Pope CA 1902
A lessee assigned the lease by an assignment which constituted an act of bankruptcy. He was subsequently adjudicated bankrupt and his trustee disclaimed the lease. During the interval between the assignment of the lease and the date of the . .
CitedRe Gunsbourg CA 1920
The debtor transferred his assets to a company formed by him. He later committed an act of bankruptcy on which he was adjudicated bankrupt. The company had sold some of the assets to a bona fide purchaser without notice of the act of bankruptcy. The . .
CitedPonsford, Baker and Co v Union of London and Smith’s Bank CA 1906
Was a debtor who had committed an act of bankruptcy but who had not yet been adjudicated bankrupt free to require his secured creditor, who had notice of it, to hand over his securities on payment of the amount due thereon?
Held: He could not. . .
CitedRe Gershon and Levy 1915
An order was made by consent in a partnership action to tax the costs of the parties and the receiver was ordered to pay the costs when taxed out to the solicitors for the parties out of the partnership assets. When the order was made all parties . .
CitedRe Ashwell ex parte Salaman Chd 1912
After the presentation of a bankruptcy petition against him, the debtor obtained an adjournment of the petition by paying the petitioning creditors money which he falsely represented to be that of a third party. The debtor was afterwards adjudicated . .
CitedIn Re Palmer, Deceased (A Debtor) ChD 25-Mar-1994
The court considered the effect of the doctrine of relation back on a property of which the bankrupt was formerly a joint tenant where the bankrupt had died after the act of bankruptcy but before adjudication.
Held: A deceased’s share in . .

Cited by:

Appealed toRe Dennis ChD 15-Jul-1992
Property was held in joint names. The husband failed to comply with a statutory demand, and so committed an act of bankruptcy. The wife later died, and the husband was then made bankrupt a month later.
Held: An act of bankruptcy did not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Trusts

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.85752

Proudreed Ltd v Microgen Holdings Plc: CA 17 Jul 1995

The handing back of keys without more does not of itself constitute a lease surrender. The passage in Tarjoumi as to implied surrender would have been more correct if there was added the phrase: ‘or such as to render it inequitable for the landlord to dispute that the tenancy has ceased.’ Where a new lease was to be granted, any implied surrender would occur only on the grant of the new lease. The circumstances must be such as to render it inequitable for the landlord or the tenant to dispute that the tenancy has ended.

Judges:

Schiemann LJ

Citations:

Times 17-Jul-1995, (1995) 72 PandCR 388, [1996] 1 EGLR 89

Statutes:

Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTarjomani v Panther Securities Ltd CA 1983
The tenant disputed whether he had surrendered the property in the lease.
Held: The court considered the basis of an implied surrender: ‘In my judgment, it is indeed estoppel that forms the foundation of the doctrine. The doctrine operates . .

Cited by:

CitedBellcourt Estates Ltd v Adesina CA 18-Feb-2005
The landlord sought to recover arrears of rent. The tenant said that she had surrendered the lease of the properties. The judge had held that she ceased to occupy the premises from November 2000, after which the landlord did not send a demand for . .
CitedArtworld Financial Corporation v Safaryan and Others CA 27-Feb-2009
The parties disputed whether the landlord had accepted the surrender of a lease. The tenant had handed in the keys. The landlord claimed rent for the subsequent period. The court had found surrender by operation of law, the landlord taking several . .
CitedQFS Scaffolding Ltd v Sable and Another CA 17-Jun-2010
The parties disputed whether a lease from S to LDC had been surrendered. S and QFS were negotiating for a renewal lease. No new lease having been agreed the parties agreed to a monthly sum to be paid pending agreement. L then let to a third party . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.85063

Practice Direction (Court of Appeal: Citation of Authority): CA 23 Jun 1995

The direction gives precise guidance for citing cases before the Court of Appeal. Practitioners are to use Weekly Law reports citations first wherever available.

Citations:

Ind Summary 17-Jul-1995, Times 23-Jun-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGovernor and Company of the Bank of Scotland v Henry Butcher and Co and others CA 13-Feb-2003
The court fiercely criticised the failure of the defendant’s solicitors to follow the practice directions and to use references to the Weekly Law Reports wherever possible as citations. The court had been badly hampered in its hearing by that and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.84861

New Hampshire Insurance Co and Others v MGN Ltd and Others (No 1): CA 15 Jun 1995

A court should not hear evidence of a common undisclosed intent to construe a written contract.

Judges:

Staughton LJ

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedScottish Power Plc v Britoil (Exploration) Limited CA 18-Nov-1997
Five contracts existed regarding sale of natural gas from a field in the North Sea. The parties disputed whether the terms prevented the sale of gas to others.
Held: ‘On the language of the contract, the Sellers are not entitled to sell gas to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.84264

Mohamed v Manek and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 28 Apr 1995

The claimant applied to the Council for accommodation, claiming to be homeless and in priority need. The council housed him in a hotel owned by Mr Manek in Tooting Bec . He had a room, a separate bathroom and lavatory, and shared use of a kitchen. After three days the council completed their investigations. Though homeless, he was not in priority need, and his accommodation arrangement would be terminated. He was given time to challenge this in court. He obtained an interim injunction against being evicted without a court order. The council appealed, but Mr Manek did not.
Held: Anti-harassment provisions in the 1977 Act do not apply to temporary housing provided by the Local Authority through a third party. The court adopted a purposive approach to interpretation of the Act, but restricted the finding to the particular arrangements in this hostel.
Auld LJ reviewed the case law on evictions: ‘In my view, none of those cases, on their facts or holdings, are of assistance in this case. The question here is not simply whether the hotel room was ‘occupied’ by Mr Mohamed as his residence or dwelling, but whether the council licensed him to occupy it as a dwelling. And, even if, contrary to my view, the agreement between the council and Mr Mohamed was a licence, it was clearly tailored to the fulfilment by the council of their statutory duty to arrange temporary accommodation under section 63 or 65 of the 1985 Act, no more.
The provisions in Part III of the 1985 Act for housing the homeless were formerly in the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977. In my view, the provisions of the other Act of 1977, the Protection from Eviction Act, cannot have been intended to apply to the temporary housing by or on behalf of councils of the homeless. Under Part III of the 1985 Act councils have a public duty to secure accommodation under section 63 or 65 for many people. It is in the interests of good public administration that they should not have to commit their limited resources to securing accommodation for persons to whom, after making due inquiries, they properly decide they have no duty, at the expense of others to whom they may have a duty. The threshold for the duty is a low one, ‘reason to believe that an applicant may be homeless and have a priority need’. The inquiries may take only a few days and result in a decision that a temporarily housed applicant is not in fact homeless or in priority need. A council’s ability efficiently to perform their public duty as a local housing authority could be seriously affected if the protection of the 1977 Act were automatically to attach to every temporarily housed unsuccessful applicant for housing just because he had been able to satisfy the low threshold under section 63 for investigation of his application.
In my view, as a matter of construction of section 3(2B) of the 1977 Act, the expression ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’ cannot apply to bed-and-breakfast accommodation of this sort, when, as here, it is provided pursuant to an agreement clearly intended as a purely temporary arrangement pending the making of inquiries under section 62. The council’s duty under section 63 is only to secure accommodation pending those inquiries and their decision as a result of them. It cannot have been the intention of Parliament that there should be grafted on to that public and temporary obligation an extension of it by at least four weeks drawn from another statute dealing with the private rights and duties of landlords (licensors) and tenants (licensees) as between themselves. Nor does it accord with the ordinary use of language to describe temporary accommodation in a hotel or hostel for this purpose as premises ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’. In my view, that is so whether the council provide the accommodation themselves or arrange it through some third party, subject in each case, however, to any contrary agreement. The agreement here was plainly not to the contrary. It bore all the marks of an arrangement for the purpose of section 63 only, and not, in Lord Greene’s words, ‘as a matter of fair and reasonable construction of simple words’ as premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence.’
Auld LJ: ‘If, despite the facts as I have summarised them, the council’s decision not to continue the arrangement at the Thames Hotel was a decision to discontinue securing temporary accommodation under section 63 of the 1985 Act, as distinct from an attempt to evict him without notice contrary to section 3 of the 1977 Act, it was a public law decision. It is not the decision that Mr Mohamed has sought to challenge in these proceedings. He could not do so, because, as a general rule, it is contrary to public policy and an abuse of process to allow proceedings by way of an ordinary action to challenge a decision affecting rights entitled to protection under public law. . . Nor is this a case where a private right has come into existence as a result of the council’s public law decision, so that ordinary civil proceedings may be taken to require them to discharge their executive, as distinct from their decision-making, function . . . Here the public law decision, if there was one, not to continue to secure temporary accommodation to Mr Mohamed did not confer on him any private right. It is the public law decision itself that Mr Mohamed seeks to challenge. The only way he can do that is to seek leave to apply for judicial review. Such a procedure, in its provision for interim relief, is capable of providing much longer tenure pending determination of a substantive application than the four weeks’ notice provided by the 1977 Act.’
Nourse LJ: ‘I rest my decision primarily on the simple proposition, derived from a purposive construction of both statutes, that accommodation made available for an applicant pursuant to section 63(1) of the Housing Act 1985 pending a decision as a result of the local housing authority’s inquiries under section 62 cannot, as a general rule, be premises let as a dwelling under a tenancy [or][1] premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence within section 3(1) and (2B) respectively of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977. The context and purpose of section 63(1) have been fully considered by Auld LJ and I agree with the views he has expressed. Moreover, it cannot be a purpose of the 1977 Act to give protection to persons whose entirely transient needs bring them within section 63(1). True, the general rule may be displaced by an agreement between an authority and an applicant such as had been entered into in Eastleigh Borough Council v. Walsh [1985] 1 W.L.R. 525, or perhaps if the applicant’s occupation is allowed to continue on a more than transient basis. But there was no such agreement or occupation here, nor anything else to take the case out of the general rule.
Judge Phelan, having referred to the judgment of Lord Denning M.R. in Luganda v. Service Hotels Ltd [1969] 2 Ch. 209 at 218-219, said that that case was from a long time ago and that here he was dealing with the rather different situation of the homeless in 1994. He added:
‘Certainly persons spending a few nights in a hotel normally have a dwelling elsewhere. This is not the situation of the homeless who have no dwelling. Where else would the Plaintiff be dwelling, even if for a very short time?’
Those observations suggest that the judge proceeded on an assumption that everyone must have a dwelling somewhere. In my view the 1977 Act makes no such assumption. Without some element of more than transient occupation, premises cannot properly be called a dwelling. Lord Denning’s observations are as valid now as they were in 1969. The two authorities relied on by the judge, Thurrock Urban District Council v. Shina (1972) 23 P. and C.R. 205 and Thrasyvoulou v. London Borough of Hackney (1986) 18 H.L.R. 370, are readily distinguishable.’
Auld LJ, said: ‘In my view, as a matter of construction of section 3(2B) of the 1977 Act, the expression ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’ cannot apply to bed-and -breakfast accommodation of this sort, when, as here, it is provided pursuant to an agreement clearly intended as a purely temporary arrangement pending the making of enquiries under section 62. The council’s duty under section 63 is only to secure accommodation pending those inquiries and their decision as a result of them. It cannot have been the intention of Parliament that there should be grafted on to that public and temporary obligation an extension of it by at least four weeks drawn from another statute dealing with the private rights and duties of landlords (licensors) and tenants (licensees) as between themselves. Nor does it accord with the ordinary use of language to describe the temporary accommodation in a hotel or hostel for this purpose as premises ‘occupied as a dwelling under a licence’. In my view, that is so whether the council provide the accommodation themselves or arrange it through some third party, subject in each case, however, to any contrary agreement. The agreement here was plainly not to the contrary. It bore all the marks of an arrangement for the purpose of section 63 only and not, in Lord Greene’s words, ‘as a matter of fair and reasonable construction of simple words’ as premises occupied as a dwelling under a licence.’
Nourse LJ pointed out that the general rule that accommodation made available for this temporary purpose was not to be considered a ‘dwelling’ under the 1977 Act might be displaced ‘if the applicant’s occupation is allowed to continue on a more than transient basis.’

Judges:

Auld, Henry and Nourse LJJ

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-1995, [1995] 27 HLR 439, (1995) 30 HLR 481

Statutes:

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCocks v Thanet District Council HL 25-Nov-1981
The applicant had been given temporary accomodation under the Act. He sought to enforce the obligation on the respondent to house him permanently by an action in the county court. The authority said the action should have been by judicial review. . .
CitedMohram Ali v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 27-May-1992
A challenge to the exercise of homelessness duties by a local authority must be by way of Judicial Review. Nolan LJ: ‘It follows that in my judgment the public law duties of the council were not discharged until they had completed the process of . .

Cited by:

CitedBrennan v London Borough of Lambeth CA 3-Jun-1997
The appellant sought to resist his eviction from temporary hostel accomodation provided to him by the local authority, saying that the provisions of the 1977 Act protected him.
Held: The agreement was a licence excluded from protection by the . .
Not per incuriamDesnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .
ConsideredRogerson v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 2005
The court considered both whether Mohamed v. Manek was still binding and whether the facts of the case were covered by the prior decision, having regard in particular to the emphasis on transience which emerges from the judgment of Nourse LJ. Heled: . .
CitedRogerson v Wigan Metropolican Borough Council QBD 14-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages under the 1977 Act. The defendant said it had behaved lawfully. He had been housed in a hostel pending a decision on the application for permanent housing as a homeless person, which the defendant said excluded him from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Administrative

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83788

Midland Bank Plc v Kidwai and Another: CA 5 Jun 1995

A bank was not under a full duty to advise a wife of a business client of the risks of signing a charge. The bank was not giving independent advice.

Citations:

Ind Summary 05-Jun-1995, [1995] 4 Bank LR 303

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBarclay’s Bank Plc v Varenka Goff CA 3-May-2001
The respondent executed an all monies charge over her property to secure the liability of companies in which she had no direct interest. The bank insisted that she employ solicitors to give her independent advice. The bank sought to enforce its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83710

McCann v Wright: CA 10 Jul 1995

A court may re-impose a power of arrest in a domestic violence case without there having first been further violence. A power of arrest may be attached to a domestic violence injunction though the couple are living apart.

Citations:

Times 10-Jul-1995, Ind Summary 17-Jul-1995, Gazette 19-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Domestic Violence and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1976 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court, Family

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83504

Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance Co Ltd: CA 19 Jul 1995

A notice exercising a tenant’s or landlord’s right to break a lease, must be given precisely as required by the break clause in the lease.
Nourse LJ said that the last moment of time on one day is not the same as the first moment of time on the next: ‘The two moments of time, albeit separated by an immeasurable stroke of midnight, have always been treated as separate’, and ‘If a notice clearly and specifically purports to determine a demise for a fixed term on a date not authorised by the lease, the date cannot be corrected simply because it is clear, first, what the correct date ought to be, secondly, that the wrong date was inserted by a slip and, thirdly, that the recipient might guess or even be certain that that was what happened. An exception can only be made where the date specified is an impossibility, either because it has passed or because it is on some other ground inconceivable that it was the date intended.’

Judges:

Nourse LJ

Citations:

Times 19-Jul-1995, Gazette 06-Sep-1995, [1995] 1 WLR 1508

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

DistinguishedSidebotham v Holland CA 1895
A house was let to the defendant as a yearly tenant ‘commencing on May 19 instant’, and on 17th November the landlord served a notice to quit ‘on 19th May next’.
Held: It related to a point of time which was held to be common to both dates and . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance HL 21-May-1997
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal
Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83383

Liddell v Middleton: CA 17 Jul 1995

A husband and wife crossed a road. The wife, appreciating that the danger from the traffic, ran across. The husband stood in the middle of the road and then went ahead, but was struck by a vehicle and injured. He was significantly affected by alcohol, and evidence had been led at the trial indicating the effect of alcohol on accident statistics, particularly relating to men. The judge concluded that the husband was 25 per cent to blame for the accident.
Held: The driver’s appeal succeeded to the extent that the plaintiff was 50% responsible for his injuries.
Stuart-Smith LJ considered the correct approach to the fact that the husband had been affected by alcohol in the context of the issue of apportionment. He replied to a submission which sought to equate the approach to a drunken driver to the situation of a drunken pedestrian, as follows: ‘That may be so in the case of a driver who puts himself in the control of an object which is capable of great damage if it is not properly controlled, but I am not persuaded that it makes a significant difference in this case in the case of a pedestrian. It seems to me that the pedestrian’s conduct has to be judged by what he did rather than the explanation as to why he did it.’ Having referred to the statistical information which had been before the judge, he said: ‘The result of that statistical survey is no doubt a matter of expert knowledge not available to a layman. But whether it is of any material assistance in this case is another matter. It is not the fact that a plaintiff has consumed too much alcohol that matters, it is what he does. If he steps in front of a car travelling at 30 mph at a time when the driver has no opportunity to avoid an accident, that is a very dangerous and unwise thing to do. The explanation of his conduct may be that he was drunk: but the fact of drunkenness does not, in my judgment, make the conduct any more or less dangerous and it does not in these circumstances increase the blameworthiness of it.’
As to the test of admissibility laid down in the 1972 Act 1972: ‘But that section in no way extends the principles upon which expert evidence is admissible. An expert is only qualified to give expert evidence on a relevant matter, if his knowledge and expertise relate to a matter which is outside the knowledge and experience of a layman. In the reference to an ‘issue in the proceedings in question’ relates to a factual issue and not to the conclusion of law based upon such fact’.
Stuart-Smith LJ laid down the limits of expert evidence: ‘In such cases the function of the expert is to furnish the Judge with the necessary scientific criteria and assistance based upon his special skill and experience not possessed by ordinary laymen to enable the Judge to interpret the factual evidence of the marks on the road, the damage or whatever it may be. What he is not entitled to do is to say in effect ‘I have considered the statements and special evidence of the eyewitnesses in this case and I conclude from their evidence that the defendant was going at a certain speed, or that he could have seen the plaintiff at a certain point’. These are facts for the trial Judge to find based on the evidence that he accepts and such inferences as he draws from the primary facts found. Still less is the expert entitled to say that in his opinion the defendant should have sounded his horn, seen the plaintiff before he did or taken avoiding action and that in taking some action or failing to take some other action, a party was guilty of negligence. These are matters for the Court, on which the expert’s opinion is wholly irrelevant and therefore inadmissible’.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Peter Gibson and Hutchison LJJ

Citations:

Times 17-Jul-1995, (1996) PIQR 36

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1), Civil Evidence Act 1972

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBailey v Warre CA 7-Feb-2006
The claimant had been severely injured in a road traffic accident. His claim was compromised and embodied in a court order, but later a question was raised as to whether he had had mental capacity at the time to make the compromise he had.
CitedLunt v Khelifa CA 22-May-2002
The claimant pedestrian had been injured when hit by a car driven by the defendant as she stepped into the roadway. Both parties appealed against the assessment of contributory negligence. The claimant had a blood alcohol level three times that . .
CitedAllen v Cornwall Council QBD 20-May-2015
The claimant was injured riding his bicycle, and alleged failure by the respondent highway authority. The court now considered an application for leave to appeal against an order allowing the production of evidence of an expert in cycling skills and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.83063

Koenigsberger v Mellor (Inspector of Taxes): CA 15 May 1995

External Lloyds name does not get retirement annuity relief on underwriting profit.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-May-1995

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 619-1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromKoenigsberger v Mellor (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 25-May-1993
Premiums which had been paid were not relevant earnings for annuity relief purposes. It was not income derived from the any trade or profession. . .

Cited by:

Appealed toKoenigsberger v Mellor (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 25-May-1993
Premiums which had been paid were not relevant earnings for annuity relief purposes. It was not income derived from the any trade or profession. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82827

Kaur v Gill: CA 15 Jun 1995

A landlord could be liable for for orders for damages both for a common law breach of quiet enjoyment under the lease and for the loss of occupation under the 1988 Act. The case of Mason was distinguished because on the basis that the common law damages were awarded here not for the loss of occupation, but for the breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment.

Judges:

Auld LJ, Nourse LJ, Kennedy Lj

Citations:

Times 15-Jun-1995

Statutes:

Housing Act 1988 27 28

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMason v Nwokorie CA 19-Oct-1993
General and aggravated damages at common law are to be set off, against damages awarded under Housing Act 1988 s2. The general damages were attributable to the loss of the right to occupy the premises, and therefore the common law damages award . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82685

Kaur v Chief Adjudication Officer: CA 5 Jul 1995

A disapplication of the restriction on claiming housing benefit must be for an event which takes place after the claim. Wife not entitled to more mortgage support benefit than had been paid as housing benefit.

Citations:

Independent 13-Jul-1995, Times 05-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 10-1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82683

Kastner v Rizla Ltd and Another: CA 23 Jun 1995

Patent specification construction to be purposive- following ‘Catnic’.

Citations:

Times 23-Jun-1995, [1995] RPC 585

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977, European Patents Convention 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRocky Mountain Traders Limited and Hewlett Packard Gmbh; Westcoast Limited and Fellowes Manufacturing (UK) Limited CA 20-Dec-2000
The claimant appealed an order finding its patents for mechanisms for labelling CDs invalid for obviousness.
Held: the judge had applied the correct tests for obviousness, and the view taken by the judge of the expert evidence was not open to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82677

John Dee Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 20 Jul 1995

There was no ‘fresh discretion’ power in the VAT tribunal on appeal if Commissioner’s decision flawed.

Citations:

Times 20-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1983 40(1)(n)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromJohn Dee Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise QBD 17-Feb-1995
VAT Tribunal has an appellate not a supervisory jurisdiction – no re-hearing. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82533

In Re TB (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Criminal Trial): CA 29 Jun 1995

Pending criminal proceedings against a family need not stop care proceedings going ahead. Butler-Sloss LJ said: ‘One starts with the fact that the criminal proceedings of themselves are not a reason to adjourn the care proceedings. There must be some detriment to the children in the broadest terms for not bringing on the care proceedings because delay is detrimental generally to the children . . I think that we do have to hold the line that in the majority of cases, unless there are circumstances which warrant taking a different course, that the care proceedings should come on, even if they are to be heard before the criminal proceedings. That is in line with the President’s ruling and it is a ruling which this court ought respectfully to follow. ‘

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

Times 29-Jun-1995, [1995] 2 FLR 801

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82231