Month: July 2015

Dr Samad Samadian v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 15 Jan 2014

References: [2014] UKUT 13 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Deduction of travel expenses – medical practitioner in private practice – travel between office at home and place of business – travel between other locations and place of business – whether ‘wholly and exclusively’ for the purposes of a trade or profession – section 74 ICTA 1988 – section 34 ITTOIA 2005

Rouse, Regina (on The Application of) v Hmrc; UTTC 7 Aug 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 383 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – self-assessment – ITA ss 64, 131 – claim for relief to be ‘carried back’ intimated in earlier year return – whether FA 2008 s 130 engaged and HMRC able to set off disputed income tax liability against VAT repayment admitted to be due – TMA ss 8, 9, 9A, 42, Schs 1A, 1B – HMRC v Cotter considered – Cotter binding on this tribunal and determinative in applicant’s favour – no debit on account against which set-off could be effected VAT – whether use of FA 2008 s 130 to refuse immediate VAT repayment a proportionate remedy – yes

HM Revenue and Customs v Marco Trading Company Ltd; UTTC 16 Sep 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 450 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC CUSTOMS DUTY- post clearance demands – whether goods eligible for reduced rate of duty under Generalised System of Preferences-whether sufficient evidence to conclude that direct transport rule satisfied-no-whether substantiating documents produced – no – whether duty may be remitted-whether a special situation existed – no – Article 78 Commission Regulation (EEC)2454/93, Article 239 Council regulation 2913/92/EEC – appeal allowed
Statutes: Council Regulation 2913/92/EEC, Commission Regulation (EEC)2454/93

ITV Plc, Granada Ltd and Others v The Pensions Regulator (Case Management Decision); UTTC 13 Dec 2013

References: [2013] UKUT B10 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PENSIONS REGULATOR – Financial support direction – procedure – whether Regulator and Trustee should be barred from pursuing parts of their pleaded cases on grounds that to do so would amount to an abuse of the Upper Tribunal’s Procedure and breach of the Upper Tribunal Procedure Rules – no – whether disclosure of documents should be directed in relation to certain matters pleaded by the Targets in reply to the Regulator’s Statement of Case – yes in part – whether the Regulator should disclose documents relating to its decision not to seek a financial support direction against Joint Venture Partner of one of the Targets – no

Hobbs v Financial Conduct Authority; UTTC 13 Dec 2013

References: [2013] UKUT B8 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Financial services – prohibition order – s 56 FSMA – matter remitted to Tribunal by Court of Appeal to address the question whether, even if applicant was not guilty of market abuse, his lying, which in earlier proceedings the Tribunal had found as a fact, demonstrated that he was not a fit and proper person – whether a prohibition order was appropriate in circumstances where applicant had not worked in financial services for a considerable period and gave evidence that he did not intend to do so
Last Update: 14-Nov-15 Ref: 521028

HM Revenue and Customs v Cooneen Watts and Stone Limited; UTTC 24 Jan 2014

References: [2014] UKUT 31 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC CUSTOMS DUTY – relief for military end use – classification of goods imported for military end use – Combined Nomenclature – objective characteristics of clothing with infra red reflectance properties – Council Regulation 150/2003 – whether certificate of MoD pursuant to that regulation is conclusive as to the availability of relief – entitlement to remission of duties – articles 236 and 239 of the Customs Code
Statutes: Council Regulation 150/2003

Liu (T/A Wings Chinese Takeaway) v Revenue and Customs; UTTC 15 May 2014

References: [2014] UKFTT 477 (TC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PAYE — Employer’s year-end return – penalty for late submission – whether submitted on time – no – whether penalty due – yes – whether penalty can be discharged on grounds of unfairness – no – whether HMRC’s maintenance prevented submission on time – no – whether penalty proportionate – yes – whether reasonable excuse for late submission – no – penalty confirmed

Revenue and Customs v Pinevale Ltd; UTTC 7 May 2014

References: [2014] UKUT 202 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Value Added Tax – Reduced rate supply – Energy saving materials – Insulation for roofs – Polycarbonate panels for conservatories – Panels supplied to create new roof – Panels supplied to replace existing panels – Whether energy saving materials comprising insulation for roofs – Appeal allowed – VATA 1994 Schedule 7A Group 2

Granada Rental and Retail Ltd and Others v The Pensions Regulator; UTTC 15 Apr 2014

References: [2014] UKUT 175 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PENSIONS REGULATOR – Financial support direction – procedure – whether Targets should be barred from pursuing parts of their pleaded cases on grounds that previous case management decision had created an issue estoppel – no – whether to allow issue to continue to be pleaded would be an abuse of process – no – application dismissed

Radford v De Froberville; 2 Jan 1977

References: [1977] 1 WLR 1262
Coram: Oliver J
A contract was made for the sale of a plot of land adjoining a house belonging to the plaintiff (the vendor) but occupied by his tenants, under which the defendant (the purchaser) undertook to build a house on the plot and also to erect a wall to a certain specification on the plot so as to separate it from the plaintiff’s land. The plaintiff obtained judgment against the defendant for damages for breach of contract by reason of her failure to erect the dividing wall, but an issue arose as to the measure of the damages. The defendant having failed to build the dividing wall on the land purchased from the plaintiff, the plaintiff proposed to build a dividing wall on his own land, and claimed the cost of doing so from the defendant; whereas the defendant maintained that the appropriate measure of damages was the consequent diminution in the value of the plaintiff’s property, which was nil.
Held: The court described the distinction made in the Liesbosch between a plaintiff’s capacity to mitigate his loss and his duty to do so: ‘No doubt the measure of damages and the plaintiff’s duty and ability to mitigate are logically distinct concepts (see for instance, the speech of Lord Wright in Liesbosch (Dredger) v SS Edison (Owners) [1933] AC 449, 456-469). But to some extent, at least, they are mirror images . .’ A contracting party should not use the remedy of damages to recover ‘an uncovenanted profit.’ However: ‘If [the plaintiff] contracts for the supply of that which he thinks serves his interests – be they commercial, aesthetic or merely eccentric – then if that which is contracted for is not supplied by the other contracting party I do not see why, in principle, he should not be compensated by being provided with the cost of supplying it through someone else or in a different way, subject to the proviso, of course, that he is seeking compensation for a genuine loss and not merely using a technical breach to secure an uncovenanted profit.’ It was for the plaintiff to judge what performance he required in exchange for the price. The court should honour that choice.
Oliver J said: ‘In the instant case, the plaintiff says in evidence that he wishes to carry out the work on his own land and there are, as it seems to me, three questions that I have to answer. First, am I satisfied on the evidence that the plaintiff has a genuine and serious intention of doing the work? Secondly, is the carrying out of the work on his own land a reasonable thing for the plaintiff to do? Thirdly, does it make any difference that the plaintiff is not personally in occupation of the land but desires to do the work for the benefit of his tenants?’
This case cites:

  • Cited – Liesbosch Dredger (Owners of) -v- Owners of SS Edison, The Liesbosch HL ([1933] AC 449, [1933] All ER Rep 144, [1933] 149 LT 49, Bailii, [1933] UKHL 2)
    The ship Edison fouled the moorings of the Liesbosch resulting in the total loss of the dredger when it sank. It had been engaged on work in the harbour under contract with the harbour board. All the owners’ liquid resources were engaged in the . .
  • Cited – Jackson -v- Horizon Holidays Ltd CA ([1975] 1 WLR 1468, Bailii, [1974] EWCA Civ 12, [1975] 3 All ER 92)
    A family claimed damages for a disappointing holiday. The generous measure of damages given to the father was that the father was being fully compensated for his own mental distress, but the rule of privity of contract operated to bar the claim for . .
  • Cited – Tito -v- Waddell (No 2); Tito -v-Attorney General ChD ([1977] Ch 106, [1977] 3 All ER 129, [1977] 3 WLR 972)
    Equity applies its doctrines to the substance, not the form, of transactions. In respect of the rule against self dealing for trustees ‘But of course equity looks beneath the surface, and applies its doctrines to cases where, although in form a . .

This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Lagden -v- O’Connor HL (House of Lords, [2003] UKHL 64, Bailii, Times 05-Dec-03, [2004] 1 AC 1067, [2004] 1 All ER 277, [2003] 3 WLR 1571, [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 315, [2004] RTR 24)
    The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
  • Approved – Dodd Properties (Kent) Ltd -v- Canterbury City Council CA ([1980] 1 WLR 433, Bailii, [1980] 1 All ER 928, [1979] EWCA Civ 4)
    The defendants had, in the course of building operations, caused nuisance and damage to the plaintiff’s building. The dispute was very lengthy, the costs of repair increased accordingly, and the parties now disputed the date at which damages fell to . .
  • Cited – Alfred Mcalpine Construction Limited -v- Panatown Limited HL (Times 15-Aug-00, House of Lords, Gazette 05-Oct-00, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 43, [2000] 4 All ER 97, [2000] 3 WLR 946, [2001] 1 AC 518)
    A main contractor who was building not on his own land, would only be free to claim damages from a sub-contractor for defects in the building where the actual owner of the land would not also have had a remedy. Here, the land owner was able to sue . .
  • Cited – Golden Strait Corporation -v- Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL (Bailii, [2007] UKHL 12, Times 30-Mar-07, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 164, [2007] Bus LR 997, [2007] 3 All ER 1, [2007] 2 AC 353, [2007] 1 CLC 352, [2007] 2 WLR 691, [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 97)
    The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
  • Cited – Johnson -v- Agnew HL ([1980] AC 367, [1979] 2 WLR 487, [1979] 1 All ER 883)
    The seller had obtained a summary order for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land against the buyer.
    Held: The breach was continuing and was still capable of being remedied by compliance with the order for specific . .
  • Cited – Alcoa Minerals of Jamaica Inc -v- Herbert Broderick PC (Times 22-Mar-00, Bailii, PC, PC, [2002] 1 AC 371, [2000] UKPC 11, (Appeal No 68 of 1998))
    (Jamaica) Damage had been caused to the claimant’s property, but, because of his lack of funds, he was dependent upon the receipt of the damages to carry out the works of repair necessary. By the time the matter came to trial, inflation meant that . .
  • Cited – Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd -v- Forsyth HL (Independent 12-Jul-95, Gazette 06-Sep-95, Times 03-Jul-95, [1996] 1 AC 344, [1995] 3 WLR 118, Bailii, [1995] UKHL 8, [1995] CLC 905, [1995] 3 All ER 268)
    The appellant had constructed to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the sepcification to construct it to a certan depth, in fact built it to the original lower depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .

Robinson v Harman; 18 Jan 1848

References: [1848] 1 Exch Rep 850, (1843-60) All ER 383, [1848] EngR 135, (1848) 1 Exch 850, (1848) 154 ER 363
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Baron Parke
Damages for breach of contract should compensate the victim of the breach for the loss of his contractual bargain. Baron Parke said: ‘The next question is: What damages is the plaintiff entitled to recover? The rule of the common law is, that where a party sustains a loss by reason of a breach of contract, he is, so far as money can do it to be placed in the same situation, with regard to damages as if the contract had been performed.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Husain and Zafar -v- Bank of Credit & Commerce International SA CA (Bailii, [2002] EWCA Civ 82, [2002] 3 All ER 750, [2002] ICR 1258, [2002] IRLR 460, [2002] Emp LR 406, A3/2001/9016/CHANF)
    The appellants challenged the refusal of their claims for stigma damages following the collapse of their former employer.
    Held: If a relevant breach of contract is established, and causation, remoteness and mitigation are satisfied, recovery . .
  • Cited – HM Attorney General -v- Blake (Jonathan Cape Ltd third Party intervening) HL (Gazette 17-Aug-00, Times 03-Aug-00, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 45, [2000] 4 All ER 385, [2000] 3 WLR 625, [2001] 1 AC 268)
    The author had written his book in breach of his duty of confidence. Having signed the Official Secrets Act, he accepted a contractual private law duty. After conviction as a spy, the publication of the book was in breach of the undertaking by not . .
  • Applied – Surrey County Council and Mole District Council -v- Bredero Homes Ltd ChD ([1992] 3 All ER 302)
    Land was agreed to be sold for development in accordance with an existing planning permission. Instead a later permission was obtained, and more houses were built. The plaintiff had not sought to restrain or prevent the breach, but now sought . .
  • Cited – Alfred Mcalpine Construction Limited -v- Panatown Limited HL (Times 15-Aug-00, House of Lords, Gazette 05-Oct-00, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 43, [2000] 4 All ER 97, [2000] 3 WLR 946, [2001] 1 AC 518)
    A main contractor who was building not on his own land, would only be free to claim damages from a sub-contractor for defects in the building where the actual owner of the land would not also have had a remedy. Here, the land owner was able to sue . .
  • Cited – Pegler Ltd -v- Wang (Uk) Ltd TCC (Bailii, [2000] EWHC Technology 137, 1997 TCC No 219)
    The claimant had acquired a computer system from the defendant, which had failed. It was admitted that the contract had been broken, and the court set out to decide the issue of damages.
    Held: Even though Wang had been ready to amend one or . .
  • Cited – Catlin Estates Ltd and Another -v- Carter Jonas (A Firm) TCC (Bailii, [2005] EWHC 2315 (TCC))
    The defendants had been employed to manage a building project which it was said went wrong. The court had to consider several different factual claims. . .
  • Cited – Golden Strait Corporation -v- Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL (Bailii, [2007] UKHL 12, Times 30-Mar-07, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 164, [2007] Bus LR 997, [2007] 3 All ER 1, [2007] 2 AC 353, [2007] 1 CLC 352, [2007] 2 WLR 691, [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 97)
    The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
  • Cited – Transfield Shipping Inc -v- Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas) HL (Bailii, [2008] UKHL 48, Times 10-Jul-08, HL)
    The parties contracted to charter the Achileas. The charterer gave notice to terminate the hire, and the owner found a new charterer. Until the termination the charterers sub-chartered. That charter was not completed, delaying the ship for the . .
  • Cited – Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd -v- Forsyth HL (Independent 12-Jul-95, Gazette 06-Sep-95, Times 03-Jul-95, [1996] 1 AC 344, [1995] 3 WLR 118, Bailii, [1995] UKHL 8, [1995] CLC 905, [1995] 3 All ER 268)
    The appellant had constructed to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the sepcification to construct it to a certan depth, in fact built it to the original lower depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .

Smith v Fromont; 18 Jul 1818

References: [1818] EngR 611, (1818) 1 Wils Ch 472, (1818) 37 ER 202 (A)
Links: Commonlii
A. the owner of a stage coach from Bristol to London, sold to B. the profits of it for a part of the road, B. agreeing to supply the coach with horses for that part of the road, and A. for the remainder. B.’s. horses having been taken in execution and advertised for sale, A. provided his own horses to convey the coach along that part of the road comprised in B.’s agreement : and the Court refused a motion for an injunction to restrain him from so doing.

Powney v Blomberg; 11 Jul 1844

References: [1844] EngR 772, (1844) 14 Sim 179, (1844) 60 ER 325
Links: Commonlii
A. executed B bond and mortgage to B. to secure £2,000 lent to him by B., with interest at 5%.
B having sold out a sum of stock to enable her to make the loan, the dividends of which exceeded the interest of the £2000 at £5 per cent., A. afterwards agreed, in consideration of her Ietting the £2000 continue secured at interest as aforesaid, to transfer to her, when requested so to do, the amount of the stock sold out, or, at her option, to pay to her a sum of money sufficient to repurchase it, and, in the meantime, to pay to her the amount of the dividends of it, intstead of the interest of the £2000.
Held, that the agreement was additional to and not substitutional for the bond and mortgage, and was, therefore, usurious.

Marcus Webb Golf Professional v HM Revenue and Customs – FTC/40/2010; UTTC 23 Oct 2012

References: [2012] UKUT 378 (TCC), FTC/40/2010
Links: Bailii
UTTC VAT – exemption in Item 2 of Group 6, Schedule 9, VATA 1994 – whether tuition supplied by an individual teacher acting independently of an employer – relevance of principle of fiscal neutrality – appeal dismissed.
This case cites:

This case is cited by:

Crompton v The United Kingdom; 13 May 2008

References: [1999] ECHR 183, 42509/05
Links: Bailii
(date) Statement of Facts
Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights
This case is cited by:

  • Statement of Facts – Crompton -v- The United Kingdom ECHR (42509/05, Bailii, [2009] ECHR 1659, (2010) 50 EHRR 36)
    The applicant had joined the Territorial Army as a pay and accounts clerk but was made redundant. He claimed redress in respect of his redundancy from his Commanding Officer. There then followed a prolonged series of proceedings which took eleven . .
  • Statement of Facts – Crompton -v- The United Kingdom ECHR (Bailii, [2011] ECHR 1656, 42509/05)
    Supervision of execution of final judgments. . .

Sibthorp v Moxton; 10 Nov 1747

References: [1747] EngR 193, (1747) 1 Ves Sen 49, (1747) 27 ER 883 (B)
Links: Commonlii
A woman by will forgives a bond-debt to her son-in-law, and desires her executor to deliver up the bond to be cancelled ; this held not to be lapsed by his dying before the testatrix.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – The Commissioner of Stamp Duties -v- Bone and Others PC ([1976] TR 117, [1976] 2 All ER 354, [1977] AC 511, Bailii, [1976] UKPC 11, [1976] 2 WLR 968, [1976] STC 145)
    (Australia) A debt can only be released and extinguished by an agreement for valuable consideration or an instrument of release under seal. Where a testator or testratrix appoints a debtor as executor under a will any cause of action against the . .

President of the Republic of South Africa v South African Rugby Football Union; 4 Jun 1999

References: [1999] ZACC 9, [1999] 4 SA 147
Links: SAFLii
Constitutional Court of South Africa – The court considered an allegation of bias in the judge, it being said that they should have recused themselves: ‘The question is whether a reasonable, objective and informed person would on the correct facts reasonably apprehend that the judge has not or will not bring an impartial mind to bear on the adjudication of the case, that is a mind open to persuasion by the evidence and the submissions of counsel. The reasonableness of the apprehension must be assessed in the light of the oath of office taken by the judges to administer justice without fear or favour; and their ability to carry out that oath by reason of their training ad experience. It must be assumed that they can disabuse their minds of any irrelevant personal beliefs or predispositions. They must take into account the fact that they have a duty to sit in any case in which they are not obliged to recuse themselves. At the same time it must never be forgotten that an impartial judge is a fundamental prerequisite for a fair trial and a judicial officer should not hesitate to recuse herself or himself if there are reasonable grounds on the part of a litigant for apprehending that the judicial officer, for whatever reasons, was not or will not be impartial.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – O’Neill -v- Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC (Bailii, [2013] UKSC 36, [2013] 2 Cr App R 34, [2013] HRLR 25, [2013] 1 WLR 1992, 2013 SCL 678, 2013 SLT 888, 2013 GWD 21-410, [2013] WLR(D) 231, 2013 SCCR 401, WLRD, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2012/0149, SC Summary, SC)
    The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .

Shop Direct Group, Littlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v HMRC; UTTC 19 Apr 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 189 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Asplin J
UTTC Corporation Tax: Effect of receipt by trader or successor to trade of sums in respect of VAT repaid under s80 VATA to representative member of VAT group plus interest paid under s78 VATA. Question of beneficial ownership of sums received and whether ‘arising from the trade’. Application of sections 103 and 106 ICTA 1988. Whether interest payments could be characterised as arising under a ‘loan relationship’ and amounted to a ‘money debt’ for purposes of section 100 FA 1996
This case cites:

  • Appeal from – Shop Direct Group and Others -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx (Bailii, [2012] UKFTT 127 (TC))
    FTTTx Corporation tax – receipts of payments in respect of overpaid VAT and statutory interest – whether VAT repayments trading receipts – whether payments in respect of supplies made in discontinued trades . .

This case is cited by:

The Attorney General v John Hollingworth; 30 May 1857

References: [1857] EngR 577, (1857) 2 H & N 416, (1857) 157 ER 172
Links: Commonlii
By agreemerit made in 1794, 80001. stock was transferred by O. to H, upon the terms that H should repay the money produced by the sale of it or replace the stock at the option of O, and in the mean time pay interest at the rate of 5 per cent., the loan was secured by bond, mortgage, and a deed of covenant. O. and H being dead, E. O being the legatee ancl heiress, but not the personal representative of O., and J H. being the devisee of H , J. H. applied to E O. to assist him to raise moNey, which E. O. agreed to do on having a security for the replacement of the stock. E. O. accordingly assigned the bond mortgage, and deed of covenant of 1794, to H. and P, by way of mortgage, to secure an advance to J. H., and in consideration thereof, J. H, iri 1842, by iindenture, conveyed to E. O. the premises comprised iri the original mortgage, together with other lands, by way of mortgage, with a proviso and covenant to secure the transfer to E O. of 80001 stock E O died, and by her will forgave the mortgage debt, of 1842 to J H. Held, that the mortgage and covenant of 1842 were not so connected with the illegal agreement of 1794 as to be usurious and void, and that therefore legacy duty was payable on the bequest
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – The Commissioner of Stamp Duties -v- Bone and Others PC ([1976] TR 117, [1976] 2 All ER 354, [1977] AC 511, Bailii, [1976] UKPC 11, [1976] 2 WLR 968, [1976] STC 145)
    (Australia) A debt can only be released and extinguished by an agreement for valuable consideration or an instrument of release under seal. Where a testator or testratrix appoints a debtor as executor under a will any cause of action against the . .

J Sainsbury Plc v Moger; 25 Feb 1994

References: [1994] UKEAT 596_93_2502, [1994] ICR 800
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mummery J P
The EAT should not accept an order by consent unless it is satisfied that there are good grounds for making the order.
This case cites:

  • Cited – Hogg -v- Dover College EAT ([1990] ICR 39)
    The claimant asserted unfair dismissal after his contract was changed to provide that his post as head of the history department would be part time. He had been ill, and the head teacher reduced his teaching periods. He accepted the change in . .

This case is cited by:

  • Approved – Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions) HL (Times 22-Jul-94, Gazette 12-Oct-94, Independent 18-Aug-94, lip, [1994] 2 AC 424, (1994) 92 LGR 701, [1994] 3 WLR 558, [1994] 3 All ER 298)
    The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order.
    Held: When an application was made on the . .
  • Cited – A McKenzie -v- East Sussex County Council EAT (EAT/1334/98, Bailii, [1999] UKEAT 1334_98_1312)
    EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability
    The parties sought to settle the appeal by consent. The Tribunal was obliged to consider the merits before making an order. In this case the order requested was . .
  • Cited – AB -v- CD EAT (Bailii, [1997] UKEAT 1272_96_1311)
    The claimant had been a cook. A poster was put up at work redrawn to show her in a sexually suggestive pose. The court now considered an appeal agreed by consent by the parties.
    Held: Since the case had been heard, the Court of Appeal in Tower . .

Kaneria, Kaneria v Patel, Kaneria, Kaneria, Kaneria, Kaneria, Guidezone Ltd Sub Nom In The Matter Of Guidezone Ltd (2000); 13 Jul 2000

References: (2000) 2 BCLC 321
Coram: Jonathan Parker J
cw The petitioners’ case was that they had a legitimate expectation that the company’s business would be sold, either by virtue of an agreement to that effect or at their request, was not made out on the facts.
This case is cited by:

  • Approved – Anderson -v- Hogg IHCS (Times 22-Jan-02, ScotC)
    The appellant sought an order under the section for repayment to the company of sums paid to a director by way of extra redundancy payments. He said the payments were improper. His application had been refused, in part because he had not chosen the . .

Baring v Noble; 9 Mar 1831

References: , [1831] EngR 491, (1831) 2 Russ & My 495, (1831) 39 ER 482
Links: Commonlii
The creditor of a partnership, in which one of the partners dies, and the surviving partners afterwards become bankrupt, has a right to resort to the assets of the deceased partner for payment, without regard to the state of the account as between such deceased partner and the surviving partners.
This case cites:

  • See Also – Devaynes -v- Noble; Baring -v- Noble, Clayton’s Case CA ([1816] 1 Mer 572, [1814-23] All ER Rep 1, [1816] 35 ER 781, Worldii)
    A partner in a banking firm died. The surviving partners continued to trade without making any changes. They later fell into bankruptcy. Creditors of the bank at the date of the death still traded with the bank with varying changes in their banking . .

Corker v Wilson; 10 Nov 2006

References: Unreported, 10 November 2006
Coram: HHJ Simpson QC
Mayor’s and City of London Court – the defendant was an ordinary landowner who owned a tree by a road. A heavy branch fell onto a passing car. There was a crack at the junction of the stem of the branch, and the claimant’s case was that this should have been identified and the branch should have been lopped. The defendant said that the crack could not have been seen on a roadside inspection or even on a more detailed inspection and that the tree was in visibly good health.
Held: The judge rejected the claim. The defendant carried out informal observations of the tree on an ongoing basis and all the evidence was that the tree was in good health. There was nothing about the tree which should have alerted the defendant or led him to obtain a more detailed inspection by an arboriculturalist.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd -v- Hind and Another TCC (Bailii, [2014] EWHC 1891 (TCC))
    A train crash was caused when an ash tree fell from the defendant’s land across the railway line. The company sought damages from the land-owner.
    Held: The land-owner’s duty extended no further than the carrying out of periodic informal or . .

Lambourn v London Brick Co Ltd; 28 Jul 1950

References: [1950] EG 28 July 1950
Finnemore J stated that an unreasonable burden must not be placed on the reasonable owner: ‘the standard to be taken should be that of an ordinary landowner and not an expert. It was neither the duty nor the practice of the ordinary prudent landowner to make a meticulous examination of its individual trees.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd -v- Hind and Another TCC (Bailii, [2014] EWHC 1891 (TCC))
    A train crash was caused when an ash tree fell from the defendant’s land across the railway line. The company sought damages from the land-owner.
    Held: The land-owner’s duty extended no further than the carrying out of periodic informal or . .

Selwyn-Smith v Gompels; 22 Dec 2009

References: Unreported, 22 December 2009
Coram: Recorder Adrian Palmer QC
Swindon County Court. A tree fell over from the defendant’s land onto the claimant’s garage.
Held: The claim failed. The law did not require the landowner to engage an expert ‘unless and until reasonable inspection by the standards of that knowledge discloses or should disclose that the tree might be unsafe’.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd -v- Hind and Another TCC (Bailii, [2014] EWHC 1891 (TCC))
    A train crash was caused when an ash tree fell from the defendant’s land across the railway line. The company sought damages from the land-owner.
    Held: The land-owner’s duty extended no further than the carrying out of periodic informal or . .

Boreham v Bignall; 12 Mar 1850

References: [1850] EngR 384, (1850) 8 Hare 131, (1850) 68 ER 302
Links: Commonlii
A bequest of annuity to the testator’s nephew for life, or until his bankruptcy or insolvency, and after his decease, bankruptcy or insolvency to be paid to his wife, for the personal support of herself, her husband and his children, during the life of his nephew and his wife, and the survivor of them ; and in case they, or either of them, should attempt to alienate the annuity, the trustees to be empowered to apply it towards the support of their children. The first wife of the nephew, to whom he was married before the date of the will, survived the testator, and the gift of the annuity was held not to extend to the widow of the nephew who was his second wife.

The Mayor And Burgesses of Truro v Reynalds Same v Bastian; 23 Jan 1832

References: [1832] EngR 386, (1832) 8 Bing 275, (1832) 131 ER 407 (B)
Links: Commonlii
The corporation of T. having proved a prescriptive right to tolls, Held, that it was not destroyed by a charter of Elizabeth granting and confirming among, other things all the ancient rights of the corporation, but exempting the inhabitants from toll in all places except London : Held, that this exemption applied to the tolls of all other places (except London), but not to the tolls of T.

Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd; 6 Dec 2001

References: (2001) 208 CLR 516
Coram: Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow, Kirby, Haynes, Callinan JJ
High Court of Australia – Rothmans were licensed to act as wholesalers of tobacco products under a New South Wales statute. They sold products to retailers for a price including licence fees, which were in reality a form of indirect taxation, payable by Rothmans to the New South Wales government. The Act imposing that liability on Rothmans was held by the High Court to be unconstitutional. The retailers then sued Rothmans to recover the amounts which they had paid in respect of the tax which had until then been unlawfully imposed on Rothmans.
The retailers argued unsuccessfully that there was an implied agreement under which they could claim repayment of any unpaid tax. This argument was described in the leading judgment of Gleeson CJ, Gaudron and Hayne JJ, as ‘artificial and unconvincing’. However, the retailers succeeded in restitution.
Gleeson CJ, Gaudron and Hayne JJ, stated that ‘Failure of consideration is not limited to non-performance of a contractual obligation, although it may include that’. They also rejected Rothmans’ argument that the restitution claims failed because there had not been a total failure of consideration, by interpreting the consideration for the total payments made by the retailers as containing severable parts.
Gummow J (concurring), advocated: ‘caution in judicial acceptance of any all-embracing theory of restitutionary rights and remedies founded upon a notion of ‘unjust enrichment’. To the lawyer whose mind has been moulded by civilian influences, the theory may come first, and the source of the theory may be the writing of jurists not the decisions of judges. However, that is not the way in which a system based on case law develops; over time, general principle is derived from judicial decisions upon particular instances, not the other way around.’
After reviewing the authorities Gummow J held that failure of consideration in this area of law may include the collapse of a bargain, which need not be contractual in nature. There had been no failure in the performance by Rothmans of any promise made by them, but there had been a ‘failure of consideration’ in the ‘failure to sustain itself of the state of affairs contemplated as a basis for the payments the appellants seek to recover’.
This case is cited by:

Churchill v Susanna Bertrand, Administratrix, andC Of Pateman; 23 Jun 1842

References: [1842] EngR 804, (1842) 3 QB 568, (1842) 114 ER 625
Links: Commonlii
Intestate granted an annuity to plaintiff. After his death, his administratix caused the annuity to be vacated for a defect in the memorial Plaintff to recover the balance of consideration money, brought indebitatus assumpsit against the admiriistratrix for money had and received by the intestate to plaintiff’s use, stating promises by intestate and by defendant. Held that, although a right to recover the consideration money became vested in plaintiff on the refusal to continue the annuity, such right did not go back, by relation, to the time when that money was originally paid : and therefore counts in the above forms were not applicable.

Nicholas Pike v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 10 May 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 225 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Norris J
UTTC INCOME TAX – claim for loss on disposal of loan stock – whether loan stock a ‘relevant discounted security’ – FA 1996, Sch 13, para 3 – whether additional payment on redemption of loan stock was interest – yes – appeal dismissed.
This case cites:

  • Appeal from – Pike -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx ([2011] STI 1990, [2011] SFTD 830, Bailii, [2011] UKFTT 289 (TC))
    FTTTx Income tax – whether a security was a relevant discounted security – security paying on redemption a sum calculated as 7.25% per annum accruing daily – whether ‘interest’ includes sums not paid periodically . .

This case is cited by:

  • Appeal from – Pike -v- HM Revenue and Customs CA (Bailii, [2014] EWCA Civ 824)
    The taxpayer challenged rejection of his claim for a loss relief arising from a ‘relevant discounted security’ within the meaning of Schedule 13 to the Finance Act 1996.
    Held: It would only be such if, taking the security as at the time of its . .

Ockenden v Henly; 31 May 1858

References: [1858] EngR 757, (1858) El Bl & El 485, (1858) 120 ER 590
Links: Commonlii
Plaintiff put up for sale by auction real property, upon Conditions of sale which stipulated that the purchaser of each lot should ‘forthwith pay into the hands of the auctioneer deposit of 20 per cent. on the purchase money, and sign the agreement ‘to pay the remainder, and ‘that, if the purchaser of either lot shall fail to comply with these conditions, the deposit money shall be actually forfeited to the vendor, who shall be at full liberty to resell such lot either by public auction or private contract ; and any deficiency tbat may arise upon such resale, together with all expences attending the same, shall immediately after such second sale be made good by such defaulter ; and, on non-payment thereof, such amount shall be recoverable by the vendor, as and for liquidated damages.’ Defendant became a purchaser at the auction, but did not pay the deposit or complete the purchase. Plaintiff resold at a price below that for whiich defendant had purchased ; and the deficiency, with the expences of sale, exceeded the amount of the deposit.-Held: that plainitiff was entitled to recover from defendant the amount of the deficiency and expences only, and not, in addition to this, the amount of the deposit.–Per Curiam, Had the deposit been paid, and the bargain completed, the deposit would have gone in part payment of the purchase money : and, in the case of the non-completion of the bargain, if the deficiericy and expences had together been less than the deposit, the purchaser would have been entitled to the whole deposit, but nothing more.

Commission v Estonia; ECH 10 May 2012

References: [2012] EUECJ C-39/10, C-39/10
Links: Bailii
Coram: J-C Bonichot, P
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Freedom of movement for workers – Income tax – Allowance – Retirement pensions – Effect on small pensions – Discrimination between resident and non-resident taxpayers
This case cites:

  • See Also – Commission -v- Estonia ECJ (Bailii, [2010] EUECJ C-39/10, C-39/10)
    Order – Interventions . .
  • Opinion – Commission -v- Estonia ECJ (C-39/10, Bailii, [2011] EUECJ C-39/10)
    ECJ Opinion – Failure to fulfill obligations – Objection of inadmissibility – Interveners – Freedom of movement for workers – Article 45 TFEU – Article 28 of the EEA Agreement – Tax legislation – Income tax – . .

Sharp v Hainsworthy; 12 Nov 1862

References: [1862] EngR 1027, (1862) 3 B & S 139, (1862) 122 ER 53
Links: Commonlii
Master and servant, Wages. Deduction.-Upon a complaint under stat. 20 G. 2, c. 19, s. 1, by an artificer against his master for nonpayment of wages, the justices may make a deduction from the wages on the ground that the work was badly done.

Interfish Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 16 Jul 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 336 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Birss J
UTTC Corporation tax – deductibility of expenditure – sponsorship payments intended to improve fortunes of sports club – expectation of trade benefits principally as a result of recognition by others involved with the club of taxpayer’s benefaction – dual purpose of benefiting sports club and taxpayer’s trade – payments not deductible – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, s 74 – appeal dismissed
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 74
This case cites:

  • At FTTTx – Interfish Ltd -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx (Bailii, [2010] UKFTT 219 (TC))
    FTTTx Corporation tax – deductibility of expenditure – sponsorship payments intended to improve fortunes of sports club – expectation of trade benefits principally as a result of recognition by others involved . .
  • Appeal from – Interfish Ltd -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx (Bailii, [2012] UKFTT 599 (TC))
    FTTTx Corporation tax – deductibility of expenditure – sponsorship payments intended to improve fortunes of sports club – expectation of trade benefits principally as a result of recognition by others involved . .

This case is cited by:

  • Appeal from – Interfish Ltd -v- HM Revenue and Customs CA (Bailii, [2014] EWCA Civ 876)
    The company sought to set payments it had made to support a local rugby club off against its income for Corporation Tax purposes.
    Held: The appeal failed. The requirement was that the expenditure be wholly necessarily and exclusively for the . .

Re Swissair; Chd 6 Aug 2009

References: [2009] EWHC 2099 (Ch)
Links: Bailii
Coram: David Richards J
The main company had been liquidated in Switzerland, The liquidators of the assets in the UK sought directions as to the payment of the proceeds of the liquidation in view of the fact that many creditors here had sought payment in Switzerland.
Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986

Gregory v The Duke of Brunswick and Hen Wellington Vallance; 26 Mar 1849

References: [1849] EngR 422, (1849) 2 HLC 415, (1849) 9 ER 1149
Links: Commonlii
Were it appeared to the House that a mistake, committed by an officer of the Court below, in entering the judgment, of that Court, was made the ground of a writ of error, the arguments on the writ of error brought on such judgment were stopped, and the case was ordered to stand over, to allow the parties to apply to the Court below to amend the error.
The House made this order, after referring to the report of the opinions of the Judges of the Court below, as stated in the printed reports of the decisions of that court.
Last Update: 17-Feb-16 Ref: 298727

The Duke of Brunswick v Slowman And Others; 24 Nov 1849

References: [1849] EngR 1084, (1849) 8 CB 617, (1849) 137 ER 649
Links: Commonlii
The want of a date in the jurat of an affidavit, is not cured by a reference to it in another affidavit as ‘an affidavit of A B sworn on such a day.’ — Semble, that this court will not give costs where a rule is discharged solely on the ground that the aaffidavit on which it is founded has a defective jurat.

The Duke of Brunswick v The Duke of Cambridge; 13 Dec 1849

References: [1849] EngR 1197, (1849) 12 Beav 279, (1849) 50 ER 1068
Links: Commonlii
Exceptions for insufficiency will be overruled, if they vary, in a material particular, from the form of the interrogatory, as where the interrogatory is in the present tense and the exception is in the past.
An interrogatory asked whether certain sums had not come to the Defendant’s hands, and whether he had not applied ‘the same.’ The Defendant denied that any sums had come to his hands, but did not answer the remainder. Held, that the answer was sufficient.
An interrogatory asked whether the Defendant had not had communication with A. B and C. D. and other persons. The answer admitted communications with A B but denied any with any other persons, omitting the name of C. D. Held, that being specially interrogated as to C. D., the general answer was insufficient.

Charles Duke of Brunswick v The King of Hanover; 13 Jan 1844

References: [1844] EngR 95, (1843-1844) 6 Beav 1, (1844) 49 ER 724
Links: Commonlii
Discussion of the question whether a sovereign prince is liable to the jurisdiction of the Courts of a foreign country, in which he happens to he resident, and as to the liability to suit of one who unites in himself the characters both of an independent foreign sovereign and a subject.
A sovereign prince, resident in the dominions of another, is ordimarily exempt from the jurisdiction of the Courts there.
A foreign sovereign may sue in this country, both at law and in equity; and, if he sues in equity, he submits himself to the jurisdiction, and a cross-bill may be filed against him, which he must answer on oath ; but a foreign sovereign does not, by filing a bill in Chancery against A., making himself liable to be sued in that Court for an independent matter by B.
The King of Hanover, after his accession, renewed his oath of allegiance, to the Queen of England, and claimed the rights of an English peer. Held, that he was exempt from the jurisdiction of the English Courts for acts done by him as a soveregn prince, but was liable to be sued in those Courts in respect of matters done by him as a asubject. Held, also, that the sovereign character prevailed where the acts were done abroad, and also where it was doubtful in which of the two characters they had been done.
A foreign sovereign prince, who was also an English peer, was made a Defendant to a suit and served with a letter missive. The Lord Chancellor refused to recall it.
The Defendant then appeared, and filed a demurrer for want of jurisdiction. Held, first, that the Lord Chancellor had not decided that the Defendant was liable to the jurisdiction of the Court ; and, secondly, that the Defendant had not, by appearing, waived any defence to the bill.
This case is cited by:

  • Appeal from – Duke of Brunswick -v- The King of Hanover HL ((1848) 2 HL Cas 1, (1844) 6 Beav 1, [1848] EngR 794, Commonlii, (1848) 2 HLC 1, (1848) 9 ER 993)
    The Duke claimed that the King of Hanover had been involved in the removal of the Duke from his position as reigning Duke and in the maladministration of his estates.
    Held: ‘A foreign Sovereign, coming into this country cannot be made . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 17-Feb-16 Ref: 304687

Gregory v Duke Of Brunswick and Vallance; 21 Jun 1843

References: [1843] EngR 859, (1843) 1 Car & K 24, (1843) 174 ER 696
Links: Commonlii
The public, who go to a theatre, have a right to express thelr free and unbiassed opinions of the merits of the performers who appear upon the stage, but parties have no right to go to a theatre, by a preconcerted plan to make such a noise that an actor, without any judgment being formed of his performance, should be driven from the stage, and if two persons are shewn to have laid a preconcerted plan to deprive a person who comes out as an actor of the benefits which he expected to result from his appearance on the stage, they are liable in an action for a conspiracy. In an action for a, conspiracy to hiss an actor, the defendants cannot, under the genera1 issue, give in evidence libels published by the plaintiff, with a view of shewing that the plaintiff was hissed on account of those libels, and not by reason of any conspiracy of the defendants. In an action for a conspiracy, the defendants pleaded the general issue, arid also a special plea of justification, which plea was demurred to, and held bad by the Court, who gave judgment on it for the plaintiff and the award of venire was as well to try the issue joined ‘as, to inquire what damages the said plaintiff hath sustained on occasion of the premises whereof the Court hath given judgment for the said plaintiff’ Held, that on the trial at Nisi Prius, the defendant’s counsel, in addressing the jury, had a right to refer to the allegatlons contained in the special plea, and to comment upon them.
Last Update: 17-Feb-16 Ref: 306553

Construccion, Promociones E Instalaciones -V- OHMI – Copisa Proyectos Y Mantenimientos Industriales: ECFI 4 Jul 2014

References: T-345/13, [2014] EUECJ T-345/13, ECLI: EU: T: 2014:614
Links: Bailii
Coram: M. Prek (Rapporteur), P
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark ICC COPISA INDUSTRIAL – Spanish figurative mark earlier Cpi construccion promociones e instalaciones, and its trade name prior Construccion, Promotions e Instalaciones, SA-CPI – Relative grounds for refusal – Article 8 , paragraph 1 b), and paragraph 4 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – No evidence of genuine use of the earlier mark – No evidence of use in the course of trade name previous trade

As Flylal-Lithuanian Airlines v VAS ‘Starptautiska lidosta ‘Riga” and AS ‘Air Baltic Corporation’: ECJ 3 Jul 2014

References: C-302/13, [2014] EUECJ C-302/13_O, ECLI: EU: C: 2014:2046, [2014] EUECJ C-302/13
Links: Bailii, Bailii
Coram: Mme Juliane Kokott AG
ECJ Opinion – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Scope – Concept of civil and commercial matters – Compensation for breach of EU competition law – Recognition of provisional and protective measures – Public Order
Statutes: Regulation (EC) No 44/2001

Studdy v Sanders And Another; 2 Jun 1826

References: [1826] EngR 977, (1826) 5 B & C 628, (1826) 108 ER 234
Links: Commonlii
Where a contract was made between A. and B., whereby A., having a quantity of apples, agreed to sell his cyder to B. at a certain price per hogshead, to be delivered at T. at a future time, and to lend such pipes as he had for the use of the cyder, to be manufactured on his, A.’s premises, and to be paid for before it was removed, and A, in pursuance, delivered a quantity of juice expressed from’the apples to a servant hired by B. to manufacture the cyder on A.’s premises, and before the cyder was completely manufactured, it was seized by the Excise-officers, because the place where it was deposited had not been entered, and was condemned in the Exchequer as B.’s property, together with the casks, and in assumpsit for goods sold and delivered, brought by A. against B., it appeared that the word cyder, at the place where the contract was made, meant the juice of the apples as soon as it was expressed : it was thereupon held, that the contract must be construed to have been for the sale of cyder in that sense of the word, and that the property passed to B. as soon as the apple juice was delivered to his servant. Secondly, that it was B.’s duty to enter t,he premises, and as through his default it became impossible for A. to deliver the goods at T., the failure to do so did not bar his action. Thirdly, that A. might recover in this action the price of the casks lent to the defendant.
This case cites:

Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Eurocell Building Plastics Ltdand Another: CA 24 Jun 2005

References: [2005] EWCA Civ 761
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mummery, Jacob, Neuberger LJJ
Appeal against finding of non-infringement of patent.
This case cites:

Khawaja v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 12 Aug 2013

References: [2013] UKUT 353 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – PENALTY – assessment based on suppressed takings of restaurant business – negligent return – standard of proof in penalty proceedings – Article 6, European Convention on Human Rights – whether appellant’s article 6 right to a public hearing within a reasonable time had been contravened – relevant period for assessing delay – whether delay had prejudiced appellant – whether First-tier Tribunal has power to reduce penalty on account of unreasonable delay – TMA 1970, s 100B – whether appellant had discharged the evidential burden to rebut the presumption under TMA, s 101 that the tax assessment was correct – whether on the evidence the First-tier Tribunal’s findings as to suppressed takings were capable of being upset – determination of amount of penalty
This case cites:

  • Appeal from – Khawaja -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx (Bailii, [2012] UKFTT 183 (TC))
    FTTTx Income Tax – Penalties – Suppressed takings from Restaurant business reflected in concealed director’s remuneration – Negligent submission of incorrect Tax Returns – Abatement of penalty. . .
  • At FTTTx – Revenue and Customs -v- Khawaja ChD (Bailii, [2008] EWHC 1687 (Ch), Times)
    The court considered the standard of proof required before the Commissioners when considering the application of penalties.
    Held: When challenging the assessment of a penalty on a taxpayer, there was no reason why the normal civil standard of . .

Laszkiewicz v OHMI – Capital Safety Group Emea (Protekt): ECFI 15 Jul 2014

References: T-576/12, [2014] EUECJ T-576/12
Links: Bailii
ECFI Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark PROTEKT – Community word marks PROTECTA – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207 / 2009 – Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009
Statutes: Regulation No 207/2009 75

Millington v Fox; 23 Jan 1938

References: (1838) 40 ER 956, [1838] EngR 377, (1838) 3 My & Cr 338
Links: Commonlii
To establish passing off, it was no longer necessary to establish fraud in the use of a trading name, and it became dependent upon proof, inter alia, of misrepresentation.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Inter Lotto (Uk) Limited -v- Camelot Group Plc ChD ([2003] EWHC 1256 (Ch), Bailii)
    The claimant asserted that the defendant had infringed its goodwill in the name ‘Hot Picks’ the defendant argued that it was licensed to use the mark by the person who applied for its registration as a trade mark, and that the claim in passing off . .

Millward v Littlewood; 6 Nov 1850

References: [1850] EngR 814, (1850) 5 Exch 775, (1850) 155 ER 339
Links: Commonlii
A declaration alleged, that in consideration that the plaintiff, at the defendant’s request, promised to marry him, he promised to marry her. Averments that the plaintiff hath continued and still is unmarried, and, until the discovery of the defendant’s marriage, was ready and willing to marry him, that, after the defendant’s promise the plaintiff discovered that the defendant, at the time of his promise, was, and still is, married, and that the plaintiff had not, at the time of the defendant’s promisee, any notice of the defendant’s then marriage. Held, on motion in arrest of judgment, that the declaration was good, and that the plaintiff’s remaining unmarried was a sufficient consideration to support the defendant’s promise – Quaere, whether a promise by a married man to marry another woman after his wife’s death is void.

Pierhead Purchasing Ltd v Revenue and Customs; Excs 24 Jan 2007

References: [2007] UKVAT-Excise E01014
Links: Bailii
UTTC PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal – Agreement – Whether agreement which was not under section 85 or Rule 17 concluded appeal – Customs mistakenly purported to carry out statutory re-review – Offer of restoration for fee accepted – Terms not certain – No promise or consideration provided by Appellant – Held no contract – Appeal against original review not concluded – VAT Act 1994 s.85 – FA 1994 s.7(4), 15(4) and 16(4)

Berrysford v Millward; 18 Jul 1740

References: [1740] EngR 162, (1740) Barn C 101, (1740) 27 ER 571
Links: Commonlii
Where a Person shall lose the Benefit of a Mortgage, by reason of his being present at the Time a Settlement was made of the Estate, and his not disclosing it.

Regina v Regan; 14 Feb 2002

References: 2002 SCC 12, [2002] 1 SCR 297, 201 NSR (2d) 63, 209 DLR (4th) 41, 161 CCC (3d) 97, 49 CR (5th) 1
Links: Canlii
Coram: McLachlin CJ and L’Heureux-Dube, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ.
Canlii Supreme Court of Canada – Criminal law – Remedies – Abuse of process – Stay of proceedings – Accused charged with sex-related offences – Police identifying accused as suspect before charges laid – Crown engaging in ‘judge shopping’ and conducting pre-charge interviews of complainants – Trial judge staying some of charges – Court of Appeal overturning stay – Whether conduct of Crown and police amounted to abuse of process – Whether partial stay of proceedings warranted – Whether Court of Appeal entitled to interfere with trial judge’s decision to grant partial stay.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Maxwell, Regina -v- SC (Bailii, [2010] UKSC 48, [2011] 2 Cr App Rep 31, [2011] 1 WLR 1837, SC Summary, UKSC 2010/0003, SC)
    The defendant had had his conviction for murder set aside after a finding of gross prosecutorial misconduct by the police. The Court was now asked as to the propriety of the order for a retrial. The police involved in the case had misled the CPS, . .

Crookes v Wikimedia Foundation Inc; 27 Oct 2008

References: 2008 BCSC 1424
Links: Canlii
Coram: Kelleher J
(Supreme Court of British Columbia) The claimant sought damages in defamation from an article published by the defendant on the internet. The court was asked whether the contents of an article to which a hyper-link was provided should be taken into account in identifying the claimant.
Held: Whilst hyperlinking could sometimes found an action for defamation, in this case, the publcation of the link did not amount to publcation in defamation.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Islam Expo Ltd -v- The Spectator (1828) Ltd and Another QBD (Bailii, [2010] EWHC 2011 (QB))
    The claimant sought damages in defamation against the defendant in respect of its web-site. It said that the use of hyperlinks to third party sites was sufficient to identify the claimant and associate it with the allegations made.
    Held: The . .

Revenue and Customs v Murray Group Holdings Ltd and Others; UTTC 8 Jul 2014

References: [2014] UKUT 292 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income Tax and NIC – emoluments/earnings – tax avoidance scheme – remuneration trust – employees’ individual sub-trusts – ‘protectors’ – (1) whether payments into sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (2) whether loans from sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (3) ‘Ramsay’ principle – whether FTT erred in law; – No – Case remitted to FTT to determine certain matters, but otherwise appeal dismissed.

Daly v Revenue and Customs; Excs 8 Dec 2005

References: [2005] UKVAT-Excise E00930
Links: Bailii
Excs EXCISE DUTY – Restoration of seized excise goods and Ford transit van–large quantity of hand rolling tobacco imported – contradictory accounts of the Appellant and his brother about the funding arrangements for the purchase of tobacco – Respondents correct in giving weight to these facts – tribunal’s findings of fact support the Respondents conclusion that tobacco imported for commercial purpose – was the non-restoration of transit van proportionate to the Appellant’s contravention – yes – did the non-restoration create exceptional hardship – no – was the decision not to restore the excise goods and the Ford transit van reasonable – yes – Appeal dismissed.

Bates v Batey and Ld: 1913

References: [1913] 3 KB 351
Coram: Horridge J
The defendants, who manufactured ginger beer, were held not liable to a consumer (who had purchased from a retailer one of their bottles) for injury occasioned by the bottle bursting as the result of a defect of which the defendants did not know, but which by the exercise of reasonable care they could have discovered.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Donoghue (or McAlister) -v- Stevenson HL ([1932] AC 562, [1932] SC (HL) 31, [1932] ScLT 317, Hamlyn, [1932] All ER Rep 1, (1932) 101 LJPC 119, (1932) 147 LT 281, [1932] SLT 317, (1932) 48 TLR 494, (1932) 37 Com Cas 350, Bailii, [1932] UKHL 100, [1932] Sol Jo 396, [1932] WN 139, [1932] SC 31, (1933) 4 DLR 337, 533 CA 47)
    The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .

Regina v Edwards Books and Art Ltd; 18 Dec 1986

References: [1986] 2 SCR 713, (1986) 35 DLR (4th) 1, 30 CCC (3d) 385, 86 CLLC 14, 55 CR (3d) 193
Links: Canlii
Coram: Dickson CJ
Supreme Court of Canada – the limitation of the protected right must be one that ‘it was reasonable for the legislature to impose’, and that the courts were ‘not called upon to substitute judicial opinions for legislative ones as to the place at which to draw a precise line’.
‘a business corporation cannot possess religious beliefs’. And
‘In interpreting and applying the Charter I believe that the courts must be cautious to ensure that it does not simply become an instrument of better situated individuals to roll back legislation which has as its object the improvement of the condition of less advantaged persons’
legislative drafting is a difficult art and Parliament cannot be held to a standard of perfection.
Statutes: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to life, liberty and security
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bank Mellat -v- Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC (Bailii Summary, WLRD, Bailii, [2013] UKSC 39, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep FC 580, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] HRLR 30, [2013] 4 All ER 533, [2013] WLR(D) 244, WLRD, UKSC 2011/0040, SC Sumary, SC)
    The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .

Illinois State Board Of Elections v Socialist Workers Party Et Al; 22 Feb 1979

References: [1979] USSC 27
Links: Worldlii
Coram: Marshall J
Ratio United States Supreme Court – Under the Illinois Election Code, new political parties and independent candidates must obtain the signatures of 25,000 qualified voters in order to appear on the ballot in statewide elections. However, the minimum number of signatures required in elections for offices of political subdivisions of the State is 5% of the number of persons who voted at the previous election for such offices. Application of these provisions to a special mayoral election in Chicago produced the result that a new party or independent candidate needed substantially more signatures than would be needed for ballot access in a statewide election. In actions by appellees, an independent candidate, two new political parties, and certain voters challenging this discrepancy on equal protection grounds, the District Court enjoined enforcement of the 5% provision insofar as it mandated more than 25,000 signatures, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Held: 1. This Court’s summary affirmance in Jackson v. Ogilvie, 403 U.S. 925, 91 S.Ct. 2247, 29 L.Ed.2d 705, of the District Court’s decision in 325 F.Supp. 864, upholding Illinois’ 5% signature requirement is not dispositive of the equal protection question presented here. The precedential effect of a summary affirmance can extend no further than ‘the precise issues presented and necessarily decided by those actions,’ Mandel v. Bradley, [1977] USSC 112; 432 U.S. 173, 176[1977] USSC 112; , 97 S.Ct. 2238, 2240[1977] USSC 112; , 53 L.Ed.2d 199. In contrast to this case, the challenge in Jackson involved only the discrepancy between the 5% requirement and the less stringent requirements for candidates of established political parties. The issue presented here was not referred to by the Jackson District Court, and was mentioned only in passing in the jurisdictional statement subsequently filed with this Court. Thus, the issue was not adequately presented to, or decided by, this Court in its summary affirmance.
2. The Illinois Election Code, insofar as it requires independent candidates and new political parties to obtain more than 25,000 signatures in Chicago violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 183-187. (a) When such fundamental rights as the freedom to associate as a political party and the right to cast votes effectively are at stake, a State must establish that its regulation of ballot access is necessary to serve a compelling interest.
(b) ‘[E]ven when pursuing a legitimate interest, a State may not choose means that unnecessarily restrict constitutionally protected liberty,’ Kusper v. Pontikes, [1973] USSC 235; 414 U.S. 51, 59[1973] USSC 235; , 94 S.Ct. 303, 308[1973] USSC 235; , 38 L.Ed.2d 260, and States must adopt the least drastic means to achieve their ends. This requirement is particularly important where restrictions on access to the ballot are involved. Since the State has determined that a smaller number of signatures in a larger political unit adequately serves its interest in regulating the number of candidates on the ballot, the signature requirements for independent candidates and political parties seeking offices in Chicago are clearly not the least restrictive means of achieving the same objective. Appellant State Board of Elections has advanced no reason, much less a compelling one, why the State needs a more stringent requirement for elections in Chicago than for statewide elections.
(c) Prior invalidation of Illinois’ rules regarding geographic distribution of signatures tied the requirements for both city and state candidates solely to a population standard. However, while this may explain the anomaly at issue here, it does not justify it. Historical accident, without more, cannot constitute a compelling state interest.
3. The Court of Appeals properly dismissed as moot appellant’s claim that the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners lacked authority to conclude a settlement agreement with respect to the unresolved issue whether the 5% signature requirement coupled with the filing deadline impermissibly burdened First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Appellant has presented no evidence creating a reasonable expectation that the Chicago Board will repeat its purportedly unauthorized actions in subsequent elections.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bank Mellat -v- Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC (Bailii Summary, WLRD, Bailii, [2013] UKSC 39, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep FC 580, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] HRLR 30, [2013] 4 All ER 533, [2013] WLR(D) 244, WLRD, UKSC 2011/0040, SC Sumary, SC)
    The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 16-May-16
Ref: 535120

Alberta v Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony; 24 Jul 2009

References: 9 Alta LR (5th) 1, 310 DLR (4th) 193, 2009 SCC 37 (CanLII)
Links: Canlii
Coram: McLachlin CJ and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Rothstein J
Canlii Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Freedom of religion – New regulation requiring photo for all Alberta driver’s licences – Members of Hutterian Brethren sincerely believing that Second Commandment prohibits them from having their photograph willingly taken – Whether regulation infringed freedom of religion – If so, whether infringement justified – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 2(a) – Operator Licensing and Vehicle Control Regulation, Alta. Reg. 320/2002, s. 14(1)(b) (am. Alta. Reg. 137/2003, s. 3).
Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Right to equality – Discrimination based on religion – New regulation requiring photo for all Alberta driver’s licences – Members of Hutterian Brethren sincerely believing that Second Commandment prohibits them from having their photograph willingly taken – Whether regulation infringed right to equality – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 15 – Operator Licensing and Vehicle Control Regulation, Alta. Reg. 320/2002, s. 14(1)(b) (am. Alta. Reg. 137/2003, s. 3).
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bank Mellat -v- Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC (Bailii Summary, WLRD, Bailii, [2013] UKSC 39, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep FC 580, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] HRLR 30, [2013] 4 All ER 533, [2013] WLR(D) 244, WLRD, UKSC 2011/0040, SC Sumary, SC)
    The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .

Lavigne v Ontario Public Service Employees Union; 27 Jun 1991

References: [1991] 2 SCR 211, 1991 CanLII 68 (SCC)
Links: Canlii
Coram: Wilson, La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin JJ
Canlii Supreme Court of Canada – Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Application – Union entering into collective agreement with community college containing mandatory dues check-off clause – Employee objecting to expenditure of union dues on causes unrelated to collective bargaining – Whether Charter applies – Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 74, s. 53 – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 32(1).
Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Freedom of association – Union entering into collective agreement with community college containing mandatory dues check-off clause – Employee objecting to expenditure of union dues on causes unrelated to collective bargaining – Whether s. 2(d) of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms infringed – If so, whether infringement justifiable under s. 1 of Charter – Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 74, ss. 51, 52, 53.
Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Freedom of expression – Union entering into collective agreement with community college containing mandatory dues check-off clause – Employee objecting to expenditure of union dues on causes unrelated to collective bargaining – Whether s. 2(b) of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms infringed – If so, whether infringement justifiable under s. 1 of Charter – Colleges Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 74, ss. 51, 52, 53.
Wilson J observed: ‘The Oakes inquiry into ‘rational connection’ between objectives and means to attain them requires nothing more than showing that the legitimate and important goals of the legislature are logically furthered by the means government has chosen to adopt.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bank Mellat -v- Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC (Bailii Summary, WLRD, Bailii, [2013] UKSC 39, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep FC 580, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] HRLR 30, [2013] 4 All ER 533, [2013] WLR(D) 244, WLRD, UKSC 2011/0040, SC Sumary, SC)
    The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .

RJR-MacDonald Inc v Canada (Attorney General); 21 Sep 1995

References: [1995] 3 SCR 199, 1995 CanLII 64 (SCC), 127 DLR (4th) 1, 100 CCC (3d) 449, 62 CPR (3d) 417, 31 CRR (2d) 189
Links: Canlii
Coram: Lamer CJ and La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ
Supreme Court of Canada – Constitutional law — Division of powers — Charter of Rights — Freedom of expression — Commercial advertising — Cigarette advertising banned — Whether or not legislation validly enacted under criminal law power or under peace, order and good government clause — If so, whether or not Act’s provisions infringing s. 2(b) Charter right to freedom of expression — If so, whether or not infringements justifiable under s. 1 — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 2(b) –Constitution Act, 1867, Preamble, s. 91(27) — Tobacco Products Control Act, S.C. 1988, c. 20, ss. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bank Mellat -v- Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC (Bailii Summary, WLRD, Bailii, [2013] UKSC 39, [2013] Lloyd’s Rep FC 580, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] HRLR 30, [2013] 4 All ER 533, [2013] WLR(D) 244, WLRD, UKSC 2011/0040, SC Sumary, SC)
    The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .

The Duchess of Kingston’s Case; 1 Apr 1776

References: [1776] EngR 16, (1776) 1 Leach 146, (1776) 168 ER 175, [1775] EngR 54, (1775) Amb 756, (1775) 27 ER 487, (1776) 2 Smith’s LC, 13th ed 644
Links: Commonlii, Commonlii
On plea, sentence in ecclesiastical Court ex directo in a matter properly cognizable there, is conclusive evidence where the same matter comes into question collaterally in a court of law or equity.
A sentence of jactitation is not conclusive evidence against an indictment of bigamy, for its validity may be impeached, as having been obtained by fraud. A peeress convicted of clergyable felony shall be discharged without burning or imprisonment.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Prest -v- Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC (Bailii, [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] WLR(D) 237, [2013] 3 FCR 210, [2013] 4 All ER 673, [2013] Fam Law 953, [2013] 2 FLR 732, [2013] BCC 571, [2013] 2 AC 415, [2013] WTLR 1249, [2013] 3 WLR 1, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2013/0004, SC Summary, SC)
    In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .
  • Cited – Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd -v- Zodiac Seats UK Ltd SC (Bailii, [2013] UKSC 46, [2013] 3 WLR 299, [2014] 1 AC 160, [2013] WLR(D) 265, [2013] RPC 29, [2013] 4 All ER 715, Baili Summary, WLRD, UKSC 2010/0013, SC Summary, SC)
    Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding £49,000,000 for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had . .

Pepper v Whalley; 6 Nov 1835

References: [1835] EngR 947, (1835) 4 Ad & E 90, (1835) 111 ER 721
Links: Commonlii
Since the rule (Hil 4 W. 4) that the entry of proceedings on the record for trial, or on the judgment roll, shall be taken to be, and shall be, the first entry of the proceedings upon record, it is not necessary to enter upon the Nisi Prius record a plea in abatement and judgment of respondent ouster thereupon.

King And Another v Hoare; 25 Nov 1844

References: [1844] EngR 1042, (1844) 13 M & W 494, (1844) 153 ER 206
Links: Commonlii
A judgment (without satisfaction) recovered against one of two joint debtors is a bar to an action against the other: – Secus where the debt is joint and several. – And it is pleadable in bar, and not in abatement. – Such a plea eed not contain a verification by the record, or prayer of judgment.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd -v- Zodiac Seats UK Ltd SC (Bailii, [2013] UKSC 46, [2013] 3 WLR 299, [2014] 1 AC 160, [2013] WLR(D) 265, [2013] RPC 29, [2013] 4 All ER 715, Baili Summary, WLRD, UKSC 2010/0013, SC Summary, SC)
    Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding £49,000,000 for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had . .