Search Results for: Civil procedure Rules Part 36

Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992

No Judicial Review of Decisions of Private Body Despite the wide range of its powers, the disciplinary committee of the Jockey Club remains a domestic tribunal. Judicial review is not available to a member. The relationship is in contract between the club and its member. Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘No serious racecourse management, owner, … Continue reading Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992

Baiai and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 10 Apr 2006

The respondent brought in laws restricting marriages between persons subject to immigration control, requiring those seeking non Church of England marriages to first obtain a certificate from the defendant that the marriage was approved. The applicants said this was discriminatory and infringed their human rights. Held: Legislation which prevented marriages of convenience between aliens and … Continue reading Baiai and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 10 Apr 2006

Lloyd v John Lewis Partnership: CA 1 Jul 2001

The judge allowed the defendant’s submission of no case to answer without putting them to their election and again the claimant’s appeal succeeded. The trial judge had been persuaded that the rule in Alexander -v- Rayson had been altered by the Civil Procedure Rules ‘and that as a general rule a judge was not required … Continue reading Lloyd v John Lewis Partnership: CA 1 Jul 2001

Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Colin James Murray: QBD 15 Dec 1997

The defendant sought judicial review of his court-martial and of the confirming officers. He said the court should have heard that he committed the offence whist intixicated after taking an anti-malarial drug. The court dd not explain why it had found no causal connection beween the treatment and the offence. Held: There is no over-riding … Continue reading Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Colin James Murray: QBD 15 Dec 1997

Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011

The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return with her. Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The court had to consider the … Continue reading ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011

Wragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd: CA 1 May 2002

A claim was made against directors of a company involved in a takeover, for failure to make proper disclosure. The case involved also other issues. The defendants appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim. Held: The rules made specific reference to cases in areas of law involving developing jurisprudence. This was one such, … Continue reading Wragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd: CA 1 May 2002

SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Nov 2008

Immigration detention proper after prison release The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that he had unlawfully detained the applicant. The applicant had been detained on release from prison pending his return to Zimbabwe as recommended by the sentencing judge under section 6 of the 1971 Act. The court had found that the detention had … Continue reading SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Nov 2008

Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson: CA 27 Apr 1994

The deceased prisoner had hanged himself. He had been a known suicide risk, and his brother said that the authorities being so aware, the death resulted from their lack of care. The inquest heard in full the circumstannces leading up to the death, but the Coroner directed the jury not to return a verdict which … Continue reading Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson: CA 27 Apr 1994

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

Pitchmastic Plc v Birse Construction Ltd: QBD 8 Jun 2000

A party to litigation made an offer on the day before trial of settlement without prejudice save as to costs. At trial it made an open offer in similar terms which was rejected. After reading a draft unfavourable judgment, the party applied to be allowed to accept the offer, contending that such an offer was … Continue reading Pitchmastic Plc v Birse Construction Ltd: QBD 8 Jun 2000

Scammell and Others v Dicker: CA 21 Dec 2000

A part 36 offer can be withdrawn at any time before it is accepted or expires. The rules can not force an offer to be left open. Clear words would have been required within the rules to impose such an obligation. The actual words referred to offers ‘expressed’ to be open for 21 days, but … Continue reading Scammell and Others v Dicker: CA 21 Dec 2000

Sampla and Others v Rushmoor Borough Council and Another: TCC 22 Oct 2008

The rejection of a Part 36 offer does not render it incapable of later acceptance. Judges: Coulson J Citations: [2008] EWHC 2616 (TCC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil procedure Rules Part 36 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Gibbon v Manchester City Council, L G Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd, Reeves and another CA 25-Jun-2010 … Continue reading Sampla and Others v Rushmoor Borough Council and Another: TCC 22 Oct 2008

Hawley v Luminar Leisure Plc Ase Security Services Limited, Mann: CA 1 Feb 2006

The defendant had made a part 36 offer of settlement. The claimant did not accept it, but then tried to accept it after the trial had begun. Held: The risks of litigation were such that situations would often alter when a case came on for trial. It was implied in a part 36 offer that … Continue reading Hawley v Luminar Leisure Plc Ase Security Services Limited, Mann: CA 1 Feb 2006

Marsh v Frenchay NHS Trust: QBD 13 Mar 2001

The circumstances required to allow a person to withdraw money paid into court. The new rules created a flexibility unavailable under the old rules, and the case law associated with the old pre-Woolfe rules should not now determine how such applications are dealt with. Citations: Times 13-Mar-2001 Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules Part 36 Cited by: … Continue reading Marsh v Frenchay NHS Trust: QBD 13 Mar 2001

Gibbon v Manchester City Council, L G Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd, Reeves and another: CA 25 Jun 2010

A payment in had been made, and a counter offer made by the claimant. The original offer was increased but rejected. The counter-offer was not withdrawn, and was then accepted by the defendant. On receipt of the acceptance, the claimant purported to withdraw the counter offer. The judge had held that since the offer had … Continue reading Gibbon v Manchester City Council, L G Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd, Reeves and another: CA 25 Jun 2010

Fraser and others v Oystertec Plc and others: 3 Nov 2009

The court considered the meaning of ‘real’ prospects of success: ‘This does not mean that a party can successfully resist summary judgement by suggesting, like Mr Micawber, that something may turn up to save him, though he does not know what: see per Megarry V-C in Lady Anne Tennant v. Associated Newspapers Group Ltd [1979] … Continue reading Fraser and others v Oystertec Plc and others: 3 Nov 2009

Agodzo v Amegashitsie and Another: CA 20 May 1999

The judge had repeatedly adjourned a matter, directing that the parties should consider alternative dispute resolution. Since the first adjournment, the rules had been changed to allow a court to refer a case for such an arrangement. One party objected. Held: The new power could be exercised even in an existing case, and therefore the … Continue reading Agodzo v Amegashitsie and Another: CA 20 May 1999

Ali Reza-Delta Transport Co Ltd v United Arab Shipping Co Sag: CA 17 Jun 2003

The case had concluded. Offers of settlement had been made and the operative one included an offer on the interest payable. The court came to decide how the interest part of the offer was to be considered when assessing whether the judgment bettered the offer. It was noted that an offer on costs was to … Continue reading Ali Reza-Delta Transport Co Ltd v United Arab Shipping Co Sag: CA 17 Jun 2003

MRW Technologies v Cecil Holdings: 22 Jun 2001

The court heard an appeal against a Master’s order which had given the defendant permission under rule 36.6(5) to withdraw a Part 36 payment. Held: The same considerations apply to giving permission to withdraw money in court as to refusing permission to take it out. He inclined, following Marsh v. Frenchay Healthcare, to a more … Continue reading MRW Technologies v Cecil Holdings: 22 Jun 2001

McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd; Liam Clarke and and Andrew Neil (No 3): CA 12 Jun 2001

In defamation proceedings the defendant had invited one issue to be left to the jury. After losing the case, the defendant sought to appeal, arguing that the jury’s verdict was perverse. It was held that such an appeal amounted to an abuse of process, and if allowed, would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. … Continue reading McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd; Liam Clarke and and Andrew Neil (No 3): CA 12 Jun 2001

P and O Nedlloyd BV Aktieselskabet Dampskibsselskabet Svendborg v Utaniko Limited/East West Corporation (No 2): CA 19 Feb 2003

The claimants had made a Part 36 offer at first instance, but the matter was appealed. Having won at appeal they sought their costs on an indemnity basis of the appeal also. Held: If a party wished to protect itself by a Part 36 offer, it must be made both at first instance, and again … Continue reading P and O Nedlloyd BV Aktieselskabet Dampskibsselskabet Svendborg v Utaniko Limited/East West Corporation (No 2): CA 19 Feb 2003

Dar v Vonsak and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2012

The second defendant insurers appealed against a refusal by the court to allow it to withdraw an admission of liability in respect of a road traffic accident. The insurer said that the fact that it now saw the accident as fraudulent was an exceptional circumstance such as to allow the change. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Dar v Vonsak and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2012

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside the rule-maker’s power. Held: Even though the rule-making power is wide … Continue reading Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

Arrow Nominees Inc, Blackledge v Blackledge: ChD 2 Nov 1999

The applicants sought to strike out a claim under section 459. The two companies sold toiletries, the one as retail agent for the other. They disputed the relationship of the companies, and the use of a trading name. Documents were disclosed which appeared to be fabrications. Held: Where a party was in breach of court … Continue reading Arrow Nominees Inc, Blackledge v Blackledge: ChD 2 Nov 1999

PHI Group Ltd v Robert West Consulting Ltd: CA 10 May 2012

The court considered the application of rule 36, and the general rules as to costs, in relation to contribution proceedings between two parties both liable to a claimant for the same damage. Judges: Rix, Lloyd, Stanley Burnton LJJ Citations: [2012] EWCA Civ 588 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 36 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Civil … Continue reading PHI Group Ltd v Robert West Consulting Ltd: CA 10 May 2012

L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

The court was asked as to whether the on-line marketplace site defendant was liable for trade mark infringements by those advertising goods on the web-site. Held: The ECJ had not yet clarified the law on accessory liability in trade mark infringement, and the legislation remained unclear. Many of the direct sellers were held to be … Continue reading L’Oreal Sa and Others v Ebay International Ag and Others: ChD 22 May 2009

In re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy): FD 9 Dec 2008

The court considered the approval required for an order under the 2002 Act. Held: Welfare considerations were important but not paramount: ‘Given the permanent nature of the order under s.30, it seems reasonable that the court should adopt the ‘lifelong’ perspective of welfare in the Adoption and Children Act 2002 rather than the ‘minority’ perspective … Continue reading In re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy): FD 9 Dec 2008

Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given oral evidence, and the Registrar contended that any further appeal to the High court should … Continue reading Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Williams and Another v Hinton and Another: CA 14 Oct 2011

The appellant landlords appealed against the award of damages to their former tenants under the 1985 and 1972 Acts. The judge had proceeded to hear the case in their absence. Held: The court considered whether the appellants should instead have applied to have the judgments set aside. Judges: Moore-Bick, Gross LJJ Citations: [2011] EWCA Civ … Continue reading Williams and Another v Hinton and Another: CA 14 Oct 2011

Dunnett v Railtrack plc: CA 22 Feb 2002

The claimant had appealed a judgment against her. The court itself recommended that the parties use a method of alternate dispute resolution, to avoid the need for appeal. The defendant refused, not wishing to make any payment over and above the offer it had already made. Held: The defendant, otherwise successful on appeal, should be … Continue reading Dunnett v Railtrack plc: CA 22 Feb 2002

Solomon v Cromwell Group Plc: CA 19 Dec 2011

Common issues relating to the construction of Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules and its inter-action with Part 44, which contains general rules about costs, and Section II of Part 45, which contains rules about costs in certain kinds of road traffic accident claims. Judges: Pill, Moore-Bick, Aikens LJJ, Hurst SCJ Citations: [2011] EWCA … Continue reading Solomon v Cromwell Group Plc: CA 19 Dec 2011

Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others: QBD 26 May 2011

The defendant, having been sued for defamation by the claimant social worker pleaded justification and now sought third party disclosure against the hospital involved and against the police of documents which might support the stories it had published. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2011] EWHC 1364 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 31.17 Defamation, Civil … Continue reading Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others: QBD 26 May 2011

Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis) v Symes (A Bankrupt), Nussberger, Galerie Nefer Ag, Geoff Rowley: ChD 19 Aug 2005

The court allowed the appellant’s application to dispense with service of a claim form under the rule. The High Court became seised of the matter as at 19 January 2005. Further directions were given. Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith Citations: [2005] EWHC 1880 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 6.9 Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis) v Symes (A Bankrupt), Nussberger, Galerie Nefer Ag, Geoff Rowley: ChD 19 Aug 2005

Sunrule Ltd v Avinue Ltd: CA 26 Nov 2003

The defendant company sought to appear by a lay representative in a small claims track case in a county court. The court did not allow that, and the only representative was a director with limited English. The company appealed. Held: The normal rule as to representation of companies did not apply in cases allocated in … Continue reading Sunrule Ltd v Avinue Ltd: CA 26 Nov 2003

Revenue and Customs v Blue Sphere Global Ltd: CA 16 Dec 2010

The respondent having successfully defended the claim by the Revenue, now sought its costs on an indemnity basis having made a Part 36 offer. The Revenue responded that Part 36 did not apply to such claims. Judges: Carnwath , Moses LJJ Citations: [2010] EWCA Civ 1448, [2011] STC 547, [2011] BVC 30, [2011] STI 129 … Continue reading Revenue and Customs v Blue Sphere Global Ltd: CA 16 Dec 2010

Irwin and Another v Lynch and Another: CA 6 Oct 2010

The court considered an appeal against an order allowing an amendment outside the limitation period which would Judges: Lloyd, Wilson, Gross LJJ Citations: [2010] EWCA Civ 1153, [2011] Bus LR 504, [2011] BPIR 158, [2011] 1 WLR 1364 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 19.5, Limitation Act 1980 35 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited … Continue reading Irwin and Another v Lynch and Another: CA 6 Oct 2010

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No 2): ChD 24 Mar 1999

The claimant intended to seek recovery of a very substantial sum from the defendant. On learning of the defendant’s intention to sell its assets, it sought an order freezing them. Held: The court has the discretion to order a freezing of a defendant’s assets so as to prevent a transfer of those assets, even though … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No 2): ChD 24 Mar 1999

Mitchell and Others v James and Others: CA 12 Jul 2002

The defendant had made an offer including an offer that each party bear their own costs. A later action led to an order on better terms, and the claimant sought costs on an indemnity basis. Held: The rules were generally incompatible with offers which included costs. Their purpose was to direct costs after a case … Continue reading Mitchell and Others v James and Others: CA 12 Jul 2002

Parkinson Engineering Services Plc v Swan and Another: CA 21 Dec 2009

The court considered the scope of the court’s power to permit an amendment as regards parties outside a limitation period. The amendment in this instance was to substitute one claimant in place of another, namely the liquidator of a company instead of the company itself. Held: The court said of the new rule that: ‘The … Continue reading Parkinson Engineering Services Plc v Swan and Another: CA 21 Dec 2009

Osborn v The Parole Board: SC 9 Oct 2013

Three prisoners raised questions as to the circumstances in which the Parole Board is required to hold an oral hearing before making an adverse decision. One of the appeals (Osborn) concerned a determinate sentence prisoner who was released on licence but then recalled to custody. The other appeals (Booth and Reilly) were indeterminate sentence prisoners … Continue reading Osborn v The Parole Board: SC 9 Oct 2013

Orton v Collins and others: ChD 23 Apr 2007

The court considered how a Part 36 offer could be treated as accepted when it involved an agreement to transfer land, because the offer and its acceptance would not operate under the 1989 Act. Held: The agreement was enforceable. The Civil Procedure Rules, and the inherent jurisdiction of the court, allowed the creation of rights … Continue reading Orton v Collins and others: ChD 23 Apr 2007

A Practitioner v Customs and Excise: VDT 12 Dec 2003

PROCEDURE – hearing in public or private – VAT Tribunals Rules 1986 r 24(1) – assessment to recover allegedly over-claimed input tax – VATA 1994 ss 25, 26, VAT Regs 1995, reg 29, Sixth Directive art 18 – Human Rights Convention arts 6 and 8 – appellant a sole practitioner solicitor – application for hearing … Continue reading A Practitioner v Customs and Excise: VDT 12 Dec 2003

Framlington Group Ltd and Another v Barnetson: CA 24 May 2007

The defendant had sought an order requiring the claimant to remove from a witness statement elements referring to without prejudice discussions between the parties before litigation began. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The test for proximity of the negotiations to the litigation was not one of time, but of the closeness of the connection between … Continue reading Framlington Group Ltd and Another v Barnetson: CA 24 May 2007

Hardy and others v Pembrokeshire County Council and Another: CA 19 Jul 2006

The court considered the consequences of delay in applications for judicial review: ‘It is important that those parties, and indeed the public generally, should be able to proceed on the basis that the decision is valid and can be relied on, and that they can plan their lives and make personal and business decisions accordingly.’ … Continue reading Hardy and others v Pembrokeshire County Council and Another: CA 19 Jul 2006

Armchair Passenger Transport Ltd v Helical Bar Plc and Another: QBD 28 Feb 2003

Objection was made to the use of an expert witness who had formerly been a senior employee of the defendant. Held: The court set out criteria for testing the independence of a proposed expert witness: ‘i) It is always desirable that an expert should have no actual or apparent interest in the outcome of the … Continue reading Armchair Passenger Transport Ltd v Helical Bar Plc and Another: QBD 28 Feb 2003

Asia Pacific (Hk) Ltd. and others v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania): ComC 7 Nov 2005

Various cargo owners sought damages against the owners of the ship which had suffered an explosion with the loss of the cargo. The defendants asserted limitation. Some claimants had agreed an extension of time. Proceedings were then issued but served only eventually made with letters claimed to be equivocal. The question was what constituted service. … Continue reading Asia Pacific (Hk) Ltd. and others v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania): ComC 7 Nov 2005

P and O Nedloyd BV v Arab Metals Co and Others (‘The UB Tiger’): QBD 22 Jun 2005

The claimants sought to amend their particulars of claim to add a request for declarations with regard to a bill of lading and contract for carriage. Held: The application to amend was made more than six years after the cause of action accrued. It was in its nature a new claim. The additional possibility that … Continue reading P and O Nedloyd BV v Arab Metals Co and Others (‘The UB Tiger’): QBD 22 Jun 2005

MRA v Education Fellowship Ltd (Aka Rushden Academy): QBD 22 Apr 2022

The claimant claimed damages for historic child abuse by a teacher. On 19 January 2018 the Defendant offered to settle the claim by paying pounds 80,000 to the Claimant. On 2 April 2020 the Claimant accepted the offer. Because the period for accepting the offer under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules had expired … Continue reading MRA v Education Fellowship Ltd (Aka Rushden Academy): QBD 22 Apr 2022

HSS Hire Services Group Plc v BMB Builders Merchants Ltd and Another: CA 24 May 2005

The claimant licensee alleged that the license contract had been repudiated by the defendant licensor. The claimant succeeded at the trial of liability. The defendant had made a payment into court. The judge was told of the payment but not of the amount. He ordered the defendant to pay the costs of the liability trial … Continue reading HSS Hire Services Group Plc v BMB Builders Merchants Ltd and Another: CA 24 May 2005

Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation: CA 21 Mar 2002

The appellants appealed rejection of their application for judicial review. They were long term residents in a nursing home, which the respondents had decided to close. Held: Though the respondent did exercise some public functions, and its activities were in part paid for by public authorities, its activity of providing residential accommodation was not a … Continue reading Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation: CA 21 Mar 2002

Burchell v Bullard and others: CA 8 Apr 2005

Each side had succeeded in part on their claims and counterclaims, but the Respondent was andpound;5,000 out of pocket. Each party had been ordered to pay the costs of the other. Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had correctly recognised the difficulty of settling costs on an issue by issue basis, but should have considered … Continue reading Burchell v Bullard and others: CA 8 Apr 2005

Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd: ChD 20 Jan 2005

Tenants occupied land next to land which was to be developed after compulsory acquisition. The tenants and the landlords asserted a right of light over the land, and sought an injunction to prevent the development. The developer denied that any right of light had been acquired. The sky contour diagrams projected that the reductions in … Continue reading Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd: ChD 20 Jan 2005

E I Du Pont de Nemours and Co v S T Dupont (1): ChD 31 Oct 2002

Parties appealed from decisions of the Trade Marks Registry, and requested leave to introduce new evidence. Held: It was not agreed what rules applied on appeals under the 1938 Act. The Trade Mark system had public interest effects as well as private law. The rules governing appeals were therefore different from other regimes. The courts … Continue reading E I Du Pont de Nemours and Co v S T Dupont (1): ChD 31 Oct 2002

The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015

Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed. Held: The appeal failed (Lord Carnworth dissenting). That the exact situation might not have … Continue reading The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015

International Finance Corporation v Utexafrica SPRL: ComC 9 May 2001

The defendant applied to have set aside judgement entered against him in default of acknowledgment of service. Held: The authorities make it plain that, in order to satisfy the test for resisting a summary claim for for wrongful repudiation and/or breach of contract, a defendant has to demonstrate a defence which is not ‘false, fanciful … Continue reading International Finance Corporation v Utexafrica SPRL: ComC 9 May 2001

Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage: EAT 15 Oct 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Case ManagementIn considering whether or not to strike out or impose some lesser remedy the guiding consideration was the overriding objective which required justice to be done between the parties and that in particular the Tribunal should consider the magnitude of the default, whether the default was the responsibility of … Continue reading Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage: EAT 15 Oct 2003

E I Du Pont De Nemours and Company v S T Dupont; Du Pont Trade Mark: CA 10 Oct 2003

The court considered the circumstances under which a Hearing Officer’s decision could be reversed on appeal: ‘Those experienced in cases such as these, such as the Hearing Officer, would have known that the sort of evidence normally adduced on issues of distinctiveness included evidence from editors of trade and other magazines, evidence from buyers of … Continue reading E I Du Pont De Nemours and Company v S T Dupont; Du Pont Trade Mark: CA 10 Oct 2003

Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware): CA 26 Jun 2003

The claimant sought damages from his wife for personal injuries. He had been late beginning the claim, and it was served without particulars. He then failed to serve the particulars within 14 days. Totty and then Sayers had clarified the procedure for applications for extension of time. Held: The lower courts had failed to apply … Continue reading Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware): CA 26 Jun 2003

Reed and others v Oury and others: ChD 14 Mar 2002

The court should only exercise its power under the Civil Procedure Rules Part 3 to require a payment in only in limited circumstances, and not do so unless the party against whom the order was sought had acted in bad faith. Citations: [2002] EWHC 369 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Reed and others v Oury and others: ChD 14 Mar 2002

Factortame Ltd and others v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions): CA 28 Jan 2002

A part 36 offer had been made and declined. A significant amendment was made to the defendant’s pleadings on the basis of information which had always been available to him. The claimant then accepted the payment in. Should the claimant be regarded as the successful party for costs purposes. Held: Costs remain at the discretion … Continue reading Factortame Ltd and others v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions): CA 28 Jan 2002

Yenula Properties Ltd v Naidu: ChD 18 Jul 2001

Those issuing proceedings, anticipating no dispute as to the facts, and therefore using Part 8, should remain aware of the fact that, upon a dispute, and in the absence of a judge explicitly reallocating the claim to the multitrack, the court rules would do the same by default, with the further effect of disallowing any … Continue reading Yenula Properties Ltd v Naidu: ChD 18 Jul 2001

In re P (a Barrister) (Wasted Costs Order): CACD 23 Jul 2001

The procedure for making a wasted costs order was primarily compensatory, for costs wasted, rather than punitive for malpractice. The procedure is summary, and more in line with applications for costs made under the Civil Procedure Rules rule 44.3, rather than cases involving contempt of court. Usually there is no need for the judge in … Continue reading In re P (a Barrister) (Wasted Costs Order): CACD 23 Jul 2001

Biguzzi v Rank Leisure Plc: CA 26 Jul 1999

The court’s powers under the new CPR to deal with non-compliance with time limits, were wide enough to allow the court to allow re-instatement of an action previously struck out. The court could find alternative ways of dealing with any delay which could recompense the other party and seek to achieve justice as between the … Continue reading Biguzzi v Rank Leisure Plc: CA 26 Jul 1999

Stewart v Engel, BDO Stoy Hayward: CA 17 May 2000

A judge may reopen a case even after he has delivered his final judgment. A judge invited counsel to amend his pleading to incorporate an improvement, but in the face of his repeated failure to take up the invitation, entered final judgment against him. After advice from leading counsel, counsel requested the judgment be reopened … Continue reading Stewart v Engel, BDO Stoy Hayward: CA 17 May 2000

Safeway Stores Plc v Albert Tate: CA 18 Dec 2000

The respondent, a neighbour of the claimant, had fallen into dispute with the claimant, and issued a leaflet and signs alleging fraud. The claimants obtained an injunction, and in the absence of a substantive defence, judgement. He claimed that the judgement had deprived him of his right to a jury trial because the case involved … Continue reading Safeway Stores Plc v Albert Tate: CA 18 Dec 2000

Ford v GKR Construction and Others: CA 22 Oct 1999

Where a party wished to put the other at risk of payment of costs by the making of an offer, it was vital that the other party should be made properly aware of any information available to decide on the offer. Under the new regime, it was not appropriate to hold back such information, and … Continue reading Ford v GKR Construction and Others: CA 22 Oct 1999

All-In-One Design and Build Ltd v Motcomb Estates Ltd and Another: QBD 4 Apr 2000

The new civil procedure rules could impose sanctions or penalties on parties who failed to act in accordance with the spirit of the rules. The word ‘interest’ when allowing a judge to award interest by way of a penalty for the failure to accept a reasonable offer was not the same as the interest awarded … Continue reading All-In-One Design and Build Ltd v Motcomb Estates Ltd and Another: QBD 4 Apr 2000

Hildebrand v Hildebrand: 1992

The parties in ancillary relief proceedings sought orders for discovery. H had been to the wife’s flat surreptitiously on five occasions, and taken photocopies of so many documents obtained by him in the course of those visits (but returned after photocopying) that the photocopies themselves would now ‘fill a crate’, as the judge was told. … Continue reading Hildebrand v Hildebrand: 1992

Adam Phones Ltd v Goldschmidt and Others: CA 17 Aug 1999

Especially given the new emphasis on proportionality, a party who brought contempt proceedings, in the case of an inadvertent breach of an injunction, with a view solely to creating costs for the other party, could expect to face those costs themselves. It was unwise to execute a complex search and seize order on a Saturday … Continue reading Adam Phones Ltd v Goldschmidt and Others: CA 17 Aug 1999

In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal): CA 24 Oct 2002

After a judgment the parties sought to appeal. Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had ‘even if prompted only at a subconscious level, nevertheless deliberately engaged in alienation.’ Whilst some circumstances might require an application … Continue reading In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal): CA 24 Oct 2002

Law Society v Southall: CA 14 Dec 2001

In making a strike out decision under Part 24, the court of first instance was exercising a discretion which an appellate court should be reluctant to disturb. The court should only interfere in the case of a manifest error. The Law Society had intervened in the legal practice of the respondent’s late husband. The court … Continue reading Law Society v Southall: CA 14 Dec 2001

Fieldman and Another v Markovitch and Another: CA 4 Jul 2001

Where a judge, on an oral application, gave leave to appeal, but limited it to certain issues, it was not for the party on the later substantive appeal to try again to re-open issues which that judge had considered and excluded. Once leave to appeal had been granted after first written and then oral submissions, … Continue reading Fieldman and Another v Markovitch and Another: CA 4 Jul 2001

Republic of Uganda v Rift Valley Railways (Uganda) Ld and Others: ComC 11 Dec 2020

Application by RVR Investments (Pty) Limited and KU Railways Holdings Limited (the ‘Shareholders’) to be joined as parties to the proceedings under CPR rule 19.4 – or more correctly CPR rule 19.2. The underlying proceedings are a challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 brought by the Claimant, the Republic of Uganda (‘Uganda’) … Continue reading Republic of Uganda v Rift Valley Railways (Uganda) Ld and Others: ComC 11 Dec 2020

In re T (Children): SC 25 Jul 2012

The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house for legal costs. Despite being exonerated, the judge followed the normal practice of not awarding costs … Continue reading In re T (Children): SC 25 Jul 2012

Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co: HL 1983

A claimant must show good reason why service on a foreign defendant should be permitted. This head of jurisdiction was an exorbitant jurisdiction, one which, under general English conflict rules, an English court would not recognise as possessed by any foreign court in the absence of some treaty providing for such recognition. Comity dictated that … Continue reading Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co: HL 1983

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

Kershaw v Roberts (Representative of The Estate of Jones) and Another: ChD 10 Apr 2014

The parties were involved in litigation under the 1976 Act. The claiant now appealed against an order penalising him for failing to provide a costs budget. He said that it had not been a case management conference at which one was to be filed. Judges: Hickinbottom J Citations: [2014] EWHC 1037 (Ch), [2014] WLR(D) 168 … Continue reading Kershaw v Roberts (Representative of The Estate of Jones) and Another: ChD 10 Apr 2014

Societe Eram Shipping Company Limited and others v Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Compagnie Internationale de Navigation: HL 12 Jun 2003

The appeal concerned a final third party debt order (formerly a garnishee order). A judgment in France was registered here for enforcement. That jurisdiction was now challenged. Held: A third party debt order is a proprietary remedy operating by attachment against the property of the judgment debtor. The property so attached is the chose in … Continue reading Societe Eram Shipping Company Limited and others v Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Compagnie Internationale de Navigation: HL 12 Jun 2003

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Deripaska v Cherney: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court considered where the trial of the action should take place. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. Even though the rights sought to be protected were of a proprietary nature, where the rights could properly be said to have arisen under an English contract, the English court could use its discretion to assert jurisdiction. Though … Continue reading Deripaska v Cherney: CA 31 Jul 2009

Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others: SC 10 Apr 2019

The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. Held: The appeals failed save that the UK was not the proper jurisdiction to bring the case. The claim … Continue reading Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others: SC 10 Apr 2019

Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd: TCC 8 Feb 2007

Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction in a manner which is obviously consonant with the intentions of those who drafted … Continue reading Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd: TCC 8 Feb 2007

Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset: HL 11 Mar 2004

The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury. Held: The jury should indeed have been given opportunity to explain their verdict: ‘By … Continue reading Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset: HL 11 Mar 2004

The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips: ChD 21 Aug 2014

The bank had brought possession proceedings against the defendant under two legal charges securing personal guarantees. The proceedings had been abandoned, but the court now was asked whether costs for the defendant should be on the standard or indemnity basis. The defendant argued that the proceedings had been brought for a collateral purpose and were … Continue reading The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips: ChD 21 Aug 2014

Gentry v Miller and Another: CA 9 Mar 2016

This appeal raises the question of how the court should approach the grant of relief from sanctions in a case where the defaulting party has delayed in applying for relief but is able to point to evidence that enables it to allege that the claim is a fraudulent one. Lewison, Beatson, Vos LJJ [2016] EWCA … Continue reading Gentry v Miller and Another: CA 9 Mar 2016