Click the case name for better results:

Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) (Rogan): CANI 2001

The court discussed the need to take notes of meetings in chambers between the judge and counsel. The court set out four principles to be applied: ‘1. There should be freedom of access for counsel to judges, but that does not mean freedom to discuss matters which can perfectly well be discussed in open court. … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) (Rogan): CANI 2001

Westminster City Council v O’Reilly and others: CA 1 Jul 2003

The defendant sought to appeal against a decision of the High Court on a case stated by the Magistrates. Held: A decision by the High Court on an appeal by way of case stated from the Magistrates was final, and no further appeal lay to the Court of Appeal. The Order did not avoid the … Continue reading Westminster City Council v O’Reilly and others: CA 1 Jul 2003

Mercury Communications Ltd v Scott-Garner: CA 1984

To count as a trade dispute, the dispute must ‘relate wholly or mainly’ to terms and conditions of employment and must not merely be ‘connected’ with them. The application of this test requires the court: ‘to consider not merely the occasion which caused the dispute to break out but also the reason why there was … Continue reading Mercury Communications Ltd v Scott-Garner: CA 1984

In re G (a Child) (Contempt: Committal): CA 10 Apr 2003

The appellant had been made subject to a suspended committal to prison. He was involved with children proceedings, and had published details on the Internet which would make the social worker traceable. Held: Where a contempt was not committed in the face of the court or was not a disobedience of a court order, only … Continue reading In re G (a Child) (Contempt: Committal): CA 10 Apr 2003

Evolution (Shinfield) Llp v British Telecommunications Plc [2019] UkUT 127 (LC): UTLC 15 Apr 2019

Electronic Communications Code – Removal of Apparatus – whether neighbouring landowner has right to require removal of electronic communications apparatus from route of proposed new access – paras 38, 40, Sch.3A, Communications Act 2003 – reference dismissed Citations: [2019] UKUT 127 (LC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Land, Utilities Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Evolution (Shinfield) Llp v British Telecommunications Plc [2019] UkUT 127 (LC): UTLC 15 Apr 2019

Regina v Director General of Telecommunications, Ex P Cellcom Ltd and others: QBD 7 Dec 1998

The Director General of Telecommunications can quite properly use his powers and discretion to ensure competition in telecommunications by the granting and withholding of licences. He may take account of economic factors in making such a decision. Section 3 draws a distinction between ‘means’ (namely how the demand is to be met) and ‘ends’ (the … Continue reading Regina v Director General of Telecommunications, Ex P Cellcom Ltd and others: QBD 7 Dec 1998

EE Ltd and Another v Affinity Water Ltd (Electronic Communications Code – New Agreement or Modification – Water Tower – Consideration and Compensation): UTLC 17 Jan 2022

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS CODE – NEW AGREEMENT OR MODIFICATION – water tower – consideration and compensation – assumption of vacant possession – relative merits of market transactions and Tribunal decisions as comparables – recovery of professional fees incurred before order conferring Code right – paras 24, 34, Schedule 3A, Communications Act 2003 Citations: [2022] UKUT 8 … Continue reading EE Ltd and Another v Affinity Water Ltd (Electronic Communications Code – New Agreement or Modification – Water Tower – Consideration and Compensation): UTLC 17 Jan 2022

Office of Communications (Decision Notice): ICO 22 Jul 2009

The complainant requested statistics which formed the basis for a report produced by OFCOM. The information was withheld under section 44 of the Act (prohibitions on disclosure). OFCOM stated that the relevant statutory prohibition was section 393 of the Communications Act 2003. The Commissioner has considered the complaint and is satisfied that the requested information … Continue reading Office of Communications (Decision Notice): ICO 22 Jul 2009

Confetti Records (A Firm), Fundamental Records, Andrew Alcee v Warner Music UK Ltd (Trading As East West Records): ChD 23 May 2003

An agreement was made for the assignment of the copyright in a music track, but it remained ‘subject to contract’. The assignor later sought to resile from the assignment. Held: It is standard practice in the music licensing business for a licensee and a licensor to enter into a deal memo followed by a long … Continue reading Confetti Records (A Firm), Fundamental Records, Andrew Alcee v Warner Music UK Ltd (Trading As East West Records): ChD 23 May 2003

Office of Communications (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Dec 2009

The complainant requested a copy of ‘the IPCC complaint referred to in [Ofcom’s] Broadcast Bulletin Issue 114 of 21 July 2008. The public authority initially refused the request under the exemption provided by section 44 of the Act, that disclosure of the information was prohibited under any other enactment. Ofcom cited the prohibition on disclosure … Continue reading Office of Communications (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Dec 2009

PNC Telecom plc v Thomas: 2003

A letter sent by fax constituted a validly ‘deposited’ notice to convene an extraordinary general meeting under section 368 of the Companies Act 1985. The Vice-Chancellor noted that by that time the Electronic Communications Act 2000 enabled specific modifications to be made to authorise communication by electronic means under existing statutes, including the Companies Act. … Continue reading PNC Telecom plc v Thomas: 2003

T and N Limited, Associated Companies of T and N Ltd (In Administration) v Royal and Sun Alliance Plc, and others: ChD 9 May 2003

T and N had exposure to asbestosis claims; these claims were insured by Lloyd’s but on terms that if payments were to be made, T and N should make certain reimbursements to Lloyd’s. T and N then insured with a captive company known as Curzon their liability to make such reimbursements. Lloyd’s called on T … Continue reading T and N Limited, Associated Companies of T and N Ltd (In Administration) v Royal and Sun Alliance Plc, and others: ChD 9 May 2003

Regina on the Application of T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd, Vodafone Ltd, Orange Personal Communication Services Ltd v The Competition Commission, the Director-General of Telecommunications: Admn 27 Jun 2003

The applicants sought to challenge a proposed scheme regulating the prices of telephone calls. Held: The principle objection was to termination charges, charges on calls between networks. The present charges were greater than the actual cost, and had the effect of transferring to users of fixed network telephones costs which were properly attributable to mobile … Continue reading Regina on the Application of T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd, Vodafone Ltd, Orange Personal Communication Services Ltd v The Competition Commission, the Director-General of Telecommunications: Admn 27 Jun 2003

Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’): HL 13 Mar 2003

Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill. Held: The specific terms added prevailed over the standard terms printed on the bill of lading. The bill was … Continue reading Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’): HL 13 Mar 2003

British Telecommunicatons Plc v Office of Communications and Others: CA 17 Feb 2014

The appellant challenged challenged the imposition of certain conditions on its licence under the 2003 Act. The Office had acted to seek to prevent acts prejudicial to consumers. Held: The appeal succeeded. The Office of Communications had jurisdiction under the section to impose conditions in broadcasting licences where the practices of licenceholders made it appropriate … Continue reading British Telecommunicatons Plc v Office of Communications and Others: CA 17 Feb 2014

Forensic Telecommunications Services Ltd v West Yorkshire Police and Another: ChD 9 Nov 2011

The claimant alleged infringement by the defendant of assorted intellectual property rights in its database. It provided systems for recovering materials deleted from Nokia mobile phones. Held: ‘the present case is concerned with a collection of numerical data . . the individual items of data are not protected by copyright. It follows that the collection … Continue reading Forensic Telecommunications Services Ltd v West Yorkshire Police and Another: ChD 9 Nov 2011

Vadim Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Limited: PC 27 Mar 2003

PC (Isle of Man) The petitioner sought disclosure of trust documents, as a beneficiary. Disclosure had been refused as he had not been a named beneficiary. Held: Times had moved on, and trust documents had taken more and more indirect ways of conferring benefits. The settlements were badly drafted, but that should not be used … Continue reading Vadim Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Limited: PC 27 Mar 2003

Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner: CA 20 Feb 2009

Grounds for non-disclosure treated cumulatively An applicant had requested disclosure of information regarding the environmental impact of electro-magnetic radiation from mobile phones. The court considered the balance between the need to disclose information and the maintaining of exceptions to disclosure in the public interest, in the context of third party intellectual property rights. The tribunal … Continue reading Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner: CA 20 Feb 2009

Kearns and Others v The General Council of the Bar: CA 17 Mar 2003

The claimants had sought to recover from the General Council of the Bar damages for libel in a communication from the head of the Bar Council’s Professional Standards and Legal Services Department to all heads of chambers, their senior clerks and practice managers to the effect that the claimants were not solicitors and were thus … Continue reading Kearns and Others v The General Council of the Bar: CA 17 Mar 2003

Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited: HL 4 Dec 2003

The claimant’s house was regularly flooded by waters including also foul sewage from the respondent’s neighbouring premises. He sought damages and an injunction. The defendants sought to restrict the claimant to his statutory rights. Held: The damages were restricted to the statutory ones. The defendant was regulated under the 1991 Act by the Director-General, who … Continue reading Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited: HL 4 Dec 2003

British Telecommunications Plc v Telefonica O2 UK Ltd: SC 9 Jul 2014

The parties disputed the termination charges which BT was entitled to charge to mobile network operators for putting calls from the latter’s networks through to BT fixed lines with associated 08 numbers. BT had introduced new tariff charges. Held: The appeal was allowed unanimously and the decision of the CAT re-establised. BT was free to … Continue reading British Telecommunications Plc v Telefonica O2 UK Ltd: SC 9 Jul 2014

Matthews v Ministry of Defence: HL 13 Feb 2003

The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act. Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided procedural bars to their enforcement. The issue of what is a substantive and … Continue reading Matthews v Ministry of Defence: HL 13 Feb 2003

T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications: CA 12 Dec 2008

The claimant telecoms companies objected to a proposed scheme for future licensing of available spectrum. The scheme anticipated a bias in favour of auctioniung such content. It was not agreed whether any challenge to the decision should be by way of appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal or by judicial review. The CAT had declined … Continue reading T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications: CA 12 Dec 2008

In re Racal Communications Ltd; In Re a Company: HL 3 Jul 1980

Court of Appeal’s powers limited to those Given The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is wholly statutory; it is appellate only. The court has no original jurisdiction. It has no jurisdiction itself to entertain any original application for judicial review; it has appellate jurisdiction over judgments and orders of the High Court made by … Continue reading In re Racal Communications Ltd; In Re a Company: HL 3 Jul 1980

British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: Admn 20 Apr 2011

The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to European law. Held: The request was refused. No obligation had yet fallen on the claimant, and the exact form and rules … Continue reading British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: Admn 20 Apr 2011

British Telecommunications Plc; Virgin Enterprises Ltd; J Sainsbury Plc; Marks and Spencer Plc and Ladbroke Group Plc v One In a Million Ltd and others: CA 23 Jul 1998

Registration of a distinctive Internet domain name using registered trade marks and company names could be an infringement of a registered Trade Mark, and also passing off. It was proper to grant quia timet injunctions where necessary to stop registration: ‘a jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief where a defendant is equipped with or is intending … Continue reading British Telecommunications Plc; Virgin Enterprises Ltd; J Sainsbury Plc; Marks and Spencer Plc and Ladbroke Group Plc v One In a Million Ltd and others: CA 23 Jul 1998

Waite v Government Communications Headquarters: HL 21 Jul 1983

Colonel Waite had obtained employment with the civil service in 1967 under the Civil Service Code’s relevant terms and conditions which provided for a retirement age of 60. Although the employers could defer retirement under these terms and conditions until 65, employees had no right to stay on after 60. Colonel Waite was compulsorily retired … Continue reading Waite v Government Communications Headquarters: HL 21 Jul 1983

Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner: SC 27 Jan 2010

The parties disputed the publication of materials relating to the exact placement of mobile phone masts. The operators wanted the information excepted from disclosure for fear of criminal acts and also said that disclosure would breach their database rights. Held: The Regulations sought merely to transpose the Directive into UK law, and it must be … Continue reading Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner: SC 27 Jan 2010

VIP Communications Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 17 Apr 2019

Order outwith Home Secretary’s powers The claimant sought judicial review of an order requiring OFWAT to limit certain licenses to exclude technology which the SSHD said would pose a threat to National Security. It said that no power to do this existed. Held: Review allowed. The Direction was ultra vires the Secretary of State’s powers … Continue reading VIP Communications Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 17 Apr 2019

VIP Communications Ltd (In Liquidation), Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 Nov 2020

Exemption Direction was Ultra Vires The Direction sought to prevent Ofcom from introducing regulations which would have the effect of making it lawful to operate a species of GSM gateway known as a commercial multi-user gateway without a licence. GSM gateways are telecommunications equipment which contain one or more SIM cards such as are placed … Continue reading VIP Communications Ltd (In Liquidation), Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 Nov 2020

Hansom and others v E Rex Makin and Wright: CA 18 Dec 2003

The court considered a strike out application. Held: Although there might be many cases where the possibility or otherwise of a fair trial is highly important to the exercise of discretion under CPR 3.9. it does not follow that where a fair trial is still possible, relief will necessarily be granted: ‘CPR 3.9 deals generally … Continue reading Hansom and others v E Rex Makin and Wright: CA 18 Dec 2003

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Ofcom (Decision Notice): ICO 19 Apr 2011

ICO The complainant made a request to Ofcom for copies of correspondence relating to a complaint it had received from Lord Ashcroft KCMG about unfair treatment in an edition of BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. The public authority initially refused the request under section 44 of the Act (Prohibitions on disclosure) by virtue of section … Continue reading Ofcom (Decision Notice): ICO 19 Apr 2011

Gaunt v OFCOM and Liberty: QBD 13 Jul 2010

The claimant, a radio presenter sought judicial review of the respondent’s finding (against the broadcaster) that a radio interview he had conducted breached the Broadcasting Code. He had strongly criticised a proposal to ban smokers from being foster parents, criticising the interviewee (author of the ban) as a Health Nazi, and otherwise insulting him. It … Continue reading Gaunt v OFCOM and Liberty: QBD 13 Jul 2010

Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith: Admn 24 Feb 2017

Prosecutor’s appeal from acquittal on charges of having transmitted grossly offensive materialover a public telecommunications network, and in particular by publishing certain videos on youtube. The district judge had found the material was not grossly offensive. Held: The appeal suceeded. Citations: [2017] EWHC 359 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Communications Act 2003 127(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith: Admn 24 Feb 2017

Animal Defenders International v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Apr 2013

ECHR (Grand Chamber) Article 10-1 Freedom of expression Refusal of permission for non-governmental organisation to place television advert owing to statutory prohibition of political advertising: no violation Facts – The Communications Act 2003 prohibits political advertising in television or radio services, the aim being to maintain impartiality in the broadcast media and to prevent powerful … Continue reading Animal Defenders International v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Apr 2013

On Tower UK Ltd v JH and FW Green Ltd: CA 7 Dec 2021

Terms of an agreement which is to be imposed on the parties pursuant to the electronic communications code contained in schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003 (‘the Code’). More specifically, it relates to the extent of the upgrading and sharing rights which the respondent, On Tower UK Limited (‘On Tower’), should enjoy under that … Continue reading On Tower UK Ltd v JH and FW Green Ltd: CA 7 Dec 2021

Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 27 Jul 2012

Appeal against conviction for sending a message by a public telecommnication network said to be of a menacing character. The appellant’s flight was delayed at Doncaster airport. He tweeted ‘I had decided to resort to terrorism’ and ‘Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together … Continue reading Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 27 Jul 2012

Crown Prosecution Service (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Dec 2013

The complainant requested a copy of the file(s) held by the public authority in connection with the trial (and associated appeals) of Chambers who was prosecuted for posting a message on Twitter considered to be of a menacing character within the meaning in section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003. The Commissioner’s decision is that … Continue reading Crown Prosecution Service (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Dec 2013

Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 27 Jul 2012

The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction under section 127 of the 2003 Act. Becoming frustrated with its inefficiency he issued a tweet, which was said to have been a threat: ‘Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I am blowing … Continue reading Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 27 Jul 2012