A statute enacted that with regard to certain charges against any Clerk in Holy Orders it ‘shall be lawful’ for the Bishop of the diocese ‘on the application of any party complaining thereof’ to issue a commission for enquiry. Held: The words ‘it shall be lawful’ merely conferred a power, not a duty.Lord Cairns said: … Continue reading Julius v Lord Bishop of Oxford and Another: HL 23 Mar 1880
chesteron_nurmohamedEAT201504 EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION Whistleblowing Protected disclosure This appeal concerns the meaning of the words ‘in the public interest’ inserted into section 43B(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 by section17 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013. The Respondent was Director of the Mayfair office of the First Appellant, a well-known firm of … Continue reading Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) and Another v Nurmohamed (Victimisation Discrimination: Whistleblowing): EAT 8 Apr 2015
Former employees had obtained a protective award against the company for failing to consult on the impending redundancies and submitted proofs of debt to the liquidator who sought guidance from the court. The judge had held that since the Act provided only one remedy, the protective awards were not provable. Held: The appeal was allowed. … Continue reading Haine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine: CA 11 Jun 2008
The appellant claimed that the requirement imposed on him to retire from his law firm partnership on attaining 65 was an unlawful discrimination on the grounds of age. Held: The matter was remitted to the Employment tribunal to see whether the fixing of the mandatory retirment age at 65 was a proportionate means of achieving … Continue reading Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes: SC 25 Apr 2012
Satisfaction of Early Conciliation requirements EAT Practice and Procedure: Preliminary Issues – This appeal raises a question of procedure in relation to the early conciliation provisions introduced by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, namely whether an early conciliation certificate obtained by a ‘prospective claimant’ can cover future events. The Employment Judge held that … Continue reading Compass Group UK and Ireland Ltd v Morgan: EAT 26 Jul 2016
chandhok_tirkeyEAT201412 EAT Race Discrimination – The Claimant worked for the Respondents as a domestic worker. She claimed that they treated her badly and in a demeaning manner, and (by amendment) that this was in part because of her low status which was infected with considerations of caste. The Respondents applied to strike out this amendment, … Continue reading Chandhok and Another v Tirkey (Race Discrimination): EAT 19 Dec 2014
The Authority had obtained and executed a search warrant against the defendant’s premises, but now sought to restrain disclosure of the materials upon which it had obtained that warrant, asserting Public Interest Immunity.
Held: An application . .
The court was asked as to the interrelationship of the statutory schemes relating to the protection of employees’ pensions and to corporate insolvency.
Held: Liabilities which arose from financial support directions or contribution notices . .
The Authority had obtained a search warrant on an ex parte application. The defendant sought a rehearing, but the Authority sought to rely upon material for which it now asserted public interest immunity in material already used. At first instance, . .
Professional Regulation . .
The court considered the application of ‘the bankruptcy template of section 382 to the rules governing the winding up of companies’.
Held: The phrase ‘obligation incurred’ in Rule 13.2(1)(b) was inapt to describe a common law duty of care in . .
The claimant had received an overpayment of benefits (Job seeker’s allowance), but then was made bankrupt. He now said that this was a debt in the bankruptcy.
Held: It was not. At the date of the bankruptcy order, the possible reclaim was not . .
The claimant’s relative had died in an air accident. They sought damages from the defendant pilot, seeking to rely upon the official report of the Air Accident Investigation Bureau The court was asked as to its admissibility.
Held: It was . .
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
EAT Practice and Procedure : Amendment – Amendment of an ET claim to add a new cause of action – ACAS Early Conciliation (Section 18A Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (as amended)) At a Preliminary Hearing, the Claimant applied to amend to add a new claim (victimisation), which post-dated the ET1. The Respondent objected solely on … Continue reading Science Warehouse Ltd v Mills: EAT 9 Oct 2015
 UKFTT PR – 2015 – 0016 Bailii Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 83(1) England and Wales Housing Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.644228
Professional Regulation . .
The court gave guidelines for the periods of disqualification to be applied for company directors under the Act. The maximum period of ten years should be reserved for only the most serious of cases. Periods of two to five years should apply to cases at the bottom end, and the middle bracket of 6 to … Continue reading In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd: CA 1990
The claimant sued for breach of trust. The action was re-instated after being struck out for want of prosecution, but in the meantime the defendant had been made bankrupt and then discharged from bankruptcy. An order for costs was then made which . .
A provisional liquidator cannot be appointed on a baseless petition. There are two conditions to be met. The first was that the petition must disclose a prima facie case, the second was that there were circumstances that require that a provisional . .
An order for costs could be proved where the action was in respect of a provable debt or liability. In such a case they were regarded as an addition to the sum recovered. . .
The parties to an arbitration agreement had agreed to pay whatever costs the arbitrator decided in his discretion to award. The losing party then went bankrupt.
Held: His bankruptcy did not relieve him of his liability for the costs. The . .