Click the case name for better results:

Equity and Law Life Assurance Society v Tritonia Ltd: HL 1943

Viscount Simon LC said: ‘When an appeal is argued before the House of Lords, no one has any right of audience except counsel instructed on behalf of a party or (when the litigant is a natural person) the party himself. In the case of a corporation, inasmuch as the artificial entity cannot attend and argue … Continue reading Equity and Law Life Assurance Society v Tritonia Ltd: HL 1943

The Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd: ChD 16 Nov 2017

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 to vary or revoke the warrant must be at an inter partes rehearing. At that rehearing eh court must … Continue reading The Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd: ChD 16 Nov 2017

In re Nortel Companies and Others: SC 24 Jul 2013

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 issued by the Pensions Regulator under the 2004 Act after the company had gone into administration, which required the company to … Continue reading In re Nortel Companies and Others: SC 24 Jul 2013

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd: CA 7 Aug 2018

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, the court said that the Authority could only use such material by way of a … Continue reading The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd: CA 7 Aug 2018

Steele, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham City Council and The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 16 Dec 2005

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 yet a contingent debt, and he remained liable. There was no contingent … Continue reading Steele, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham City Council and The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 16 Dec 2005

In re T and N Ltd and Others (No 3): ChD 16 Jun 2006

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 negligence which existed on and was breached by a company before liquidation, but where actionable … Continue reading In re T and N Ltd and Others (No 3): ChD 16 Jun 2006

Rogers and Another v Hoyle: QBD 23 May 2013

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 admissible.Leggatt J said: ‘It is not, however, the function of an expert to express opinions … Continue reading Rogers and Another v Hoyle: QBD 23 May 2013

Julius v Lord Bishop of Oxford and Another: HL 23 Mar 1880

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

Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) and Another v Nurmohamed (Victimisation Discrimination: Whistleblowing): EAT 8 Apr 2015

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

Haine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine: CA 11 Jun 2008

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

Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes: SC 25 Apr 2012

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

Compass Group UK and Ireland Ltd v Morgan: EAT 26 Jul 2016

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 and Another v Tirkey (Race Discrimination): EAT 19 Dec 2014

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

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

Science Warehouse Ltd v Mills: EAT 9 Oct 2015

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

Re Union Accident Insurance Co Ltd: ChD 1972

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 liquidator ought to be appointed. The circumstances were not limited. The fact that the … Continue reading Re Union Accident Insurance Co Ltd: ChD 1972

In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd: CA 1990

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