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
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
The claimant sought recovery of his substantial winnings from the defendant gaming club. The club had resisted saying that the methods used by the claimant at cards, called, ‘edge sorting’ was a form of cheating, a criminal offence within the section, and that therefore no claim arose. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed (Sharp LJ dissenting) … Continue reading Ivey v Genting Casinos UK Ltd (T/A Crockfords Club): CA 4 Nov 2016
The three defendants appealed convictions on a plea of guilty of corruption for ‘spot fixing’ as a player in cricket matches. The defendants had signed contracts not to do anything to bring the Pakistan Cricket Board into disrepute and to comply . .
Taxation – whether gaming or betting and the different VAT Treatment of newer gaming machines. Citations: [2012] UKUT 347 (TCC), [2013] STC 420 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: At VDT (1) – The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs VDT 27-May-2008 VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Gaming – Mechanised cash bingo under Gaming … Continue reading HMRC v The Rank Group Plc: UTTC 4 Oct 2012
Financial wrong-doing short of dishonesty can be a basis for summary dismissal. Gross misconduct sufficient to justify dismissal must in the particular circumstances so undermine the trust and confidence of an employer that he should no longer be required to continue the employment. The identity of the employer and employee were relevant factors. Lord Jauncey … Continue reading Neary and Neary v Dean of Westminster: 9 Jun 1999
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. The bank owed a duty … Continue reading HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006
The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful images of children were found. The searching officer asked the court for directions as to what to do. Held: The … Continue reading C Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General: ChD 26 May 2006
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were worthless, and that therefore no consideration had been given. Held: The casino’s defence succeeded. … Continue reading Lipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd: HL 6 Jun 1991
The plaintiffs sought damages for nervous shock. They had watched on television, as their relatives and friends, 96 in all, died at a football match, for the safety of which the defendants were responsible. The defendant police service had not defended a claim of negligence in their management of safety at the match at Hillsborough … Continue reading Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police: HL 28 Nov 1991
The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. The presence of such plaques were symptomless, and would not themselves cause other asbestos related disease, but signalled the presence of asbestos in the lungs. The employer appealed a finding of liability. Held: The claims … Continue reading Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar: HL 17 Oct 2007
Right of Recovery of Money Paid under Mistake Kleinwort Benson had made payments to a local authority under swap agreements which were thought to be legally enforceable when made. Subsequently, a decision of the House of Lords, (Hazell v. Hammersmith and Fulham) established that such swap agreements were unlawful. Kleinwort Benson then sought restitution of … Continue reading Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council etc: HL 29 Jul 1998
The parties agreed that damages were payable in an action for restitution, but the sum depended upon to a calculation of interest. They disputed whether such interest should be calculated on a simple or compound basis. The company sought compound . .
References: Gazette 09-Jun-1999, [1999] IRLR 288 Coram: Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle Financial wrong-doing short of dishonesty can be a basis for summary dismissal. Gross misconduct sufficient to justify dismissal must in the particular circumstances so undermine the trust and confidence of an employer that he should no longer be required to continue the employment. The … Continue reading Neary and Neary v Dean of Westminster; 9 Jun 1999