The court was asked to make an order against persons unknown in order to recover land. Although an owner of land which was being occupied by squatters was entitled to take the remedy into his own hand, he was encouraged to go to a common law court . .
The claimant sought an order requiring delivery of possession of land occupied by the respondent objectors. They needed to remove trees from the land in order to construct a runway on their own adjacent land. The claimant had been granted a licence to enter on the land to remove the trees. The respondents said the … Continue reading Manchester Airport Plc v Dutton and others: CA 23 Feb 1999
The plaintiff sought possession of two rooms in a house occupied by the defendants separately. The agreements stated that they were licences. The agreements excluded the occupiers between 10:30am and noon on each day. The occupiers claimed to be tenants with protection. Held: The tenants’ appeal against summary orders for posession were successful, and the … Continue reading Crancour Ltd v Da Silvaesa and Another: CA 26 Feb 1986
The Court set out the range of remedies available to protect court processes from abuse by litigants who persist in making applications totally devoid of merit. The courts are facing very serious contemporary problems created by the activities of litigants who bombard them with applications which have no merit at all. The court made an … Continue reading Bhamjee v Forsdick and Others (No 2): CA 25 Jul 2003
The court was asked to interpret the 1976 Act to see whether its protection extended to cohabitees as well as to wives. In doing so it had to look at practice in the Court of Appeal in having to follow precedent. Held: The operation of the doctrine of precedent in the Court of Appeal so … Continue reading Davis v Johnson: HL 2 Jan 1978
Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation. Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human rights, the court had to assess whether the, first, the objective could be achieved by some alternative, less interfering, … Continue reading Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jul 2001
The court considered its power to order transfer of assets from one jurisdiction (in this case Switzerland) to another in aid of a Mareva injunction. Held: An order that assets be delivered or transferred to a receiver was a usual one.The appointment of a receiver over foreign assets is an in personam remedy. Dillon LJ … Continue reading Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6): CA 3 Jan 1990
United States Supreme Court – The court considered the Federal Rules of Evidence in the use of expert or skilled evidence: ‘If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, … Continue reading Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc: 28 Jun 1993
The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under Order 62 of the Rules of the Supreme Court included the power to make a pre-emptive order for costs.Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘In these circumstances the judge decided to make a wholly novel order. In its detail it is of … Continue reading Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation): CA 1987
A company was granted a licence to enter on land, for surveys and technical investigations, with a view eventually to its purchase. The land was occupied by protesters, and the company sought an injunction to exclude them. It was held that the licence did not give a right to occupy the land to the exclusion … Continue reading Countryside Residential (North Thames) Ltd v Tugwell: CA 4 Apr 2000
Students occupied the administrative office part of university premises. Following an order for possession of that part, they moved to a part known as Level Six. The university then sought an order for possession of the whole of its premises. Just prior to the hearing before the judge the students vacated Level Six but left … Continue reading University of Essex v Djemal and others: CA 1980
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax. Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose of a transfer of capital from the United Kingdom. The restriction of relief … Continue reading Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 16 Oct 2019
For a party to avail himself of the Order he must bring himself within its words. If he does so the court has no discretion to refuse him possession. The rules require: ‘(1) of the plaintiff that he should have a right to possession of the land in question and claim possession of land which … Continue reading Wiltshire County Council v Frazer: CA 1984
UTIAC (1) Lord Neuberger’s judgment in R (ZA (Nigeria)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 926 is an authoritative pronouncement on the scope of the Supreme Court’s judgments in R (BA (Nigeria)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] UKSC 7. (2) Parliament’s actions in amending paragraph 353 … Continue reading Hussein, Regina (on The Application of) v First-Tier Tribunal (Para 353: Present Scope and Effect)(IJR): UTIAC 8 Aug 2016
Each appellant complained of the disclosure by the respondent of very old and minor offences to potential employers, destroying prospects of finding work. Two statutory schemes were challenged, raising two separate questions, namely whether any interference with Article 8 ECHR is: (1) ‘in accordance with the law’ (‘the legality test’) and (2) ‘necessary in a … Continue reading Gallagher for Judicial Review (NI): SC 30 Jan 2019
Hate-Incident Guidance Inflexible and Unlawful The central issue raised in the appeal is the lawfulness of certain parts of a document entitled the Hate Crime Operational Guidance (the Guidance). The Guidance, issued in 2014 by the College of Policing (the College), the respondent to this appeal, sets out the national policy in relation to the … Continue reading Miller v The College of Policing: CA 20 Dec 2021
In each of these actions the respective Plaintiffs issued Originating Summons seeking to recover possession of premises pursuant to Order 113 Rules of the Supreme Court (NI) 1980 on the grounds that they are entitled to possession and the defendants are in occupation without licence or consent. McBride J [2016] NICh 9 Bailii Northern Ireland … Continue reading Farrell and Another v Brien and Another: ChNI 4 Feb 2016
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act. Held: The challenge failed. The court was to give effect to the intentions of … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance): HL 13 Mar 2003
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004
The claimant’s parents were secure joint tenants. After her father left, the mother later died. The respondent served a notice on the father terminating the tenancy since as the survivor and not resident, he was not entitled to continue the tenancy. The claimant sought to succeed to the tenancy. The Court of Appeal allowed the … Continue reading Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council v Hickin: SC 25 Jul 2012
The applicant had been given temporary accomodation under the Act. He sought to enforce the obligation on the respondent to house him permanently by an action in the county court. The authority said the action should have been by judicial review. Held: Where the action impugned the authority’s performance of its statutory duties as a … Continue reading Cocks v Thanet District Council: HL 25 Nov 1981
Certain investment trust companies (ITCs) sought refunds of VAT paid on the supply of investment management services. EU law however clarified that they were not due. Refunds were restricted by the Commissioners both as to the amounts and limitation . .
References: [2012] FCAFC 6, (2012) 200 FCR 296, (2012) 287 ALR 22, (2012) 87 ACSR 260 Links: Austlii Coram: Finn, Stome, and Perram JJ Federal Court of Australia CORPORATIONS – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 9 – ‘director’ – ‘officer’ – de facto director – no single test for determining whether a person is such … Continue reading Grimaldi v Chameleon Mining NL (No 2); 21 Feb 2012
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
