Search Results for: Senior Courts Act 1981 69

Click the case name for better results:

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

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 27 May 2011

The defendant appealed against an order refusing trial by judge alone on the basis that the application had been made out of time. Judges: Tugendhat J Citations: [2011] EWHC 1376 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Senior Courts Act 1981 69 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 16-Jun-2010 … Continue reading Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 27 May 2011

Lewis v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Others (Rev 1): QBD 31 Mar 2011

The defendant sought a ruling on the meaning of the words but using section 69(4) of the 1981 Act. The claimant solicitor was acting in complaints as to the unlawful interception of celebrity voicemails by agents of the press. There had been debate as to how many phones had been hacked, and the findings by … Continue reading Lewis v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Others (Rev 1): QBD 31 Mar 2011

Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 28 Jul 2014

The claimant MP had a bad tempered altercation with police officers outside Downing Street. He sued the defendant newspaper in defamation saying that they had falsely accused him of calling te officers ‘plebs’. One officer now sued the MP saying that the MP’s public denials amounted to defamation of the officer as a liar. The … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 28 Jul 2014

Fiddes v Channel Four Television Corporation and Others: CA 29 Jun 2010

The claimants in a defamation case made an interlocutory appeal against an order for trial by judge alone. The parties had agreed for trial by jury, but the defendants made a late application for trial by judge alone. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The right to a trial by jury is a constitutional right subject … Continue reading Fiddes v Channel Four Television Corporation and Others: CA 29 Jun 2010

Cook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 29 Mar 2011

The claimant, an MP, complained in defamation of the defendant’s description of his rejected expenses claim regarding an assistant’s charitable donation. The paper pleaded a Reynolds defence. The claimant said that when published the defendant knew that the article was untrue. The defendant sought summary judgment. Held: It was not possible to say there was … Continue reading Cook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 29 Mar 2011

Times Newspapers Ltd and others v Armstrong: CA 13 Jun 2006

May LJ noted: ‘an action which does not come within section 69(1) has to be tried without a jury, unless the court in its discretion orders it to be tried with a jury. The discretion is now very rarely exercised, reflecting contemporary practice. Contemporary practice has an eye, among other things, to proportionality; the greater … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd and others v Armstrong: CA 13 Jun 2006

Belhaj and Another v Straw and Others: SC 17 Jan 2017

The claimant alleged complicity by the defendant, (now former) Foreign Secretary, in his mistreatment by the US while held in Libya. He also alleged involvement in his unlawful abduction and removal to Libya, from which had had fled for political persecution. The defendants now appealed from rejection of the defendants’ claim to state immunity and … Continue reading Belhaj and Another v Straw and Others: SC 17 Jan 2017

Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to be disclosed during the hearing, but the court had had no power … Continue reading Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

Amelia Leigh v James Rose: SCS 19 Dec 1792

An attorney defending in an action for a person abroad, is not liable personally for the expenses awarded against his constituent. Citations: [1792] Mor 4645 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: Scotland Cited by: Cited – Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ SC 30-Oct-2019 Challenge to the making of a non-party costs order under section 51 of the … Continue reading Amelia Leigh v James Rose: SCS 19 Dec 1792

Mobbs v Vandenbrande And Wife, Late Youens Executrix Of Price: 29 Jan 1864

Blackburn J said: ‘In ordinary cases, where there has been no abuse of its process, the court has no jurisdiction to order a person not a party on the record to pay costs.’ Judges: Blackburn J Citations: [1864] EngR 193, (1864) 4 B and S 904, (1864) 122 ER 698 Links: Commonlii Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Mobbs v Vandenbrande And Wife, Late Youens Executrix Of Price: 29 Jan 1864

Murphy, and Murphy v Young and Co’s Brewery Plc, Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 20 Nov 1996

When an unsuccessful party has had its legal costs funded under legal expenses insurance, should the insurer be held liable to pay the successful party’s costs? The insurer had not instigated the litigation, nor controlled it, and could not be accused of ‘wanton and officious intermeddling’. The insurance was general and did not relate to … Continue reading Murphy, and Murphy v Young and Co’s Brewery Plc, Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 20 Nov 1996

Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd: SC 20 May 2015

A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule at common law as to such evidence. In the UK, the 2006 Act had amended the … Continue reading Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd: SC 20 May 2015

Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break): CA 29 Jul 2005

The parties contested ancillary relief where there had been only a short marriage, but where here were considerable family assets available for division. The wife sought to rely upn the husband’s behaviour to counter any argument as to the shortness of the marriage. The husband answered to say that she had declared that she would … Continue reading Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break): CA 29 Jul 2005

McAtee, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: CA 20 Dec 2018

The claimant prisoner sought to challenge the statutory licence regime as it applied to indeterminate prisoners. The parties disputed whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction which in turn depended upon whether the claim was criminal in nature. Held: It did not follow from the case having criminal aspects that all associated claims were a … Continue reading McAtee, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: CA 20 Dec 2018

Mezvinsky and Another v Associated Newspapers Ltd: ChD 25 May 2018

Choice of Division and Business Lists Claim that the publication of pictures of the young children of the celebrity claimants had been published by the defendant on-line without consent and without pixelation, in breach of their human rights, of data protection, and right to privacy. The defendants now sought the transfer of the case to … Continue reading Mezvinsky and Another v Associated Newspapers Ltd: ChD 25 May 2018

Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane: HL 24 May 2006

Fairness on Division of Family Capital The House faced the question of how to achieve fairness in the division of property following a divorce. In the one case there were substantial assets but a short marriage, and in the other a high income, but low capital. Held: The 1973 Act gives only limited guidance on … Continue reading Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane: HL 24 May 2006

McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd: OHCS 31 May 2005

The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this. Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not proved that the smoking of cigarettes was the cause of the lung cancer, and it was … Continue reading McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd: OHCS 31 May 2005

National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’): 1993

References: [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 68 Coram: Cresswell J Ratio:Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following: 1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the independent product of the … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’): 1993

National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer”): 1993″

References: [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 68 Coram: Cresswell J Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following: 1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the independent product of the … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer”): 1993″