Copyright Purposes claim limited The plaintiff bookmaker was publisher of Matthew Hale’s Pleas of the Crown. The first and second defendants hired the third to abridge it and they began to published the result as Modern Crown Law. The plaintiff sought to restrain further publication. Held: The application failed. ‘The Stat. of 8 A. cannot … Continue reading Gyles v Wilcox, Nutt and Barrow: 6 Mar 1740
References: [1740] EngR 77, (1740) Barn C 368, (1740) 27 ER 682, [1740] EngR 78, (1740) 2 Atk 141, (1740) 26 ER 489 (C), [1740] EngR 90, (1740) 3 Atk 269, (1740) 26 ER 957 (A) Links: Commonlii, Commonlii, Commonlii Coram: Lord Hardwicke LC Ratio The plaintiff bookmaker was publisher of Matthew Hale’s Pleas of … Continue reading Gyles v Wilcox, Nutt and Barrow; 6 Mar 1740
ECJ An occupational pension scheme which, although established in accordance with statutory provisions, is based on an agreement between the employer and employee representatives constitutes an integral part of the contract of employ- ment and has the effect of supplementing the social benefits paid under national legislation of general application with benefits financed entirely by … Continue reading Bilka-Kaufhaus v Webers Von Hartz: ECJ 13 May 1986
The claimant appealed the award of damages in his claim for defamation. The defendants had variously issued apologies. The claimant had not complained initially as to one publication. Held: In defamation proceedings the damage to feelings is assessed as at the point of assessment, and conduct of the defendant after the publication may aggravate or … Continue reading Nail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others: CA 20 Dec 2004
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for misrepresentation. The policies were novel and sophisticated contracts and included clauses modifying the duties of … Continue reading HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others: HL 20 Feb 2003
(1) The Immigration (Biometric Registration) Regulations 2008 (SI 2008/3048) (‘the 2008 Regulations’) have the effect that where a person subject to immigration control makes (or purports to make) an application for entry clearance which has effect as leave to enter the United Kingdom for a limited period exceeding 6 months, and, at the same time, … Continue reading Regina (on The Application of SGW) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Biometrics, Family Reunion Policy): UTIAC 26 Nov 2021
