Application for vexatious litigant order. Citations:  EWHC Admin 123 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Litigation Practice Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137068
Citations:  EWHC Admin 124 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 Criminal Practice Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137069
Citations:  EWHC Admin 81 Links: Bailii Jury Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137026
The Secretary of State had refused to grant a certifate as to a file under the 1985 Act thus disallowing certain capital allowances. The Rules said that a decision of the High Court would be final. Judges: Kennedy, Jonathan Parker LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 1864 Links: Bailii Statutes: Films Act 1985 Sch 1, Supreme … Continue reading Peakviewing (Interactive) Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport: CA 28 Nov 2002
The bank having sued the defendant under a guarantee, the defendant sought to join in the principal debtor company to pursue a counterclaim. The defendant appealed a refusal on the ground that the principal would not itself have been given leave to serve a writ on the plaintiff who was outside the jurisdiction. Held: The … Continue reading Union Bank of the Middle East Ltd v Clapham: CA 15 Jul 1981
ICO The complainant was the subject of a civil proceedings order issued under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. The complainant asked the public authority for a letter about him which was sent by the judges to the Attorney General’s Office after his court case that initiated this order. The public authority did … Continue reading Her Majestys Courts Service (Decision Notice): ICO 25 Mar 2009
Supreme Court of Canada The References in question were prompted by the opposition of eight provinces to a proposed Resolution, published on October 2, 1980. The proposed Resolution contained an address to be presented to Her Majesty The Queen in right of the United Kingdom and a statute, to which was appended another statute providing … Continue reading Resolution to amend the Constitution: 28 Sep 1981
A court which was considering ordering a third party, who was not party to the action, to pay costs in an action, should first be satisfied that it is just to do so in all the circumstances. There is no need to establish any exceptional circumstances. There must be a connection between the incurring of … Continue reading Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others and Other Actions: CA 5 Mar 1999
The Applicant was charged and remanded into custody by the Justices, having refused conditional bail. Bail was later granted, but he sought judicial review of the original remand decision, just before his trial, which then intervened. After the trial, the Divisional Court quashed the remand decision adjourning the claim for damages. It was said that … Continue reading Regina v Blandford Magistrates Court ex parte Pamment: CA 1990
MEP’s are susceptible to prosecution. The National courts do have jurisdiction. Citations: Gazette 20-Jan-1993 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Manchester Crown Court and Ashton and Others, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions HL 7-May-1993 A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for … Continue reading Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 20 Jan 1993
Application for leave by person subject to vexatious litigant order to commence proceedings against her former husband. Citations:  EWHC 2727 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.246355
Decision in Crown Court regarding costs or other element of a matter which was formulated in the indictment is a matter relating to the trial and was not subject to judicial review. Citations: Times 28-Apr-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Judicial Review Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86816
A Divisional Court has no jurisdiction to challenge a Crown Court’s order for disclosure. Citations: Times 23-Oct-1995, Ind Summary 16-Oct-1995 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86345
Crown Court decision to give complaints statements to defendant not reviewable. The Supreme Court Act 1981 limits judicial review power. Citations: Ind Summary 05-Jul-1993, Times 27-Jul-1993 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 28 29 31 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Judicial Review, Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86334
A ship belonging to the appellants had been blacked by the defendant union. Negotiations to clear the threat resulted in payment by the appellants to a welfare fund of the defendant. The company sought its refund saying that it had been paid under duress. The Court of Appeal had found it to be a payment … Continue reading Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation: HL 1 Apr 1981
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
Worldlii United States Supreme Court – When the General Counsel for petitioner pharmaceutical manufacturing corporation (hereafter petitioner) was informed that one of its foreign subsidiaries had made questionable payments to foreign government officials in order to secure government business, an internal investigation of such payments was initiated. As part of this investigation, petitioner’s attorneys sent … Continue reading Upjohn Company v United States: 13 Jan 1981
The plaintiff had applied for disclosure of assets under the Rules of the Supreme Court in support of a Mareva freezing order. The rules were held not to provide any such power: disclosure of assets could not be obtained as part of discovery as the documents concerned did not relate ‘to matters in question in … Continue reading A J Bekhor and Co Ltd v Bilton: CA 6 Feb 1981
Civil Search Orders possible The plaintiff manufactured and supplied through the defendants, its English agents, computer components. It had reason to suspect that the defendant was disclosing its trade secrets to competitors. The court considered the effect of a civil search order (as opposed to a criminal search warrant), where the court had in effect … Continue reading Anton Piller v Manufacturing Processes Ltd: CA 8 Dec 1975
In a defamation action, issues arose as to two conflicting oil concessions which neighbouring states in the Arabian Gulf had granted over their territorial and offshore waters. The foreign relations of the United Kingdom and Iran were also involved in the dispute. The authorities concerning acts of state were reviewed for the purpose of a … Continue reading Buttes Gas and Oil Co v Hammer (No 3): HL 1981
A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for lack of jurisdiction, was not susceptible to Judicial Review. This was a ‘decision affecting conduct of trial’. The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘other than its jurisdiction in matters . .
In the course of urgent children proceedings, counsel advised solicitors inappropriately to seek judicial review of a court decision. The application was persisted with despite warnings from the respondents that they intended to seek a wasted costs . .
The applicant had been convicted of offences relating to the management of his nursing home, and had been struck off the Register of Nurses.
Held: It was no defence to the criminal charges that a member of staff had failed in her duties. The . .
The Crown Court is a single court. . .
The claimant newspaper sought to appeal against a refusal by the respondent to disclose papers filed in a case before it. The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal.
Held: Under the 1981 Act no appeal would lie if the . .
A appealed an order made by the Crown Court under the 1964 Act for his detention in a mental hospital on the grounds that he was unfit to enter a plea to the charge of murder.
Held: The Court of Appal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. . .
The claimant appealed against a refusal by the magistrate to allow access to documents filed during proceedings when the court felt that all relevant matters had been discussed openly and in detail in court.
Held: The appeal failed, and the . .
The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay.
Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted . .
References:  USSC 7, 449 U.S. 383, 101 S.Ct. 677, 66 L.Ed.2d 584 Links: Worldlii Coram: Justice Rehnqist Worldlii United States Supreme Court – When the General Counsel for petitioner pharmaceutical manufacturing corporation (hereafter petitioner) was informed that one of its foreign subsidiaries had made questionable payments to foreign government officials in order to secure … Continue reading Upjohn Company v United States; 13 Jan 1981
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
When the ITC did not satisfy an arbitral award made against it, the judgment creditor sought to discover where its assets could be found. Application to the Court was made under RSC 0.48 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 and under the Court’s inherent . .
Application by the Attorney General for a Civil Proceedings Order pursuant to section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 (‘the 1981 Act’) against M. . .
Application by 2 and 3 defendants for an order suspending proceedings in England pending production and consideration of expert report. Whether, pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1981 s. 49(3) and CPR 3.1(2)(f), there were ‘compelling circumstances’ . .
Two applications for costs orders under section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. . .
Appeal against anti-suit order. The court ordered that since the question of whether an anti-suit injunction could be made to restrain proceedings abroad had been decided in Through Transport, that issue could go straight to the House of Lords. Judges: Mr Justice Colman Citations:  EWHC 454 (Comm) Links: Bailii Statutes: EC Regulation 44/2001, Administration … Continue reading West Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and Another (“The Front Comor”): ComC 21 Mar 2005
Application for civil proceedings order Judges: Rose LJ, Leveson J Citations:  EWHC 2794 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220113
Application for leave to appeal against vexatious litigant order. Citations:  EWCA Civ 1981 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.218620
The defendant firm of solicitors appealed a wasted costs order. Held: The jurisdiction to make a wasted costs order was to be used for breaches of duty to the court. It was not proper to make one where, as here, the failure was merely a failure in a duty to his client to act in … Continue reading Radford and Co v Charles and Another: ChD 5 Nov 2003
The court examined the development of the law in relation to comparative advertising. Jacob J said: ‘Prior to the coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994 comparative advertising using a registered trade mark of a competitor was, subject to minor exceptions involving the use of a company name, forbidden by section 4(1) of … Continue reading Vodafone Group Plc v Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd: ChD 1997
Application by KAC, Kuwait Airways Corporation, for an order pursuant to Section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, and to CPR part 48.2, that the costs of four actions, namely 1991 folio 69 and 2587, 2000 folio 1137 and 2003 folio 223, all of which had been brought by the claimant, KAC, against Iraqi … Continue reading Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company: TCC 16 Jul 2008
Application under section 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 to appoint a receiver. Judges: Goldring J Citations:  EWHC 2003 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Insolvency Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.331020
Each defendant had appealed. The appeals had been heard but the decisions not announced. One of the judges, Lord Justice Kay died. Held: It was not open to the remaining judges to announce their decisions, whatever discussions had taken place before His Lordhsip’s death. The jurisdiction of the court was statutory, and that jurisdiction required … Continue reading Regina v Coates; Regina v Graves; Regina v Terry: CACD 30 Jul 2004
The claimant had in the course of proceedings obtained an order requiring an employee of the third party to attend as a witness. That third party now sought to be joined so as to claim its costs. Held: The Act and the rules allowed the court to make an order for costs against a party … Continue reading Individual Homes Ltd v Macbream Investments Ltd: ChD 23 Oct 2002
There was no power to make an order for wasted costs against a solicitor who had not been acting in a matter when proceedings were issued. Delays eventually led to the dismissal of a medical negligence case for limitation. The defendant authority sought their lost costs against the firm. The true test was whether the … Continue reading Byrne v Sefton Health Authority: CA 22 Nov 2001
The appellant challenged an order declaring him a vexatious litigant, saying that the order had been made by a court of two judges, where the Act required that only one judge should sit. Held: Only a single judge of the Hight Court has jurisdiction to hear such an application. Citations: Times 12-Jun-1984 Statutes: Supreme Court … Continue reading In Re Fletcher: CA 12 Jun 1984
Request for vexatious litigant orders Citations:  EWHC 2057 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201623
Costs had been awarded against the third party, the parent company of the defendant. Leave to appeal was sought. Held: It was arguable that the judge had not taken into account properly the interest of the company in protecting the interests of creditors and not just itself. Leave was given. Judges: Kay LJ, Keene LJ … Continue reading Pegler Ltd v Wang (Uk) Ltd and Another: CA 18 Jun 2001
vexatious litigant allegation Citations:  EWHC 2144 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.220577
Application for vexatious litigant order Citations:  EWHC 3190 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.191219
Application by HM Attorney General, pursuant to section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, for a civil proceedings order against Mr Alexander. The basis of the claim is that Mr Alexander has habitually and persistently and any without reasonable ground instituted vexatious civil proceedings, and made vexatious applications within civil proceedings, whether instituted by … Continue reading Attorney General v Alexander: Admn 26 Nov 2003
Citations:  EWHC 2930 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189120
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
Judges: Brooke, Carnwath LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 799 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See also – Bhamjee v Forsdick and Others (No 2) CA 25-Jul-2003 The Court set out the range of remedies available to protect court processes from abuse by litigants who persist in making … Continue reading Bhamjee v Forsdick and others: CA 14 May 2003
The firm of solicitors challenged a wasted costs order. The order had been made on the basis that they had persisted with a case which the court had told them was misconceived, and had acted despite a conflict of interest. The order had been made under unusual circumstances on appeal from the original costs order. … Continue reading Fitzhugh Gates (A Firm) v Claudia Louise Elaine Borden Sherman: CA 1 Jul 2003
Six appeals concerned a number of aspects of the new Conditional Fee Agreement. Held: It should be normal for a CFA, redacted as necessary, to be disclosed for costs proceedings where a success fee is claimed. If a party seeks to rely on the CFA, as a matter of fairness she should ordinarily be put … Continue reading Hollins v Russell etc: CA 22 May 2003
An undertaking to submit to a court ‘of competent jurisdiction’ given in consideration of a cargo not being arrested, by a protection and indemnity club , included a reference to the Admiralty Court. Under the Act. Under the Convention the phrase could not mean a court which was already seised of the matter, since jurisdiction … Continue reading Jutha Rajprueck, Owners of the Cargo and others v Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd: CA 10 Mar 2003
The judge, a circuit judge who had been appointed a judge of the TCC, had adjudicated on the claimant’s case in the High Court in the false belief that the appointment allowed him to do so. Held: The judge had not wilfully closed his eyes to the law, and his mistake was understandable. On established … Continue reading Coppard v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Lord Chancellor intervening: CA 9 Apr 2003
In a claim aganst the police, it had become apparent that some parts of the trial would require the examination of detailed documents. The defendant appealed a refusal of its request for the matter to be heard without a jury. Held: The Act and the Rules explicitly acknowledged the possibility of splitting a trial between … Continue reading Phillips v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 20 Mar 2003
The applicant sought damages for the wrongful termination of her lease by the respondent. The landlords re-entered in default of payment of the rent. The premises had been sub-let, and she sought damages for the loss of rental profits. Held: The judge had admitted evidence which was not in formal form, but it was within … Continue reading Jaura v Ahmed: CA 21 Feb 2002
The Court reminded insolvency practitioners of fiduciary duties to creditors when refusing application for further payment on account of costs. Ferris J considered the principles applicable to fixing the remuneration of receivers of the estate of Robert Maxwell appointed by the court under section 37 of the 1981 Act. Their total recoveries before their remuneration … Continue reading Mirror Group Newspapers Plc v Maxwell and Others (No 2): ChD 15 Jul 1997
Civil proceedings order. The defendant had commenced ten sets of proceedings which the court held amounted to serial and repeated litigation of the same points. Held: The fact that new details had emerged which might throw new light on the underlying events did not mean that the respondent’s behaviour did not come within the section. … Continue reading HM Attorney General v Pepin: Admn 27 May 2004
The claimant challenged the granting of permission to a cement factory to change its energy systems to be operated by the burning of waste tyres. The respondent was concerned as to the standing of the claimant. He was impecunious, but associated with a woman who was a leading light in the campaign and relatively well … Continue reading Edwards, Regina (on the Application Of) v Environment Agency and Another: Admn 2 Apr 2004
ICO The complainant is the subject of a civil proceedings order issued under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. The Complainant wrote to the Attorney General’s Office to request information related to the making of this order. The request was transferred to the Treasury Solicitors who refused the request on the grounds that … Continue reading Treasury Solicitors (Decision Notice): ICO 23 Oct 2006
The appeal court had previously remitted a matter to the Restrictive Practices court, having found that the court might be biased. The parties having settled the main litigation, they sought the additional costs incurred by them in correcting what they said was the fault of the court. The Lord Chancellor responded that the parties were … Continue reading Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Another: CA 26 Jul 2001
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 claimant sought an order restraining the defendants from pursuing a claim in America. The parties were party to a contract governed by English law, but the allegation was one of fraud, and the defendants said this was outside the provisions of the contract. Held: Where a remedy was available both in England and in … Continue reading Roger Thomas Donohue v Armco Inc and others: CA 29 Mar 2000
The court refused leave to appeal from the High Court. It would be absurd if, when an order was made restricting commencement of proceedings by a vexatious litigant, that the High Court should not have power to restrain by the same order also commencement of proceedings in the County Court. Judges: Lord Woolf LCJ Citations: … Continue reading Ebert v Venvill (Trustee In Bankruptcy); Woolf; Midland Bank Plc and Rabinowicz (a Solicitor): CA 5 Jul 1999
The insurers refused to pay on a fire claim, saying that it was started by the insured, that the proposal was incorrect, and that in extending the value insured, the insured had misrepresented the situation. The court considered whether a jury trial was required. Citations:  EWCA Civ 311 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 69(1) … Continue reading Parsons, Parsons v Provincial Insurance Plc: CA 20 Feb 1998
The court stated that there is either no jurisdiction to hear an appeal by way of case stated in relation to an interlocutory decision, in criminal proceedings or that it is the court’s invariable practice not to entertain one. A court might simply dismiss the appeal. As to section 28 of the 1981 Act: ‘There … Continue reading Loade v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1990
A civil proceedings order was sought against the respondent. The respondent had commenced many actions against a particular company, which it was claimed were vindictive in nature. Held: Though the earliest proceedings had been vexatious it was not possible to characterise more recent attempts to litigate as such. ‘An improper motive may convert an otherwise … Continue reading HM Attorney-General v Ian Richard Flack: Admn 29 Nov 2000
The applicant sought to have set aside an order declaring him a vexatious litigant under the 1981 Act. Held: The application was refused. Judges: Ognall J Citations:  EWHC Admin 493 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Litigation Practice Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139757
The claimants sought declarations as to the ownership of copyrights to music fom Cuba. Many witnesses would be required to give evidence from Cuba. Attempts to take evidence by video link from Cuba had failed. It was suggested that the judge might travel to Cuba to take evidence as necessary, even though the claimant did … Continue reading Peer International Corp and others v Termidor Music Publishers Ltd and Another: ChD 25 May 2005
Rent demands were made by a local authority landlord on one of its tenants. The local authority, using its powers under the Act, resolved to increase rents generally. The tenant refused to pay the increased element of the rent. He argued that the resolutions and notices of increase were ultra vires and void, on the … Continue reading Wandsworth London Borough Council v Winder: HL 1985
The defendant had been made subject to a civil proceedings order but had begun criminal prosecutions from his prison cell against journalists. Held: The civil restraint order did not prevent the defendant commencing criminal actions. A criminal proceedings restraint order was made. Citations:  EWHC Admin 216 Links: Bailii Statutes: Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 … Continue reading Hm Attorney General v Gleaves: Admn 9 Mar 1999
The court declined to hear an appeal against a decision to refuse to allow the transfer of a legal aid order in criminal proceedings. Judges: Harry Ognall QC J Citations:  EWHC Admin 74 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Legal Professions, Legal Aid Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139338
Application for civil proceedings order. Citations:  EWHC Admin 619 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Litigation Practice Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138740
Citations:  EWHC Admin 408 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: See Also – Drozdowski v Department of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Oct-1998 A parking ticket had wrongly identified the town in which the ticket was issued, and the ticket described the offence as ‘No Waiting’ where the … Continue reading HM Attorney General v Drozdowski: Admn 6 Apr 1998
Application for Civil Proceedings Order. Judges: Lord Justice Kennedy, and Mrs Justice Smith Citations:  EWHC Admin 965 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Litigation Practice Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137910
The claimant, subject to a vexatious litigant order under the 1981 Act, sought leave to bring judicial review proceedings of a decision by the respondents to appoint a woman to the position of Minor Canon in the cathedral. Held: Permission was refused. He had no prospect of success, and the proceedings woud amount to an … Continue reading Regina v Dean and Chapter of St Paul’s Cathedral and Church In Wales ex parte Williamson: Admn 22 Aug 1997
Citations:  EWHC Admin 691 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Ecclesiastical, Litigation Practice Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137636
Citations:  EWHC Admin 663 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice, Ecclesiastical Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137608
If subordinate legislation cannot be construed in a way that makes it compatible with fundamental rights, it will be declared ultra vires. Rules which disallowed exemptions from court fees to a litigant in person on income support were invalid. They infringed the rule allowing access to justice. The common law had given special weight to … Continue reading Regina v Lord Chancellor ex parte John Witham: Admn 7 Mar 1997
The applicant, subject to a civil proceedings order, was refused permission to appeal to the court of appeal against refusal of his request for permission to bring judicial review proceedings against the respondent in respect of his claim for compensation for personal injuries after being assaulted. Judges: Laws J Citations:  EWHC Admin 240 Links: … Continue reading Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte E: Admn 10 Mar 1997
Citations:  EWHC Admin 155 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Crime Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137100
Reasons for Civil proceedings order. Citations:  EWHC Admin 157 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Litigation Practice Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136705
The defendants sought a declaration that they would not be liable in respect of their potential involvement in a pending action. The appellants asserted that such a declaration could not be granted since no proceedings were yet in issue. The court said that such orders might be useful in simplifying international court actions, and that … Continue reading Messier-Dowty Ltd and Another v Sabena Sa and Others: CA 21 Feb 2000
The respondent, a neighbour of the claimant, had fallen into dispute with the claimant, and issued a leaflet and signs alleging fraud. The claimants obtained an injunction, and in the absence of a substantive defence, judgement. He claimed that the judgement had deprived him of his right to a jury trial because the case involved … Continue reading Safeway Stores Plc v Albert Tate: CA 18 Dec 2000
Application by person subject to civil proceeedings order for permission to bring claims for defamation and otherwise against the defendants. Held: Leave was refused. The claims in relation to the hard copy articles have no real prospect of success and/or were an abuse of the process of the court, and claim in relation to the … Continue reading E v News International Ltd and others: QBD 22 Jul 2008
Where the Court of Appeal had refused permission to apply for judicial review after a similar refusal by a judge, that decision was also, by implication, a refusal to grant permission to appeal against the judge’s decision, and there was no scope for a further appeal to the House of Lords. It is not the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex Parte Eastaway: HL 8 Nov 2000
The court has the power to stay an action which pursued a remedy which was outside the terms of the arbitration agreement determining the dispute. The contract between the parties provided for disputes to be settled by arbitration in Belgium. The plaintiff sought injunctive relief from an English court. The defendant requested a stay. Held: … Continue reading Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd and Others: HL 17 Feb 1993
Appeals were made against orders under s42 of the 1981 Act restraining the appellants from commencing proceedings without consent of the court. Held: The non-disclosure of a bench memorandum was the usual practice internationally, and not a breach of the litigant’s human rights. The right to present a case, did not include the right to … Continue reading Attorney-General v Covey; Attorney-General v Matthews: CA 19 Feb 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
Leave to amend was given to the defendant to add a claim for a contribution. It was not an issue of fact. The statute did not imply any assumption that the defendant would would not maintain a defence. Matters of foreign law were not part of the facts of a case. Judges: Chadwick J Citations: … Continue reading Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and Others (No 8): ChD 17 Jun 1993
Sir John Donaldson MR explained that: ‘In terms of jurisdiction, there can be no doubt that this court can hear an appeal from an order made by the High Court upon an ex parte application. This jurisdiction is conferred by section 16 (1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981. Equally there is no doubt that … Continue reading WEA Records v Visions Channel 4 Ltd: CA 1983
The court gave directions on how banks and other third parties were to respond to Mareva injunctions. The plaintiff had obtained orders against companies with bank accounts in England. The action was settled, but the banks sougfht clarification. Held: The application was dismissed. The injunction had been properly granted. An innocent third party had to … Continue reading Z Ltd v A-Z and AA-LL: CA 1982
There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the defendants’, ‘not to be enforced without leave of the court save by way of … Continue reading Lockley v National Blood Transfusion Service: CA 1992
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
The plaintiff in a personal injury claim sought assessment of his damages by a jury. The judge held at first instance that this was a matter for his discretion under the Act, and exercised it in favour of the plaintiff. Held: The defendant’s appeal suceeded. The Act in section 69(3) introduced a bias against jury … Continue reading H v Ministry of Defence: CA 1991
The court was asked to look at three events envisaged, and to consider whether, if they did occur, they should be described as constituting serious deterioration. Held: ‘First of all the development of arthritis to the extent that surgery is required. Osteoarthritis is a progressive condition. It is very common in cases where damage is … Continue reading Wilson v Ministry of Defence: 1991