Author: admin

Halifax Plc Country Wide Properrty Investments Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs: VDT 5 Jul 2001

Tax avoidance – Input tax – Partially exempt trader – Building works required for that trader’s business – Trader’s input tax recovery rate restricted – Scheme for fully taxable subsidiary of trader to incur expenditure on building works – Meaning of expressions ‘supply’, ‘economic activities’ and ‘business’ – Transaction carried out for tax avoidance purposes with no business purpose – Whether transactions designed to incur input tax in subsidiary qualify as supplies – No – Appeals dismissed – EC 6th Dir. Arts. 2 and 4
[2001] UKVAT V17124
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.247559

Kingscrest Associates Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs: VDT 10 Jun 2003

Cancellation of registration on ceasing to make taxable outputs – Item 9 Group 7 Schedule 9 VATA – compatibility of changes to that group with European Law – Article 13A Sixth Directive- Supplies exempt if changes compatible with European Law – use of other language versions- Should reference be made to ECJ? Yes
[2003] UKVAT V18184
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.247576

Bertelsen v Revenue and Customs (Stamp Duty Land Tax): FTTTx 18 Mar 2021

Discovery assessments – whether information made available to HMRC before enquiry window closed – whether HMRC could reasonably have been expected to be aware of insufficiency of tax before that time – date on which discovery was made – whether ‘stale’ – held discovery assessments valid – appeals dismissed
[2021] UKFTT 76 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.663653

Clowance Owners Club Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 8 Oct 2004

VALUE ADDED TAX : Timeshare charges; whether cost components in a single onward supply of facilities to time share owners or a basket of services including certain charges as disbursements; appeal only allowed as to one charge; EC Sixth Directive Articles 11(A)(1)(2) and (3)(C); VATA 1994 sections 19(1) and (2)
[2004] UKVAT V18787
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.216480

Jalla and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Others: TCC 20 Jul 2021

Claimants’ application for an extension of time in respect of both claims currently before the court – service of witness statements
[2021] EWHC 2118 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Jalla and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Others TCC 21-Jul-2021
Issue as to whether the claimants’ purported legal representatives, Rosenblatt Limited, have authority to act . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.667723

Baines and Ernst Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 23 Sep 2004

VAT – unjust enrichment – debt management services – originally classified as standard rated but following tribunal decision in appeal by Debt Management Associates (Decision No 17880) accepted by Customs as two discrete exempt services – Customs further acceptance that VAT on appellants initial service did not result in unjust enrichment -whether VAT paid on appellants management services would result in its being unjustly enriched – finding on facts that it would – appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18769
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.216104

Telekom Deutschland (Electronic Communications – Open Internet Access – End Users’ Rights – Judgment): ECJ 2 Sep 2021

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications – Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 – Article 3 – Open internet access – Article 3(1) – End users’ rights – Article 3(2) – Prohibition of agreements and commercial practices limiting the exercise of end users’ rights – Article 3(3) – Obligation of equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic – Possibility of implementing reasonable traffic management measures – Additional ‘zero tariff’ option – Limitation on bandwidth
C-34/20, [2021] EUECJ C-34/20, ECLI:EU:C:2021:677
Bailii
European

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.668125

Pakistan International Airline Corporation v Times Travel (UK) Ltd: SC 18 Aug 2021

Whether, and if so in what circumstances, a party can set aside a contract on the ground that it was entered into as a result of the other party threatening to do a lawful act.
Lord Reed, President, Lord Hodge, Deputy President, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Kitchin, Lord Burrows
[2021] UKSC 40
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
At First Instance – Times Travel (UK) Ltd Nottingham Travel (UK) Ltd v Pakistan International Airlines Corporation ChD 14-Jun-2017
The claimants alleged undue pressure on them by the defendants to enter into contracts to compromise earlier disputes. . .
See Also – Times Travel UK Ltd and Another v Pakistan International Airline Corporation ChD 17-Jul-2018
The court considered, post judgment, directions for the taking of accounts and an application for a variation of the costs order. . .
Appeal from – Times Travel (UK) Ltd v Pakistan International Airlines Corporation CA 14-May-2019
This appeal concerns the area of lawful act duress, where a contract results from a threat of a lawful act or omission. Does lawful act duress exist at all and, if so, in what circumstances may it be invoked? . .
See Also – Times Travel UK Ltd and Another v Pakistan Internation Airlines Corporation ChD 11-Aug-2020
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.668363

Henderson v HM Advocate: HCJ 7 Sep 2010

A general provision creating a new order for lifelong restriction was read as not extending to certain convictions under the Firearms Act 1968, since the sentences applicable to such convictions fell outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.
[2010] ScotHC HCJAC – 107
Bailii
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – References (Bills) By The Attorney General and The Advocate General for Scotland – United Nations Convention On The Rights of The Child and European Charter of Local Self-Government SC 6-Oct-2021
Scots Bills were Outwith Parliament’s Competence
The AG questioned the constitutionaliity of Bills designed to give effect to two treaties to which the UK is a signatory, and passed by the Scottish Parliament as to the care of children.
Held: The laws had effect also outside Scotland . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.425922

HM Customs and Excise (Decision Notice): ICO 10 Apr 2007

The complainant requested DTI guidance held by HMRC supporting the withdrawal of the professional trustee measure. HMRC responded to confirm it held information but that it was exempt from disclosure as the documentation was legal advice and so section 42 of the Act, ‘legal professional privilege’, was engaged, and that section 35 ‘formulation of government policy’ also applied to some of the information. HMRC argued that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner investigated HMRC’s application of section 42 and found that the information requested is legal advice and is therefore covered by the exemption and that the public interest does favour maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner found section 42 applied to all the information requested and so did not investigate the application of section 35. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC dealt with the request in accordance with the Act and require no steps to be taken. An appeal was made to the Information Tribunal but the Tribunal has ruled on this appeal and dismissed the appeal.
[2007] UKICO FS50126996
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.532907

Sharman, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for Inner North London: Admn 12 May 2005

A caller reported to the police that a man had left a public house with a gun in a plastic bag. He was confronted by armed police and shot. It had in fact been a stick of wood. The officers appealed a finding of unlawful killing.
Held: The coroner had been in error to direct the jury as to what must have been in the minds of the officers.
Leveson J
[2005] EWHC 857 (Admin)
Bailii
Coroners’ Act 1988
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v HM Coroner for Exeter and East Devon ex parte Palmer 10-Dec-1997
Lord Woolf discussed the role of the coroner acting as a filter to avoid injustice: ‘In a difficult case, the Coroner is carrying out an evaluation exercise. He is looking at the evidence before him as a whole and saying to himself, without deciding . .

Cited by:
Cited – Bennett, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for Inner South London and others CA 26-Jun-2007
The deceased had been shot by the police, who mistakenly believed him to be armed. Judicial review was sought saying that the coroner had wrongly refused to leave to the jury the possible verdict of unlawful killing.
Held: The appeal was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.224850

Boso v Italy: ECHR 5 Sep 2002

The applicant was married. In 1984 his wife, who was pregnant, decided to have an abortion despite his opposition. Her pregnancy was terminated on 10 October 1984.
On 8 November 1984 the applicant brought an action against his wife in the San Dona di Piave magistrate’s court, seeking compensation for the infringement of his rights as a potential father and of the unborn child’s right to life. The applicant further challenged the constitutionality of Law no. 194 of 1978, arguing that it contravened the principle of equality between spouses as enshrined in Articles 29 and 30 of the Italian Constitution in that it left it entirely to the mother to decide whether to have an abortion and took no account of the father’s wishes.
The applicant’s wife maintained that she had acted in accordance with section 5 of Law no. 194 of 1978, by which she alone had the right to decide whether to undergo an abortion.
In an order (no. 389) of 31 March 1988 the Constitutional Court declared the constitutionality issue manifestly ill-founded on the ground that the Law complained of was based on a policy decision to grant the mother full responsibility for an abortion, and that that decision was not illogical, especially as the effects of pregnancy, both physical and mental, were felt primarily by the mother.
50490/99, [2002] ECHR 846
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care Admn 23-Sep-2021
Foetus has no Established Human Rights
The Claimants sought a declaration that section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), as well as some other remedies. The claimant had Down’s Syndrome, and complained the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.263105

South Liverpool Housing Ltd v Customs and Excise: VDT 3 Sep 2004

VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – transfer by local authority of housing stock to registered social landlord – transferee undertaking to repair, improve and maintain houses – cost of repair of tenanted dwellings – whether landlord using repair services for purpose of making taxable supply to local authority or exempt supplies of housing to tenants – consideration – whether transfer a barter arrangement – no – payment by government agency of grant to compensate for negative value of transferred houses – whether consideration for the undertaking – no – transferee making only exempt supplies of housing – appeal dismissed
[2004] UKVAT V18750
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.213726

The National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd: ComC 19 Apr 2010

Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a peril insured against occurs, the general rule is that, subject to any particular modifying terms and to the limits of indemnity provided under each insurance contract, the insured may recover for the whole of the loss from either insurer. Upon such indemnity being paid to the insured by either one of the two insurers, that insurer is, in general, entitled to recover a contribution from the other.’
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ
[2010] EWHC 773 (Comm), [2010] 1 CLC 557
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
Cited – Albion Insurance Co Ltd v Government Insurance Office (NSW) 31-Oct-1969
(High Court of Australia) Insurance – Contribution between insurers – Identity of risk insured – Loss covered by two policies – General nature and purpose of policies different – Extent of rights and liabilities created under policies different – . .
Cited – Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .

Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.408675

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others: SC 6 Mar 2013

Daejan owned the freehold of a block of apartments, managing it through an agency. The tenants were members of a resident’s association. The landlord wished to carry out works, but failed to complete the consultation requirements. The court was asked as to the extent of the flexibility given to a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal to dispense with those requirements. The LVT and Upper Tribunal had found the failure serious and prejudicial to the tenants, and had each declined to allow the claim in full.
Held: (Majority; Lord Hope and Lord Wilson dissenting) The landlord’s appeal was allowed, but on terms limiting the tenants’ aggregate liabilities.
The effective issue was whether the tenants had suffered any prejudice. Had the landlords fulfilled the procedure, the result would have been the same. The purpose of the Regulations was to ensure that tenants were not asked to pay more than was appropriate. The consultation procedure and transaprency were not ends in themselves. Nor was it appropriate to look at whether the failure was serious or minor save as far as that created prejudice to the tenants.
The discretion given to the LVT included a power to attach conditions to its exercise in favour of the landlord whether as to costs or otherwise, and such conditions may be used to remedy any prejudice to the tenants.
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption
UKSC 2011/0057, [2013] UKSC 14, [2013] 2 All ER 375, [2013] 1 WLR 854, [2013] L andTR 17, [2013] HLR 21, [2013] WLR(D) 94, [2013] RVR 164, [2013] 11 EG 80, [2013] 2 P andCR 2, [2013] 2 EGLR 45
SC Summary, SC, Bailii, WLRD
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, Service Charges (Consultation requirements) (England) Regulations 2003
England and Wales
Citing:
At UTLC – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others UTLC 27-Nov-2009
UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT – service charges – consultation requirements for qualifying works – failure at stage 2 to provide summary of observations received during stage 1 consultation period and responses to . .
Appeal from – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others CA 28-Jan-2011
The landlord had set out to refurbish the building occupied by the defendant tenants. They began a consultation process for the repairs, but failed to complete it, and the tenants objected. The landlords now appealed against rejection of their . .
Cited – Paddington Basin Developments Ltd and Others v West End Quay Estate Management Ltd and Another ChD 20-Apr-2010
The parties disputed whether a particular arrangement was covered by and subject to the 2003 Regulations.
Lewison J said: ‘[T] here are two separate strands to the policy underlying the regulation of service charges. Parliament gave two types . .
Cited – Howard v Fanshawe 29-Jun-1895
In equity a proviso for re-entry in a lease is to be treated as a security for the payment of the rent.
A tenant applying for relief from forfeiture will normally be required to pay the lessor’s costs of the forfeiture proceedings, save in so . .
Cited – Egerton v Jones CA 1939
A mortgagee of a leasehold interest claimed that he should have been given notice of a section 146 notice served on the lessee.
Held: A mortgagee by subdemise is always at the risk of a lessor obtaining re-entry for breach of covenant without . .
Cited – Factors (Sundries) Ltd v Miller CA 1952
The tenant seeking and being granted forfeiture was legally aided and the court was precluded by statute from making an order for costs against him.
Held: There was nonetheless jurisdiction to require him to pay the landlord’s costs as a . .
Cited – 30-40 Grafton Way – Camden : London LVT 30-Oct-2006
Service Charges . .
Cited – Camden v Leaseholders of Flats on Grafton Way LT 30-Jun-2008
LT LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – consultation requirements for qualifying works – failure to serve notice – application for dispensation – financial consequences for landlord – whether relevant – . .
Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011
Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal
Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper . .
Cited – Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd SC 8-Feb-2012
The respondent was employed by the appellant. He was resident in GB, and was based here, but much work was overseas. At the time of his dismissal he was working in Libya. The company denied that UK law applied. He alleged unfair dismissal.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.471358

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Commerzbank AG: ChD 1990

Mummery J set out the correct approach to interpretation of double taxation agreements as laid down in Fothergill. He said ‘(1) It is necessary to look first for a clear meaning of the words used in the relevant article of the convention, bearing in mind that ‘consideration of the purpose of an enactment is always a legitimate part of the process of interpretation’: per Lord Wilberforce and Lord Scarman. A strictly literal approach to interpretation is not appropriate in construing legislation which gives effect to or incorporates an international treaty: per Lord Fraser and Lord Scarman. A literal interpretation may be obviously inconsistent with the purposes of the particular article or of the treaty as a whole. If the provisions of a particular article are ambiguous, it may be possible to resolve that ambiguity by giving a purposive construction to the convention looking at it as a whole by reference to its language as set out in the relevant United Kingdom legislative instrument: per Lord Diplock.
(2) The process of interpretation should take account of the fact that – ‘The language of an international convention has not been chosen by an English parliamentary draftsman. It is neither couched in the conventional English legislative idiom nor designed to be construed exclusively by English judges. It is addressed to a much wider and more varied judicial audience than is an Act of Parliament which deals with purely domestic law. It should be interpreted, as Lord Wilberforce put it in James Buchanan and Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Limited, [1987] AC 141 at 152, ‘unconstrained by technical rules of English law, or by English legal precedent, but on broad principles of general acceptation’: per Lord Diplock and Lord Scarman.
(3) Among those principles is the general principle of international law, now embodied in art 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that ‘a treaty should be interpreted in good faith and in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose’. A similar principle is expressed in slightly different terms in McNair’s The Law of Treaties (1961) p 365, where it is stated that the task of applying or construing or interpreting a treaty is ‘the duty of giving effect to the expressed intention of the parties, that is, their intention as expressed in the words used by them in the light of the surrounding circumstances’. It is also stated in that work that references to the primary necessity of giving effect to the ‘plain terms’ of a treaty or construing words according to their ‘general and ordinary meaning’ or their ‘natural signification’ are to be a starting point or prima facie guide and ‘cannot be allowed to obstruct the essential quest in the application of treaties, namely the search for the real intention of the contracting parties in using the language employed by them’.
(4) If the adoption of this approach to the article leaves the meaning of the relevant provision unclear or ambiguous or leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable recourse may be had to ‘supplementary means of interpretation’ including travaux preparatoires: per Lord Diplock referring to art 32 of the Vienna Convention, which came into force after the conclusion of this double taxation convention, but codified an already existing principle of public international law. See also Lord Fraser and Lord Scarman.
(5) Subsequent commentaries on a convention or treaty have persuasive value only, depending on the cogency of their reasoning. Similarly, decisions of foreign courts on the interpretation of a convention or treaty text depend for their authority on the reputation and status of the court in question: per Lord Diplock and per Lord Scarman.
(6) Aids to the interpretation of a treaty such as travaux preparatoires, international case law and the writings of jurists are not a substitute for study of the terms of the convention. Their use is discretionary, not mandatory, depending, for example, on the relevance of such material and the weight to be attached to it: per Lord Scarman.’
Mummery J
[1990] STC 285
Civil Procedure Rules Part 36.21
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd HL 10-Jul-1980
The plaintiff, on arriving at the airport found that his luggage had been lost. The defendant denied liability saying he had not notified his claim within the requisite period.
Held: Elementary justice requires that the rules by which the . .
Appeal from – Petrotrade Inc v Texaco Ltd CA 23-May-2000
Where a defendant failed to beat a claimant’s part 36 offer to settle, but judgment was given summarily the rule did not mean that the defendant was necessarily to be ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis, and to pay interest. Summary judgment . .

Cited by:
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Smallwood and Another CA 8-Jul-2010
The taxpayers had set up trusts which they said were based in Mauritius allowing them to claim double taxation relief. The Revenue had issued closure notices, confirmed by the SPCT, but overturned by the High Court. The Revenue appealed, saying that . .
Cited – Ben Nevis (Holdings) Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 23-May-2013
The company owed very substantial arrears of tax in South Africa. Assets had been transferred to a bank account in London in the name of an associated company. The double taxation treaty with South Africa now provided for mutlual assistance and the . .
Cited – Fowler v Revenue and Customs SC 20-May-2020
The taxpayer, a diver resident in South Africa had undertaken engagements within UK waters and now disputed his liability to Income Tax using a deeming provision in section 5 of the 2005 Act being self employed.
Held: HMRC’s appeal succeeded. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.420677

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others: CA 28 Jan 2011

The landlord had set out to refurbish the building occupied by the defendant tenants. They began a consultation process for the repairs, but failed to complete it, and the tenants objected. The landlords now appealed against rejection of their request that the tribunal exercise its discretion to make an order notwithstanding the failure.
Held: The appeal failed.
Gross LJ concentrated on three issues. First, ‘the financial effect of the grant or refusal of dispensation [on the individual landlord and tenants] is an irrelevant consideration when exercising the discretion under section 20ZA(1)’. Secondly, that the LVT had not erred in treating Daejan more harshly than if it had been a landlord controlled or owned by the lessees. Thirdly, ‘significant prejudice to the tenants is a consideration of first importance in exercising the dispensatory discretion under section 20ZA(1)’.
However, he went on to say that Daejan’s failure ‘constituted a serious failing and did cause the respondents serious prejudice’, and he echoed the LVT and Upper Tribunal in saying that this was not ‘a technical, minor or excusable oversight’. The LVT had been entitled not to speculate on what would have happened if there had been no breach, on the ground that the respondents’ ‘loss of opportunity (to make further representations and have them considered) . . itself amount[ed] to significant prejudice’. In agreement with the Upper Tribunal, he doubted that the LVT would have been entitled to accede to Daejan’s offer to reduce the chargeable amount by andpound;50,000, and that, anyway, the LVT was entitled to reject that proposal.
Sedley, Pitchford, Gross LLJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 38, [2011] HLR 21, [2011] L and TR 14, [2011] 5 EG 105 (CS), [2011] 1 WLR 2330
Bailii
Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others UTLC 27-Nov-2009
UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT – service charges – consultation requirements for qualifying works – failure at stage 2 to provide summary of observations received during stage 1 consultation period and responses to . .
Cited – Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955
The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others SC 6-Mar-2013
Daejan owned the freehold of a block of apartments, managing it through an agency. The tenants were members of a resident’s association. The landlord wished to carry out works, but failed to complete the consultation requirements. The court was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.428308

Wensleydale’s Settlement Trustees v Inland Revenue Commissioners: SCIT 1996

The test for where a trust has its tax residence is the place which is the centre of top-level management.
Mr David Shirley
[1996] STC 241
Cited by:
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Smallwood and Another CA 8-Jul-2010
The taxpayers had set up trusts which they said were based in Mauritius allowing them to claim double taxation relief. The Revenue had issued closure notices, confirmed by the SPCT, but overturned by the High Court. The Revenue appealed, saying that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.420678

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others: UTLC 27 Nov 2009

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT – service charges – consultation requirements for qualifying works – failure at stage 2 to provide summary of observations received during stage 1 consultation period and responses to them – delay in providing copies of estimates until after lessees advised that contract awarded – whether significant prejudice caused to lessees – Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s20ZA
Carnwath LJ SP
[2009] UKUT 233 (LC), [2010] 2 P and CR 8, [2010] L and TR 11
Bailii
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 20ZA
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others CA 28-Jan-2011
The landlord had set out to refurbish the building occupied by the defendant tenants. They began a consultation process for the repairs, but failed to complete it, and the tenants objected. The landlords now appealed against rejection of their . .
At UTLC – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others SC 6-Mar-2013
Daejan owned the freehold of a block of apartments, managing it through an agency. The tenants were members of a resident’s association. The landlord wished to carry out works, but failed to complete the consultation requirements. The court was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.415042

Howard v Fanshawe: 29 Jun 1895

In equity a proviso for re-entry in a lease is to be treated as a security for the payment of the rent.
A tenant applying for relief from forfeiture will normally be required to pay the lessor’s costs of the forfeiture proceedings, save in so far as those costs have been increased by the lessor’s opposition to the grant of relief, upon appropriate terms.
The forfeiture by peaceable re-entry took place on 21 February 1894 and the application for relief was made on 6 July 1894: within six months. Stirling J said: ‘The statute fixes a period of six months only from recovery in ejectment within which an application for relief may be made, and it is said that the whole evil which the Act was passed to remove would be re-introduced if it were to be held that the jurisdiction to give relief were to be applied in a case where peaceable possession had been taken. Upon that two observations may be made: first, that if the landlord desires to limit the time within which the tenant can apply for relief, he can avail himself of legal process to recover possession and so get the benefit of the statute; and, secondly, that it does not follow that a Court of Equity would now grant relief at any distance of time from the happening of the event which gave rise to it. It appears to me that, inasmuch as the inconvenience of so doing has been recognised by the legislature, and a time has been fixed after which, in a case of ejectment, no proceedings for relief can be taken, a similar period might well be fixed, by analogy, within which an application for general relief in Equity must be made. A Court of Equity might possibly say that the action for relief must be brought within six months from the resumption of possession by the lessor.’
McMullen J
[1895] 2 Ch 581, [1895] UKLawRpCh 111
Commomlii
Common Law Procedure Act 1852
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others SC 6-Mar-2013
Daejan owned the freehold of a block of apartments, managing it through an agency. The tenants were members of a resident’s association. The landlord wished to carry out works, but failed to complete the consultation requirements. The court was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.471751

Trevor Smallwood Trust v Revenue and Customs: SCIT 19 Feb 2008

SCIT CAPITAL GAINS TAX – double taxation relief – trust assets included shares which would realise a gain on disposal – UK settlor had power to appoint new trustees – tax planning scheme – new trustees in Mauritius appointed after which shares sold after which UK trustees appointed – all events took place in same tax year – whether trustees entitled to double taxation relief – whether trustees resident only in Mauritius – no – or also resident in the UK – yes – whether place of effective management of trust was Mauritius – no – or UK – yes – appeal dismissed – TCGA 1992 S 77(7); Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Mauritius) Order 1981 SI 1981 No 1121.
[2008] UKSPC SPC00669
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
At SPCT – Smallwood v Revenue and Customs ChD 8-Apr-2009
The taxpayer had settled company shares for the benefit of himself and his family. He appealed from an amendment to his tax returns creating a CGT liability of 6 million pounds.
Held: The appeal was successful. . .
At SPCT – Revenue and Customs v Smallwood and Another CA 8-Jul-2010
The taxpayers had set up trusts which they said were based in Mauritius allowing them to claim double taxation relief. The Revenue had issued closure notices, confirmed by the SPCT, but overturned by the High Court. The Revenue appealed, saying that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.267755

Smallwood v Revenue and Customs: ChD 8 Apr 2009

The taxpayer had settled company shares for the benefit of himself and his family. He appealed from an amendment to his tax returns creating a CGT liability of 6 million pounds.
Held: The appeal was successful.
Mann J
[2009] EWHC 777 (Ch), [2009] STI 1092, [2009] WTLR 669, [2009] BTC 135, [2009] STC 1222, 11 ITL Rep 943
Bailii
Taxation of Capital Gains Act 1992 86, Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income)(Mauritius) Order 1981
England and Wales
Citing:
At SPCT – Trevor Smallwood Trust v Revenue and Customs SCIT 19-Feb-2008
SCIT CAPITAL GAINS TAX – double taxation relief – trust assets included shares which would realise a gain on disposal – UK settlor had power to appoint new trustees – tax planning scheme – new trustees in . .
Cited – James Buchanan and Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd HL 1978
A consignment of whisky was stolen whilst on consignemt from a bonded warehouse under CMR terms for Teheran. In bond, it was worth 7,000 pounds, and on export no excise duty was to be paid. Being stolen in the course of transit, excise duty of . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Revenue and Customs v Smallwood and Another CA 8-Jul-2010
The taxpayers had set up trusts which they said were based in Mauritius allowing them to claim double taxation relief. The Revenue had issued closure notices, confirmed by the SPCT, but overturned by the High Court. The Revenue appealed, saying that . .
At ChD – Fowler v Revenue and Customs SC 20-May-2020
The taxpayer, a diver resident in South Africa had undertaken engagements within UK waters and now disputed his liability to Income Tax using a deeming provision in section 5 of the 2005 Act being self employed.
Held: HMRC’s appeal succeeded. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.331156

Willis v Childe: 14 Jan 1851

Injunction granted to restrain trustees of a grammar school removing the master.
[1851] EngR 121, (1850-1851) 13 Beav 117, (1851) 51 ER 46
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
Narrowly Distinguished – The Queen On The Prosecution Of Wray v The Governors Of The Darlington Free Grammar School 27-Nov-1844
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .
Cited – Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.296437

Boahen, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for the Home Department: Admn 5 Jun 2009

The claimant, from Ghana, had entered on a visitors visa, but had stayed on after its expiry. He said that he had not left because of his health. He returned to Ghana, and now sought to be re-admitted, the SSHD having granted a visa, but then purporting to cancel it.
Held: The officer had had no power to cancel a visa once validly granted.
Collins J
[2009] EWHC 1407 (Admin), [2010] Imm AR 76
Bailii
Immigration Act 1971
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal From – Secretary of State for The Home Department v Boahen CA 28-May-2010
The SSHD appealed against an order finding that its officer had acted without power in cancelling a valid visitor’s visa once granted. The officer had decided that the visit was not for the purpose stated.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.347251

Wilson and Another v Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority: Admn 19 Jun 2009

The claimants, who promoted responsible motorsports challenged the defendant’s Traffic Regulation Order banning vehicular traffic on certain unsealed roads in the Dales, saying that there was nothing to show that the relevant committee had taken into account the necessary balancing exercise.
Held: The duty to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular traffic is that prescribed by section 122(1). However that duty takes effect so far as practicable in the light of the matters to be taken into account under section 122(b). In this case the absence if reference to the balancing exercise under section 122 was consistent. The Order was quashed.
[2009] EWHC 1425 (Admin)
Bailii
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 22B92), National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, National Park Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England) Regulations 2007, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Environment Act 1995, Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – LPC Group Plc, Regina (on the Application Of) v Leicester City Council Admn 18-Oct-2002
Challenge to parking scheme.
Held: As to section 122 of the 1984 Act, if the Defendant has not had proper regard to the matters set out in section 122(1) and (2) it did not direct its mind to matters it was bound to consider.
Section . .
Cited – UK Waste Management Ltd v West Lancashire District Council; St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Same QBD 5-Apr-1996
It was not a proper purpose of an experimental traffic scheme to seek to ban heavy goods vehicles. The council used traffic calming measures to seek to dissuade heavy goods vehicles using certain roads to get to a waste management site.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.347118

X v Y and Another: EAT 15 Apr 1999

[1999] UKEAT 534 – 98 – 1504
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.205134

Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd: CA 11 Feb 1991

As to the exercise of relief in equity outside the limitation period: ‘This is not to say that courts of equity should now grant relief without any regard to the statutory provisions. Equity follows the law, but not slavishly nor always: see Cardozo C.J. in Graf v. Hope Building Corporation (1930) 254 N.Y. 1,9. On this we have the benefit of guidance elsewhere in the field of relief from forfeiture. Section 210 of the Common Law Procedure Act 1852, which is still in force, limited to six months after judgment the period within which a tenant could apply for relief in the non-payment of rent cases to which that statute applied, viz., where the rent was six months in arrears. Courts of equity have due regard to this statutory limitation in non-payment of rent cases where the statute does not apply: in cases of forfeiture by peaceable re-entry, and’ in cases where possession has been taken under a court order where less than six months’ rent was in arrears.’
Nicholls LJ
[1992] 1 All ER 141
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd HL 12-Dec-1991
Relief from forfeiture was available against a landlord who had peaceably re-entered property subject to a tenancy without a court order. Such a landlord was still ‘proceeding’ to enforce his rights of forfeiture until he obtained a judgment for . .
Cited – Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .
Cited – Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.234852

James Buchanan and Company Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd: CA 2 Dec 1976

A trailer full of whisky had been stolen. Four fifths of its retail value was excise duty. Because it was to have been exported, duty had not been paid. On the theft the owners had had to pay the duty. The owners sued the carriers for the loss, but the court had to decide the value of the cargo.
Held: At common law the carriers would have to pay the full losses, but the 1965 Act imported the European Convention.
Lord Denning discussed the correct approach to interpretation of an international convention.
Lord Denning MR, Roskill LJ, Lawton LJ
[1976] EWCA Civ 9, [1977] QB 208
Bailii
Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Bulmer (HP) Ltd v Bollinger SA CA 1974
The plaintiff complained that the respondent had described its drink ‘Babycham’ as a champagne perry, which it said was a misuse of the appellation ‘champagne’.
Held: The court considered the effect of European legislation on the law of . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – James Buchanan and Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd HL 1978
A consignment of whisky was stolen whilst on consignemt from a bonded warehouse under CMR terms for Teheran. In bond, it was worth 7,000 pounds, and on export no excise duty was to be paid. Being stolen in the course of transit, excise duty of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.262714

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2006

The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on public liability policies which covered claims made during the currency of the policy rather than under employers’ liability polcies which covered damage incurred during the policy.
Held: MMU’s policy required the injury rather than its cause, to arise during the policy, and they were liable to indemnify Bolton unless CU were liable. CU’s policy provided cover only during the time of exposure, and the claimant had no claim against them. An insurer is entitled to say that he has only agreed to issue on certain terms and he ought to be able to rely on that position not only against his insured but also as against a co-insurer. The rejection by an insurer on the grounds of lack of cover could not be counted as a waiver of his right later to plead a breach of condition even in respect of a breach which had already happened.
Auld LJ, Longmore LJ, Hallett LJ
[2006] EWCA Civ 50, Times 09-Feb-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 1492, [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR 173
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Cartledge v E Jopling and Sons Ltd HL 1963
The plaintiffs were steel dressers who, in the course of their employment, had inhaled quantities of noxious dust which had caused them to suffer from pneumoconiosis. They issued proceedings on 1 October 1956 but were unable to show any breach of . .
Cited – Keenen v Miller Insulation and Engineering Ltd 8-Dec-1987
The claimant’s cause of action for lung fibrosis did not arise at the time he was exposed to asbestos between August 1952 and May 1953 because at that stage he had not suffered physical injury by May 1953. Basing himself on the evidence of Dr Rudd . .
Cited – Promet Engineering (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Formerly Self-Elevating Platform Management Pte Limited) v Nicholas Colwyn Sturge and others (The Nukila) CA 26-Mar-1997
Insurers were liable for other damage to ship hull if there had been more than a latent defect in it. In Inchmaree clauses in English law, ‘damage’ usually refers to a changed physical state. . .
Cited – McCaul v Elias Wild 14-Sep-1989
The plaintiff who had suffered pleural thickening from inhalation of asbestos fibres in 1943 – 1950 suffered no actionable injury until about 1985, when he first experienced breathlessness. . .
Cited – Arnold v Central Electricity Generating Board HL 22-Oct-1987
The plaintiff was widow and administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband. He had worked from April 1938 to April 1943 for a predecessor to the CEGB. He had been exposed to asbestos dust as a result of his employer’s negligence and breach of . .
Cited – Guidera v NEI Projects (India) Ltd 17-Nov-1988
The plaintiff was exposed to asbestos in 1952 and 1953 and later diagnosed with asbestosis.
Held: He had suffered no injury by 4th June 1954 because physical injury would not occur for at least 5 (and more likely 10 – 20) years after exposure. . .
Cited – Jameson and Wyatt (Executors of the Estate of David Allen Jameson) v Central Electricity Generating Board and Babcock Energy Limited 10-Mar-1995
The plaintiff claimed damages for mesothelioma. CEGB had provided a contractual indemnity in respect of damage or injury occurring before building works were taken over by a client in 1960. The question was whether a workman who died from . .
Cited – Kammins Ballrooms Co Limited v Zenith Investments (Torquay) Limited HL 1970
The tenant had served his section 26 notice under the 1954 Act, but then began the court proceedings before the minumum two month period had expired. The landlord did not take the point at first, and delivered an answer and negotiated compensation. . .
Cited – China National Foreign Trade Transportation Corporation v Evlogia Shipping Co SA of Panama (The Mihalios Xilas) HL 1979
A hire clause was in bespoke terms providing for withdrawal ‘in default of payment’. The payment of hire for the final instalment was deficient because, as the umpire held, the charterers’ deductions for the length of the final voyage and bunkers on . .
Cited – Welch v Royal Exchange Assurance CA 1938
The court was asked whether compliance with a clause in the insurance contract was a condition precedent. There was also a question whether the insured could rely on facts arising after the making of their claim.
Held: If a clause does not set . .
Cited – Peyman v Lanjani CA 1985
Application was made for consent to assign a lease. The court was asked whether or not the purchaser of a leasehold interest in a property, who had elected to affirm the contract despite a repudiatory breach by the vendor, could be held to his . .
Cited – Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .
Cited – Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
Cited – Oliver Ashworth (Holdings) Limited v Ballard (Kent) Limited CA 18-Mar-1999
In order for the landlord to claim double rent where a tenant held over unlawfully after the tenancy was determined, the landlord must not do anything to indicate that the lease might be continuing, for example by denying the validity of break . .
Cited – James, Regina v; Regina v Karimi CACD 25-Jan-2006
The defendants appealed their convictions for murder, saying that the court had not properly guided the jury on provocation. The court was faced with apparently conflicting decision of the House of Lords (Smith) and the Privy Council (Holley).
Cited by:
Cited – Lexington Insurance Co v AGF Insurance Ltd HL 30-Jul-2009
The respondent insurers had been held liable in Washington, and had been granted indemnity against the appellants by the Court of Appeal. The insurance contract had been under the law of Pennsylvania, but that of the re-insurance under the law of . .
Contrasted – Employers’ Liability Insurance ‘Trigger’ Litigation: BAI (Run Off) Ltd v Durham and Others SC 28-Mar-2012
The court considered the liability of insurers of companies now wound up for mesothelioma injuries suffered by former employees of those companies, and in particular whether the 1930 Act could be used to impose liability. The insurers now appealed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.238308

Rutherford v Richardson: HL 1923

The decision of legal issues must depend on rigid rules of evidence necessarily general in their scope. It was very likely, therefore, in individual applications, to present an appearance of artificiality and even of inconsistency: ‘The issues pronounced upon by courts in criminal, and indeed, in civil matters are attended with such decisive consequences that the adoption in matters of evidence of a standard of admissibility which is so cautious as to be meticulous may not only be defended, but is in fact essential.’ and ‘Applying these considerations to the kind of difficulty which has often presented itself in the Divorce Court, we find that a case which has sometimes been ignorantly derided is in fact both logical and defensible: for instance A, a husband, brings against his wife, B, a petition for divorce on the ground of her adultery with a named co-respondent, C. There is some independent evidence against both B and C, but not sufficient to justify a positive adverse conclusion. B, however, makes a full confession. Here the court may very reasonably pronounce a decree against B, while concluding that the matter is not established as against C. Indeed, to hold otherwise would be to lay it down that the admission or confession of B – which may be quite untrue and which may be induced by hidden and private motives – is to be treated as good evidence against C. And so it happens that the court may quite reasonably conclude that it is proved that B has committed adultery with C, but not that C has committed adultery with B.’
Viscount Birkenhead
[1923] AC 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222546

Regina v Hayter: HL 3 Feb 2005

The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. The judge had directed that the jury could use the fact of the actual murderer’s conviction to support their consideration of the guilt of the middleman and the prime mover. The actual murderer’s guilt was proved by confession. The others objected that this amounted to conviction of them on the basis of the confession of the third.
Held: The appeals failed (by a majority). The value of joint trial was accepted subject to the protection of defendants. A voluntary out of court confession or admission against interest made by a defendant is an exception to the hearsay rule, and is admissible against him, but in a joint trial, the prosecution may not rely on what the maker of a confession said against a co-accused, and a trial judge must direct the jury to ignore a confession made by an accused in considering the case against a co-defendant. Some of the earlier cases on the topic would now be decided differently because of changes in the admissibility of hearsay evidence, and those case were no longer relevant. The rules against admission of such evidence should be relaxed.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2005] UKHL 6, Times 07-Feb-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 605
House of Lords, Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Lake CACD 1976
Subject to a judge’s discretion to order separate trials in the interests of justice, there are powerful public reasons why joint offences should be tried jointly. . .
Cited – Regina v Randall HL 18-Dec-2003
Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By . .
Appeal from – Regina v Hayter CACD 16-Apr-2003
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, on the basis that the jury had used a conclusion about the guilt of a jointly accused to support his own conviction.
Held: Section 74 had altered the law, and earlier cases were no . .
Cited – Regina v Rhodes 1959
. .
Cited – Hollington v E Hewthorn and Co Ltd CA 1943
Decisions of an earlier tribunal were not binding or admissible in later proceedings where the earlier proceedings were before a court of criminal jurisdiction. Evidence of a prior conviction would not have been admissible in separate criminal . .
Cited – Regina v Spinks CACD 1982
Spinks was charged under section 4(1) of the 1967 Act, in that knowing or believing that a Mr Fairey had committed an arrestable offence, he acted with intent to impede his apprehension or prosecution. To prove that Fairey had committed an . .
Cited – Regina v Hickey, Hickey, Robinson, Molloy CACD 30-Jul-1997
The case concerned the production for the benefit of the defence, of the prison records of a prosecution witness who was putting forward an account of a cell confession. The Appeal Court is not concerned with the guilt or innocence of the appellant, . .
Cited – Lobban v The Queen PC 28-Apr-1995
(Jamaica) The judge had no discretion to exclude evidence on request of co-defendant in joint trial. The exculpatory part of co-accused statement not to be excluded since it was his right to have it put in. Those who are charged with an offence . .
Cited – HM Advocate v Kemp 1891
. .
Cited – Montes v HM Advocate HCJ 1990
The appellant was convicted of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of a prohibition on the importation of cocaine by importing a quantity of cocaine on a ship which docked at Greenock. The trial judge directed the jury that, in . .
Cited – McIntosh v HM Advocate HCJ 1986
The appellant was convicted of supplying cannabis to a named individual at a house in Paisley. The appellant had acted with his co-accused Miss C who had made the actual supply. There was sufficient evidence against Miss C to prove that she had made . .
Cited – Rutherford v Richardson HL 1923
The decision of legal issues must depend on rigid rules of evidence necessarily general in their scope. It was very likely, therefore, in individual applications, to present an appearance of artificiality and even of inconsistency: ‘The issues . .
Cited – Myers v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1965
Limits to Admission of Hearsay Evidence
It was not for the House to alter the admissibility of hearsay evidence on a case by case basis.
Lord Reid said: ‘I have never taken a narrow view of the functions of this House as an appellate tribunal. The common law must be developed to . .
Cited – Regina v Blastland HL 1985
The majority decision of the House in Myers v DPP ‘established the principle, never since challenged, that it is for the legislature, not the judiciary, to create new exceptions to the hearsay rule.’ and ‘Hearsay evidence is not excluded because it . .
Cited – Teper v The Queen PC 1952
The defendant was charged with arson of his own shop. A woman had been heard to shout to a passing motorist ‘Your place burning and you going away from the fire’.
Held: the defendant’s alibi could not be contradicted by the evidence of a . .

Cited by:
Cited – Simmons and Another v Regina PC 3-Apr-2006
(Bahamas) The appellants challenged admission of confession statements at their trial. A statement was not to be admitted without proof hat it had not been obtained by oppression.
Held: The defendant would have failed in a submission of no . .
Cited – Persad v Trinidad and Tobago PC 23-Jul-2007
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board considered the admissibility of out of court admissions as against co-defendants. Three defendants faced allegations of a series of violent crimes. The appellant said the only evidence against him for an offence of . .
Cited – Regina v Abdroikof, Regina v Green; Regina v Williamson HL 17-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether a jury in criminal trials containing variously a Crown Prosecution Service solicitor, or a police officer would have the appearance of bias. In Abdroikof, the presence of the police officer on the jury was discovered only . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222206

Santos v Santos: CA 16 Feb 1972

The court considered whether one party who lived in Spain and the other who lived mainly, but not exclusively, in England, were, despite several periods of close cohabitation, living apart.
Held: Mere physical separation without more did not constitute living apart. This ‘something more’ they recognised as the consortium vitae (in contrast to divortium a mensa et thoro) which comprised different elements, the presence or absence of which would go to show more or less conclusively whether the matrimonial relationship does or does not exist .
The court discussed the meaning of the phrase ‘living together’ when used in the Act: ‘. . use is again made of words with a well settled matrimonial meaning — ‘living together’, a phrase which is simply the antithesis of living apart, and ‘household’, a word which essentially refers to people held together by a particular kind of tie, even if temporarily separated . .’ and ‘. . ‘living apart’ . . is a state of affairs to establish which it is in the vast generality of cases arising under those heads necessary to prove something more than that the husband and wife were physically separated. For the purpose of that vast generality, it is sufficient to say that the relevant state of affairs does not exist while both parties recognise the marriage as subsisting. That involves considering attitudes of mind; and naturally the difficulty of judicially determining that attitude in a particular case may on occasions be great.’
Petitioning wife’s appeal against the dismissal of her undefended petition for dissolution of marriage, brought under section 1 and section 2 (1) (d) of the 1969 Act, alleging irretrievable breakdown of the marriage as shown by the fact that the parties had lived apart for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and the husband consented to the grant of a decree. The judge had not allowed the petition on the basis that the parties had lived under the same roof.
Davies, Sachs, Ormrod LJJ
[1972] Fam 247, [1972] EWCA Civ 9, [1972] 2 All ER 246, [1972] 2 All ER 246, [1972] 2 WLR 889
Bailii
Divorce Reform Act 1969 1 2(1)(d)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Gully v Dix; In re Dix deceased CA 21-Jan-2004
The claimant sought provision from the estate under the Act. She had cohabited with the deceased for many years, but had moved out several months before the death because of her concern for his drunkenness which lead to threats of self harm.
Cited – Witkowska v Kaminski ChD 25-Jul-2006
The claimant sought provision from the estate claiming to have lived with the deceased as his partner for the two years preceding his death. She appealed an order which would be enough to allow her to live in Poland, but not in England. She said . .
Cited – Dooris v Dooris CANI 18-Jan-2002
Appeal against dismissal of undefended divorce petition, based upon two years’ separation and consent. The parties still occupied the same property, but said that they lived separate lives.
Held: The parties to a marriage shall be treated as . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.196716

Director of Buildings and Land v Shun Fung Ironworks Limited: PC 1995

The House considered a claim for compensation in the form of loss of profits.
Held: The loss of profits in the shadow period, being the period after the possibility that the claimant’s site might be resumed became known and which had a paralyzing effect on its operations, were awarded.
Lord Nicholls held that such losses might be recovered if they satisfy three conditions, namely, that the losses were causally connected with the resumption; that they were not too remote; and that they were not losses which a reasonable person would have avoided.
Lord Nicholls said: ‘The purpose of these provisions, in Hong Kong and England, is to provide fair compensation for a claimant whose land has been compulsorily taken from him. This is sometimes described as the principle of equivalence. No allowance is to be made because the resumption or acquisition was compulsory; and land is to be valued at the price it might be expected to realise if sold by a willing seller, not an unwilling seller. But subject to these qualifications, a claimant is entitled to be compensated fairly and fully for his loss. Conversely, and built into the concept of fair compensation, is the corollary that a claimant is not entitled to receive more than fair compensation: a person is entitled to compensation for losses fairly attributable to the taking of his land, but not to any greater amount. It is ultimately by this touchstone, with its two facets, that all claims for compensation succeed or fail.’
‘The law expects those who claim compensation to behave reasonably. If a reasonable person in the position of the claimant would have taken steps to reduce the loss, and the claimant failed to do so, he cannot fairly expect to be compensated for the loss or the unreasonable part of it. Likewise if a reasonable person in the position of the claimant would not have incurred, or would not incur, the expenditure being claimed, fairness does not require that the authority should be responsible for such expenditure.’
Lord Nicholls
[1995] 2 AC 111
England and Wales

Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.250977

Regina v Spinks: CACD 1982

Spinks was charged under section 4(1) of the 1967 Act, in that knowing or believing that a Mr Fairey had committed an arrestable offence, he acted with intent to impede his apprehension or prosecution. To prove that Fairey had committed an arrestable offence, the prosecution relied on police officers statements as to statements made by Fairey, in the absence of the defendant, in which he said that he had stabbed someone. A submission of no case to answer was rejected and Spinks was convicted.
Held: The Court allowed his appeal. The court referred to ‘the universal rule which excludes out of court admissions being used to provide evidence against a co-accused, whether indicted jointly or separately’. ‘In the judgment of this Court the offence with which the appellant was charged and the means of establishing it do not provide any exception to the universal rule which excludes out of court admissions being used to provide evidence against a co-accused, whether indicted jointly or separately’ and ‘In his summing-up the learned recorder left the jury with the clear impression that they could, if they wished, rely upon Fairey’s admissions to prove the wounding, not only against him but against the appellant. In doing so there was a plain misdirection.’
Watkins LJ, Kilner Brown and Russell JJ
[1982] 1 All ER 587
Criminal Law Act 1967 4(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .
Cited – Persad v Trinidad and Tobago PC 23-Jul-2007
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board considered the admissibility of out of court admissions as against co-defendants. Three defendants faced allegations of a series of violent crimes. The appellant said the only evidence against him for an offence of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222542

Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm): ChD 26 Jul 2005

A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but for’ test set out in the Kuwait Airlines case was passed. ‘But for’ the negligence relief would have been obtained. The law has abandoned the theory that a claimant’s impecuniosity absolves a tortfeasor from liability. As to damages, the value of the lease would include a sum in respect of loss of profits.
Lewison J
[2005] EWHC 1675 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company and Others (Nos 4 and 5) HL 16-May-2002
After the invasion of Kuwait, the Iraqi government had dissolved Kuwait airlines, and appropriated several airplanes. Four planes were destroyed by Allied bombing, and 6 more were appropriated again by Iran.
Held: The appeal failed. No claim . .
Cited – Hopkins v Mackenzie CA 27-Oct-1994
A loss arising from a solicitor’s failure to pursue a case arose only when the claim was struck out, not earlier when compromised, and even though value already diminished. Accordingly the limitation period began to run from that time. . .
Cited – Khan v R M Falvey and Co (a Firm) CA 22-Mar-2002
The claimant sought damages from his former solicitors for failing to act to avoid his case being struck out. The second action was itself delayed, and the defendants asserted that the cause of action occurred not when his claim was actually struck . .
Cited – Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd CA 11-Feb-1991
As to the exercise of relief in equity outside the limitation period: ‘This is not to say that courts of equity should now grant relief without any regard to the statutory provisions. Equity follows the law, but not slavishly nor always: see Cardozo . .
Cited – Lagden v O’Connor HL 4-Dec-2003
The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
Cited – Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd HL 12-Dec-1991
Relief from forfeiture was available against a landlord who had peaceably re-entered property subject to a tenancy without a court order. Such a landlord was still ‘proceeding’ to enforce his rights of forfeiture until he obtained a judgment for . .
Cited – Lovelock v Margo CA 1963
The tenant wished to assign the lease. The lease contained the ‘usual covenant’ not to assign without consent, that consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The landlord had refused a request from the tenant to assign the lease because she was ‘not . .
Cited – Thatcher v CH Pearce and Sons (Contractors) Ltd 1968
(Bristol Assizes) The tenant was the tenant of a scrap yard. He had paid his rent promptly, until he was sent to prison. Thereafter he failed to pay the rent; and had no access to legal advice. The landlord peaceably re-entered for non-payment of . .
Cited – Crehan v Inntrepreneur Pub Company (CPC) CA 21-May-2004
The claimant had taken two leases, but had been made subject to beer ties with the defendant. He claimed damages for the losses, saying he had been forced to pay higher prices than those allowed to non-tied houses, and that the agreement was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.234731

Bravery v Bravery: 1954

A young husband with the consent of his wife, underwent a sterilisation operation, not so as to avoid the risk of transmitting a hereditary disease, or something similar, but to enable him to ‘have the pleasure of sexual intercourse without shouldering the responsibilities attaching to it’.
Held: Denning (dissenting): Such an operation was plainly ‘injurious to the public interest’.
Lord Denning
[1954] 3 All ER 59
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.196592

Streekgewest Westelijk Noord-Brabant v Staatssecretaris van Financien: ECJ 13 Jan 2005

Europa State aid – Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article 88(3) EC) – Planned aid – Prohibition on the implementation of planned measures before the Commission’s final decision – Scope of the prohibition if the aid consists of an exemption from a tax – Persons who may rely on an infringement
C-174/02, [2005] EUECJ C-174/02
Bailii
European

Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.221481

HM Advocate v Kemp: 1891

(1891) 3 White 17
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222543

Regina v Blastland: HL 1985

The majority decision of the House in Myers v DPP ‘established the principle, never since challenged, that it is for the legislature, not the judiciary, to create new exceptions to the hearsay rule.’ and ‘Hearsay evidence is not excluded because it has no logical probative value . . The rationale of excluding [hearsay] as inadmissible, rooted as it is in the system of trial by jury, is a recognition of the great difficulty, even more acute for a juror than for a trained judicial mind, of assessing what, if any, weight can properly be given to a statement by a person whom the jury have not seen or heard and which has not been subject to any test of reliability in cross-examination . . The danger against which this fundamental rule provides a safeguard is that untested hearsay evidence will be treated as having a probative force which it does not deserve.’
Lord Bridge of Harwich
[1986] AC 41, [1985] 2 All ER 1095, [1985] 3 WLR 345, (1985) 81 Cr App R 266
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Myers v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1965
Limits to Admission of Hearsay Evidence
It was not for the House to alter the admissibility of hearsay evidence on a case by case basis.
Lord Reid said: ‘I have never taken a narrow view of the functions of this House as an appellate tribunal. The common law must be developed to . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .
Cited – Cole and Another v Regina CACD 30-Jul-2007
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222548

Thatcher v CH Pearce and Sons (Contractors) Ltd: 1968

(Bristol Assizes) The tenant was the tenant of a scrap yard. He had paid his rent promptly, until he was sent to prison. Thereafter he failed to pay the rent; and had no access to legal advice. The landlord peaceably re-entered for non-payment of one quarter’s rent. Six months and four days after the re-entry the tenant applied for relief.
Held: The court considered the exercise of the equitable right of a court to grant relief from forfeiture. Simon P said: ‘The decision of the Court of Appeal in Lovelock v. Margo makes it plain that where a landlord re-enters peaceably and not through an action for forfeiture of the lease the jurisdiction of the court to give relief from forfeiture is not a statutory one but the old equitable one. As I understand the old equitable doctrine, the court would not give relief in respect of stale claims. Furthermore, if there were a statute of limitation applying at common law, equity followed the law and applied the statute to strictly analogous proceedings in Chancery. But there is no question in the instant case of a Limitation Act applying to the present situation; and it seems to me to be contrary to the whole spirit of equity to boggle at a matter of days, which is all that we are concerned with here, when justice indicates relief.
I think that a court of equity -. and it is such jurisdiction that I am exercising now — would look at the situation of the plaintiff to see whether in all the circumstances he acted with reasonable promptitude. Naturally it would also have to look at the situation of the defendants to see if anything has happened, particularly by way of delay on the part of the plaintiff, which would cause a greater hardship to them by the extension of the relief sought than by its denial to the plaintiff.’
Sir Jocelyn Simon P
[1968] 1 WLR 748
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lovelock v Margo CA 1963
The tenant wished to assign the lease. The lease contained the ‘usual covenant’ not to assign without consent, that consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The landlord had refused a request from the tenant to assign the lease because she was ‘not . .

Cited by:
Cited – Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.234850

McIntosh v HM Advocate: HCJ 1986

The appellant was convicted of supplying cannabis to a named individual at a house in Paisley. The appellant had acted with his co-accused Miss C who had made the actual supply. There was sufficient evidence against Miss C to prove that she had made the supply from two sources: a statement that she had made to the police, admitting the supply, and the eye-witness testimony of her sister. The sister’s evidence was available against the appellant, but the Appeal Court quashed the appellant’s conviction on the ground that the co-accused’s statement was not evidence against the appellant and therefore the sister’s evidence was not corroborated, as it requires to be in Scots law.
Held: ‘It is plain that without the evidence of Deborah Campbell’s voluntary statement, there was no corroborated evidence of supply to Maureen Campbell. In a question with Deborah Campbell the jury were entitled to treat her voluntary statement as corroboration. However, the jury were not entitled to rely on the evidence of the voluntary statement of Deborah Campbell when considering the case against the other co-accused including the appellant. What Deborah Campbell said in her voluntary statement to the police was not evidence against the appellant.’ The co-accused’s statement made no mention of the appellant, but was none the less not admissible against him to prove the supply with which he was charged.
Lord Justice Clerk (Ross)
1986 SC 169
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.222544

Wood and Another v Holden (HMIT): CA 26 Jan 2006

Husband and wife sold their business, arranging matters so as to avoid paying Capital Gains Tax by transferring their interest between members of a group of companies which was non-resident.
Held: The scheme was effective. The sole real issue was whether the company was in fact non-resident. The correct test was the actual domiciliary status of the company. The directors in this case were non-resident, and were not bypassed in their decisions about the company.
[2006] EWCA Civ 26, Times 20-Feb-2006, 78 TC 1, [2006] STC 443, 8 ITL Rep 468, [2006] STI 236, [2006] 2 BCLC 210, [2006] 1 WLR 1393, [2006] BTC 208
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 56A, Taxation of hargeable Gains Act 1992 13
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Wood v Holden (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 8-Apr-2005
The parties had entered into complex share transactions for the sale of their trading business, and sought to avoid liability for capital gains tax.
Held: Gains on disposals between members of a non-resident group of companies were exempt. The . .
Cited – De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd v Howe, Surveyor of Taxes HL 1905
The appellant Company was registered in the Cape Colony and it’s business was mining for diamonds in mines which it possessed in South Africa, and selling the diamonds there under annual contracts to a syndicate for delivery there. The Head Office . .

Cited by:
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Smallwood and Another CA 8-Jul-2010
The taxpayers had set up trusts which they said were based in Mauritius allowing them to claim double taxation relief. The Revenue had issued closure notices, confirmed by the SPCT, but overturned by the High Court. The Revenue appealed, saying that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.238136

Regina v Hayter: CACD 16 Apr 2003

The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, on the basis that the jury had used a conclusion about the guilt of a jointly accused to support his own conviction.
Held: Section 74 had altered the law, and earlier cases were no longer relevant. A prior conviction would now be admissible to prove the commission of offences by others jointly accused, and so now would be a jury’s own finding of the guilt of a co-accused. It would not be sensible to withhold evidence from a jury which would prove the guilt of a co-accused.
Mantell LJ, Jack, Hedley JJ
Times 18-Apr-2003, [2003] EWCA Crim 1048, [2003] 1 WLR 1910
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 74
England and Wales
Citing:
Dsitinguished – Regina v Hickey, Hickey, Robinson, Molloy CACD 30-Jul-1997
The case concerned the production for the benefit of the defence, of the prison records of a prosecution witness who was putting forward an account of a cell confession. The Appeal Court is not concerned with the guilt or innocence of the appellant, . .
Cited – Hollington v E Hewthorn and Co Ltd CA 1943
Decisions of an earlier tribunal were not binding or admissible in later proceedings where the earlier proceedings were before a court of criminal jurisdiction. Evidence of a prior conviction would not have been admissible in separate criminal . .
Cited – Regina v Rhodes 1959
. .
Cited – Regina v Hickey, Hickey, Robinson, Molloy CACD 30-Jul-1997
The case concerned the production for the benefit of the defence, of the prison records of a prosecution witness who was putting forward an account of a cell confession. The Appeal Court is not concerned with the guilt or innocence of the appellant, . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.180846

Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd: HL 12 Dec 1991

Relief from forfeiture was available against a landlord who had peaceably re-entered property subject to a tenancy without a court order. Such a landlord was still ‘proceeding’ to enforce his rights of forfeiture until he obtained a judgment for possession.
Lord Templeman described as the ‘dubious and dangerous’ the method of enforcing a right of forfeiture by re-entry without due process of law:
(a) A tenant should not be at risk of returning home to discover that, unbeknown to him, he and his family have been locked out and are homeless. If they are to be evicted, the eviction should be conducted in an orderly fashion, upon at least some prior notice, by officers subject to court direction.
(b) If there is to be an issue as to whether the landlord is entitled to forfeiture under the terms of the tenancy, it is preferable, particularly in relation to a home, for the court to determine it in advance of eviction rather than in proceedings brought by the tenant for an injunction and damages in the wake of it or in criminal proceedings against the landlord under s.1 of the Act of 1977.
(c) If there is to be an issue as to whether the tenant is entitled to relief against forfeiture pursuant to s.146(2) of the Act of 1925, it is, again, preferable, particularly in relation to a home, for the court to determine it in advance of eviction rather than in its wake.
Lord Templeman said that it was wrong to award costs on the indemnity basis against a tenant who failed in his application for relief against forfeiture. He also deprecated the imposition of a term for obtaining relief as to the payment of indemnity costs, as a general practice. He said: ‘But it seems to me that in principle a tenant should not be at the mercy of an order made by a judge who has no means of knowing the effect of the order and imposes no impartial criterion by which costs can be taxed down.’
Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Templeman, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle
Gazette 22-Jan-1992, [1992] 1 AC 494, [1992] 2 WLR 15, [1991] UKHL 7, [1991] 3 WLR 264
Bailii
Law of Property Act 1925 146(1)(2)
Citing:
Appeal from – Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd CA 11-Feb-1991
As to the exercise of relief in equity outside the limitation period: ‘This is not to say that courts of equity should now grant relief without any regard to the statutory provisions. Equity follows the law, but not slavishly nor always: see Cardozo . .

Cited by:
Cited – Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .
Cited – Pirabakaran v Patel and Another CA 26-May-2006
The landlord had wanted possession. The tenant said that the landlord had been harassing him. The landlord said that the tenancy was a mixed residential and business tenancy and that the 1977 Act did not apply.
Held: The 1977 Act applied. A . .
Cited – Patel and Another v K and J Restaurants Ltd and Another CA 28-Oct-2010
The landlord appealed against refusal of forfeiture for breaches of the lease. A covenant provided against use for immoral purposes, and the sub-tenant had been found to be running a brothel. The tenant said that he had been concerned of an action . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.78405

Pezold v Border Timbers Ltd: QBD 6 Aug 2020

Application to set aside an ex parte order giving the Claimant permission to serve the Claim Form and other associated documents in these proceedings (including an application for an interim injunction) on the Defendant in Zimbabwe by alternative means.
Miss Julia Dias Q.C. sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge
[2020] EWHC 2172 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.653081

Khan v R M Falvey and Co (a Firm): CA 22 Mar 2002

The claimant sought damages from his former solicitors for failing to act to avoid his case being struck out. The second action was itself delayed, and the defendants asserted that the cause of action occurred not when his claim was actually struck out, but at the time when it could have been struck out.
Held: ‘where a tort is actionable only on proof of damage, the cause of action is not complete and time does not begin to run for the purposes of statutory limitation until actual damage occurs.’ The cause of action accrued on the occurrence of the first item of material loss. Damage in a claim for pure financial loss arose before the action was actually dismissed, and limitation ran accordingly.
Chadwick LJ said: ‘Typically, the effect of cumulative delay has been that it becomes increasingly difficult to resist an application to strike out based on the contention that it is no longer possible to have a fair trial. Although it may be possible to say in such cases that before a certain date the claim is not vulnerable to being struck out, and after another and later date it was so vulnerable, there would usually be a period of some months in respect of which there is room for a legitimate difference of view. But what can be said with some confidence is that during that period the value of the claim is diminishing as its vulnerability to strike out increases. It seems to me that once the action has entered that period it is impossible to say that damage has not occurred as a consequence of the previous delay. It is no answer that the damage may be difficult to quantify.’
Schiemann LJ said: ‘By the phrase ‘amenable to be struck out’ the pleader intended to convey that after 1990 there was no arguable defence to an application to strike out. This is common ground. On that basis the claimant had suffered damage from the defendant’s negligence by, at the latest, January 1, 1991 and his cause of action had arisen then. What had been (let us assume) a right of action against the debtor which was worth something, had become a right of action which was worth nothing. All the alleged negligence by the solicitor had occurred by then. The present action was not started until more than six years later. In those circumstances it is time barred.’
Sir Murray Stuart-Smith referred to the judgment of Hobhouse LJ in Hopkins v Mackenzie and said of it: ‘I share Hobhouse LJ’s difficulties. A claimant cannot defeat the statute of limitations by claiming only in respect of damage which occurs within the limitation period, if he has suffered actual damage from the same wrongful acts outside that period.’
Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Chadwick and Sir Murray Stuart-Smith
Times 12-Apr-2002, Gazette 10-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 400, [2002] Lloyd’s Rep PN 369, [2002] PNLR 28
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Disapproved – Hopkins v Mackenzie CA 27-Oct-1994
A loss arising from a solicitor’s failure to pursue a case arose only when the claim was struck out, not earlier when compromised, and even though value already diminished. Accordingly the limitation period began to run from that time. . .
Cited – Nykredit Mortgage Bank Plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2) HL 27-Nov-1997
A surveyor’s negligent valuation had led to the plaintiff obtaining what turned out to be inadequate security for his loan. A cause of action against a valuer for his negligent valuation arises when a relevant and measurable loss is first recorded. . .
Cited – Knapp v Ecclesiastical Insurance Group Plc and Another CA 30-Oct-1997
A claim in negligence was brought against insurance brokers for failing to advise the claimant of certain matters with the result that an insurance policy entered into by the claimant was voidable for non-disclosure.
Held: The claimant . .

Cited by:
Cited – Hatton v Messrs Chafes (A Firm) CA 13-Mar-2003
The defendant firm appealed against a refusal to strike out the claimant’s claim for professional negligence, asserting that the judge should have considered the limitation issue in the light of Khan v Falvey.
Held: By the time that the . .
Cited – The Law Society v Sephton and Co and others CA 13-Dec-2004
The Society appealed dismissal for limitation of its claim against the defendant firm of accountants arising from alleged fraud in approval of a solicitor’s accounts.
Held: The liability did not arise until the Society decided to make . .
Cited – Iqbal v Legal Services Commission CA 10-May-2005
The claimant had been a partner in a firm of solicitors. They came to be suspected by the respondent of overclaiming legal aid payments and sums were withheld. For this and other reasons the practice folded, and the claimant became insolvent. He . .
Cited – Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .
Cited – Luke v Kingsley Smith and Company and Others QBD 23-Jun-2003
The claimant sued various of those who had represented him in a claim against the Ministry of Defence. He believed that he had had to accept an inadequate sum in settlement after being at risk of losing the claim for non-prosecution. The defendant . .
Cited – St Anselm Development Company Ltd v Slaughter and May ChD 1-Feb-2013
The claimants appealed against rejection of their claim in negligence said to have been out of time. They had set out to sublet flats but their mistiming disallowed reclaiming of certain rents under the 1993 Act.
Held: The two flats were to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.168538

Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc: PC 24 May 1993

Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities.
Lord Woolf
Times 09-Jun-1993, [1994] 1 AC 130, [1993] UKPC 22
Bailii
Citing:
Not Followed – Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .

Cited by:
Cited – Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
Cited – The National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd ComC 19-Apr-2010
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a . .
Cited – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.80208

Hopkins v Mackenzie: CA 27 Oct 1994

A loss arising from a solicitor’s failure to pursue a case arose only when the claim was struck out, not earlier when compromised, and even though value already diminished. Accordingly the limitation period began to run from that time.
Hobhouse LJ
Times 03-Nov-1994, Independent 27-Oct-1994, Gazette 07-Dec-1994, [1995] PIQR 43
Limitation Act 1980
England and Wales
Cited by:
Disapproved – Khan v R M Falvey and Co (a Firm) CA 22-Mar-2002
The claimant sought damages from his former solicitors for failing to act to avoid his case being struck out. The second action was itself delayed, and the defendants asserted that the cause of action occurred not when his claim was actually struck . .
Cited – Iqbal v Legal Services Commission CA 10-May-2005
The claimant had been a partner in a firm of solicitors. They came to be suspected by the respondent of overclaiming legal aid payments and sums were withheld. For this and other reasons the practice folded, and the claimant became insolvent. He . .
Cited – Vision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
A lease had been forfeited. The defendant firm of solicitors had negligently failed to apply for relief. They argued that that failure had in fact caused no loss to the claimants, since they would have lost the lease anyway.
Held: The ‘but . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.81467

Regina v Taylor: 1869

It was ‘contrary to common sense’ to describe the infliction of a sexually transmitted disease as an assault. A prisoner could upon an indictment under the section be convicted of a common assault, because each offence (‘wounding’ and ‘infliucting grievous bodily harm’) ‘necessarily includes an assault’, though the word does not already occur in the section.
Manisty J
(1869) Law Rep 1 CCR 194
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 18 20 47
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Cited – Regina v Clarence CCCR 20-Nov-1888
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm.
Held: ‘The question in this . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.196591

Regina v Wilson (Clarence); Regina v Jenkins: HL 1983

The court considered the application of the section on alternative verdicts available to juries on a trial for attempted murder. The allegations in a charge under section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 or under section 9(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968 impliedly included allegations of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and accordingly, on a charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the 1861 Act or on a charge of burglary contrary to section 9(1)(b) of the 1968 Act, it was open to the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as charged, but guilty of assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to section 47 of the 1861 Act, notwithstanding the absence of an assault: ‘there can be an infliction of grievous bodily harm contrary to s.20 without an assault being committed’. The House also set out the essential elements of the crime of conspiracy.
Lord Roskill observed: ‘In the present case, the issue to my mind is not whether the allegations in the section 20 charge, expressly or impliedly, amount to an allegation of a section 47 charge, for plainly they do not. The issue is whether they ‘either expressly or impliedly’ include such an allegation. The answer to that question is what is expressly or impliedly included in a charge of inflicting bodily harm.’
Lord Roskill
[1984] AC 242, [1983] 3 WLR 686, [1983] 3 All ER 448
Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 5(1) 5(2), Criminal Law Act 1967 6(3), Theft Act 1968 9(1)(b), Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 20 47
England and Wales
Cited by:
Followed – Regina v Savage; Director of Public Prosecutions v Parmenter HL 7-Nov-1991
The first defendant had been convicted of wounding. She had intended to throw beer over her victim, but her glass slipped from her hand, and cut the victim. The second defendant threw his three year old child in the air and caught him, not realising . .
Cited – Regina v Morrison CACD 20-May-2003
The defendant appealed a conviction for attempting to cause grievous bodily harm. He had faced trial on a charge of attempted murder, and the judge had left open to the jury the alternative of the offence for which he had been convicted.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Graham, Kansal, etc CACD 25-Oct-1996
The court discussed when it was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to substitute other lesser convictions, after the main conviction had been declared unsafe.
Held: After studying the authorities at length, the court felt that the various . .
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Cited – Regina v Dawson, Dawson CACD 14-Jul-1997
The defendants were convicted of a mortgage fraud. They appealed saying they had not been dishonest. They had signed forms, but they then had been completed by others, and that it had been those further replies which were dishonest. The original . .
Cited – Regina v Lahaye CACD 12-Oct-2005
The defendant had faced only an indictment alleging a malcious wounding charge under s18. The judge had left to the jury the alternative of a conviction for the lesser s20 offence.
Held: The lesser charge should normally be included on the . .
Cited – White v Regina CACD 15-Apr-2014
The defendant sought an extension of time for leave to appeal against his conviction for fraud. After his conviction there had been academic debate as to its basis, and the present application was not opposed. He had originally been charged under . .
Cited – Haystead v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 2-Jun-2000
The defendant had hit a mother in the face as she held the child. The force was sufficient to cause her to drop the child causing injury to the child. He appealed against a conviction for beating the child.
Held: The appeal failed. A battery . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.182275

Regina v Randall: HL 18 Dec 2003

Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By putting his own record in issue the co-defendant had lost the protection of the 1898 Act: ‘where evidence of propensity of a co-accused is relevant to a fact in issue between the Crown and the other accused it is not necessary for a trial judge to direct the jury to ignore that evidence in considering the case against the co-accused. Justice does not require that such a direction be given. Moreover, such a direction would needlessly perplex juries. ‘ Lord Steyn: ‘It is no answer to admitting [similar fact] evidence that it is evidence of the propensity of the accused to commit certain crimes. On the contrary, that is often the very reason for admitting such evidence. While these rules are not applicable in this case their rationale illustrates that propensity to commit certain crimes may sometimes be relevant to the fact in issue.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
[2003] UKHL 69, Times 19-Dec-2003, [2004] 1 Cr App R 26, [2004] 1 All ER 467, [2004] 1 WLR 56
House of Lords, Bailii
Criminal Evidence Act 1898 1(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Randall (EP) CACD 21-Feb-2003
The defendant had been a co-accused on a charge of murder. He appealed saying the judge had incorrectly directed the jury on the relevance of his co-accused’s previous convictions for violence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. He should have been . .
Cited – Lowery v The Queen PC 1974
(Victoria) A young girl was sadistically murdered. The two accused, were present and the crime was committed by one or the other, or both. Each brought evidence of the unlikelihood that he could have committed the murder. L emphasised his good . .
Cited – Regina v Bracewell CACD 1978
When there is more than one defendant in a case, the test of the relevance of an accused’s previous convictions before their admission into evidence, must be strictly applied ‘for if irrelevant and therefore inadmissible evidence is admitted, the . .
Cited – Regina v Miller 1952
The fact that a defendant has previous convictions is not normally relevant: ‘The fundamental principle, equally applicable to any question that is asked by the defence as to any question that is asked by the prosecution, is that it is not normally . .
Cited – Regina v Kilbourne HL 1973
The respondent was convicted of sexual offences against two groups of boys. The trial judge directed the jury that they would be entitled to take into account the uncorroborated evidence of the second group as supporting evidence given by the first . .
Cited – Lobban v The Queen PC 28-Apr-1995
(Jamaica) The judge had no discretion to exclude evidence on request of co-defendant in joint trial. The exculpatory part of co-accused statement not to be excluded since it was his right to have it put in. Those who are charged with an offence . .
Cited – Regina v Neale CACD 1977
Neale and Burr were jointly charged with arson and manslaughter. N wanted to adduce evidence, either by cross-examining prosecution witnesses or leading evidence himself, that B had admitted that he had started fires himself on four other occasions. . .
Cited – Regina v Lee CACD 1976
A defendant charged with burglary of a house should have been allowed to introduce into evidence the bad character of others, not called as witnesses, who had access to the house. The relevance of this evidence is that it goes to disposition. . .
Cited – Regina v Aziz; Regina v Tosun; Regina v Yorganci HL 16-Jun-1995
The defendant (one of three) relied upon his part exculpatory statement made in interview and did not give evidence. The judge said that his good character was relevant as to his own propensity, and the character of the others was relevant to their . .
Cited – Regina v Vye etc CACD 7-Apr-1993
Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v P HL 1991
The defendant faced specimen counts of rape and incest against each of his two daughters. The trial judge refused an application for separate trials in respect of the offences alleged against each daughter. The defendant was convicted.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Murray CACD 10-Jun-1994
If one defendant claims a defence of duress from fear of the other’s driving, the other driver’s driving convictions are relevant and can be admitted in evidence. Evidence of the convictions of the other driver should have been admitted even though . .

Cited by:
Appealed to – Regina v Randall (EP) CACD 21-Feb-2003
The defendant had been a co-accused on a charge of murder. He appealed saying the judge had incorrectly directed the jury on the relevance of his co-accused’s previous convictions for violence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. He should have been . .
Cited – Regina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .
Cited – O’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
The claimant sought damages against the police, and wanted to bring in evidence of previous misconduct by the officers on a similar fact basis. They had been imprisoned and held for several years based upon admissions which they said they had . .
Cited – Henry, Regina v CACD 29-Jun-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for soliciting to murder and conspiracy to murder. An expert’s opinion now described him as of low intelligence and vulnerable to the sort of pressure of which he complained.
Held: The expert evidence had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.188922

Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Feb 1997

A prosecution for sado-masochist acts was a necessary invasion of privacy to protect health. The Court found no violation where applicants were imprisoned as a result of sado-masochistic activities captured on video tape when police obtained possession of them. Although all male defendants in that case consented, they were charged with assault and wounding and sentenced to imprisonment. There was no unjustifiable interference.
A criminal conviction cannot constitute an interference with the right to respect for private life under Article 8, unless there are special circumstances in a particular case calling for a different conclusion.
Times 20-Feb-1997, 21826/93, 21627/93, 21974/93, [1997] 24 EHRR 39, [1997] ECHR 4
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Human Rights
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc HL 11-Mar-1993
The appellants had been convicted of assault, after having engaged in consensual acts of sado-masochism in which they inflicted varying degreees of physical self harm. They had pleaded guilty after a ruling that the prosecution had not needed to . .
See Also – Regina v Brown etc CACD 15-Apr-1992
The defendants appealed against their convictions for offences under the 1861 Act of assaults inflicting injury. They said that as sado-masochists, they had mutually consented to the assaults and that no offences had been commited, but pleaded gulty . .

Cited by:
Cited – Pay v Lancashire Probation Service EAT 29-Oct-2003
The appellant challenged refusal of his claim for unfair dismissal. A probation officer, he had business interests in fire breathing and bondage merchandising which the service said were incompatible with his duties, and dismissed him. He complained . .
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Cited – Regina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
mosley_newsgroupQBD2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Cited – Gillberg v Sweden ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The applicant, a consultant psychiatrist, had conducted research with children under undertakings of absolute privacy. Several years later a researcher, for proper reasons, obtained court orders for the disclosure of the data under . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.165472

Stanway v Attorney-General: CA 5 Apr 2000

Sir Richard Scott V-C said: ‘Charities operate within a framework of public law, not private law. The Crown is parens patriae of the charity and the judges of the courts represent the Crown in supervising what the charity is doing and in giving directions . . The Attorney General’s function is to make representations to the court as to where lies the public interest as he sees it.’
Sir Richard Scott V-C
Ureported, 5 April 2000
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Stanway v Attorney-General et al ChD 25-Nov-1999
Where a defendant had brought a counter-claim against his co-defendants but had restricted that claim to issues raised already by the claim against himself, he was not to be prevented from commencing fresh proceedings against the co-defendants where . .

Cited by:
Cited – Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.653167

Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd: CA 15 Jan 1991

An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company had paid in excess of their true liability, because of a ‘ratable proportion’ clause, they were not entitled to recover any part of the voluntary payment. The matter should be looked at at the time of the loss before there was any non-compliance with the condition precedent.
Lloyd LJ said: l ‘the principles on which one insurer is entitled to recover from another in a case of double insurance have been settled since Lord Mansfield’s day’.
Lloyd LJ
Gazette 15-Jan-1992, [1992] QB 887, [1992] 2 WLR 157, [1992] 1 All ER 283, [1991] 2 Lloyds Rep 36
England and Wales
Cited by:
Not Followed – Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
Cited – Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
Cited – The National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd ComC 19-Apr-2010
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a . .
Cited – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.83017

Clearlake Chartering Usa Inc and Another v Petroleo Brasileiro Sa: ComC 31 Mar 2020

Mr. Justice Jacobs
[2020] EWHC 805 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Trafigura Maritime Logistics Pte Ltd v Clearlake Shipping Pte Ltd ComC 27-Apr-2020
Return date in respect of two mandatory injunctions requiring a voyage charterer, Clearlake, and a sub-voyage charterer, Petrobras, ‘forthwith’ to provide such bail or other security required to secure the release of the vessel MIRACLE HOPE from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.649886