Thorne v Lass Salt Garvin (A Firm): QBD 28 Jan 2009

Appeal brought by the Claimant against the order declaring that the purported service of the Claim Form by fax on 6 June 2008 was invalid and ineffective and in which he refused to make an order dispensing with service.

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 100 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.314295

Al-Rawas v Pegasus Energy Ltd and others: QBD 8 Apr 2008

Judgment determining the damages to be recovered by the defendants under the claimant’s cross-undertakings given in respect of damages in an order for search and seizure, and in a freezing order.

Judges:

Jack J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 617 (QB), [2009] 1 All ER 346, [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 393

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.266908

Armchair Passenger Transport Ltd v Helical Bar Plc and Another: QBD 28 Feb 2003

Objection was made to the use of an expert witness who had formerly been a senior employee of the defendant.
Held: The court set out criteria for testing the independence of a proposed expert witness: ‘i) It is always desirable that an expert should have no actual or apparent interest in the outcome of the proceedings.
ii) The existence of such an interest, whether as an employee of one of the parties or otherwise, does not automatically render the evidence of the proposed expert inadmissible. It is the nature and extent of the interest or connection which matters, not the mere fact of the interest or connection.
iii) Where the expert has an interest of one kind or another in the outcome of the case, the question of whether he should be permitted to give evidence should be determined as soon as possible in the course of case management.
iv) The decision as to whether an expert should be permitted to give evidence in such circumstances is a matter of fact and degree. The test of apparent bias is not relevant to the question of whether or not an expert witness should be permitted to give evidence.
v) The questions which have to be determined are whether (i) the person has relevant expertise and (ii) he or she is aware of their primary duty to the Court if they give expert evidence, and willing and able, despite the interest or connection with the litigation or a party thereto, to carry out that duty.
vi) The Judge will have to weigh the alternative choices open if the expert’s evidence is excluded, having regard to the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules.
vii) If the expert has an interest which is not sufficient to preclude him from giving evidence the interest may nevertheless affect the weight of his evidence.

Judges:

Nelson J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 367 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
CitedLiverpool Roman Catholic Archdeacon Trustees Inc v Goldberg (No 2) 2001
The claimant brought proceedings for professional negligence against a barrister specialising in tax. The Defendant wished to rely upon the expert evidence of another tax barrister in the same set of chambers as him, who was a friend of many years’ . .
CitedRegina (Factortame Ltd and Others) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (No 8) CA 3-Jul-2002
A firm of accountants had agreed to provide their services as experts in a case on the basis that they would be paid by taking part of any damages awarded. The respondent claimed that such an agreement was champertous and unlawful.
Held: The . .
CitedClark v Tull (T/A Ardington Electrical Services) CA 1-May-2002
. .
CitedLocabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd CA 17-Nov-1999
Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias
In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The mere . .
CitedWhitehouse v Jordan HL 17-Dec-1980
The plaintiff sued for brain damage suffered at birth by use of forceps at the alleged professional negligence of his doctor. The Court of Appeal had reversed the judge’s finding in his favour.
Held: In this case most of the evidence at issue . .
CitedField and Another v Leeds City Council CA 8-Dec-1999
The parties were involved in a dispute as to repairs on a tenanted property. The court had ordered an independent surveyor’s report. The claimant objected to the use by the defendant of an employee for this purpose, and was involved in their claims . .
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.263155

PR Records Ltd v Vinyl 2000 Ltd and Another: ChD 18 Jul 2007

Application to join third party – appeal against refusal – nature of the inquiry which a court should be asked to undertake on an application by a party to proceedings to join someone who was previously not a party to those proceedings, for the purpose of seeking a non-party costs order.

Judges:

Morgan J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1721 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.259427

Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006

The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through the giving of the ‘wrongful undertakings’
Held: The joined party, who had not itself been party to the undertakings, could not claim the benefit of them.

Judges:

Lord Justice Moore-Bick, The Chancellor of the High Court, Lord Justice Jacob

Citations:

Times 09-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 658, Gazette 08-Jun-2006, [2006] 3 WLR 1146, [2007] Ch 71

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSmithkline Beecham Plc and others v Apotex Europe Ltd and others PatC 26-Jul-2005
Application was made to join in further parties to support a cross undertaking on being made subject to interim injunctions.
Held: On orders other than asset freezing orders it was not open to the court to impose cross-undertakings against . .
CitedF Hoffmann La Roche and Co A G v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry HL 1975
No Indemnity for misadministration
The Secretary of State sought an interlocutory injunction under the Act to restrain the appellant from charging prices in excess of those fixed by a statutory instrument he had made. The appellant argued that the statutory instrument was ultra . .
CitedAmerican Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mellor CA 4-Apr-2001
A prisoner had no right to facilities to artificially inseminate his wife. In this case, he might not be released for several years, and there were no medical reasons advanced for finding exceptional reasons under the Department policy. Provided the . .
CitedMiller v Jackson CA 6-Apr-1977
The activities of a long established cricket club had been found to be a legal nuisance, because of the number of cricket balls landing in the gardens of neighbouring houses. An injunction had been granted to local householders who complained of . .
CitedRegina v Medicines Control Agency ex parte Smith and Nephew Pharmaceuticals Limited Intervener: Primecrown Limited ChD 1999
The court considered the right to damages arising from the giving of an undertaking: ‘There is no contract and no tort. The right to damages, if any, stems only from the cross-undertaking’ . .
CitedNWL Ltd v Woods HL 1979
The phrase ‘trade dispute’ was defined by reference to (i) the parties to it and (ii) the subject matter. Lord Scarman referred to the legislative history of attempts to regulate strike actions by trades unions: ‘It is wrong to attempt to construe . .
CitedAllied Irish Bank v Ashford Hotels Limited and Ashford Hotels Limited v Higgins; Tyree and Emblem Bv CA 8-May-1997
The court asked itself whether it had power to require a cross-undertaking in favour of third parties as a condition of appointing a receiver.
Held: Phillips LJ: ‘The Mareva injunction is a comparatively recent addition to the armoury of the . .
CitedChiron v Organon (No.10) 1995
The position of third parties or the public who may be affected by the proposed injunction may be allowed for by a court in limited circumstances when asked to exercise its discretion to grant even a final injunction. . .
CitedZ Ltd v A-Z and AA-LL CA 1982
The plaintiffs, an overseas company with an office in London had been defrauded here. They sought and obtained Mareva injunctions against defendants and against six clearing banks. The banks sought clarification of their duties.
Held: The . .
CitedSearose v Seatrain UK 1981
Third parties who are unconnected with a dispute but who incur expense in complying with an order may specifically be covered by a cross-undertaking as to their costs and otherwise. Robert Goff J said: ‘the banks in this country have received . .
CitedSympson v Juxon 1624
At first instance, judgment had wrongly given possession of land to the plaintiff. Upon successful appeal the defendant had his land restored along with profits made meanwhile: ‘for the plaintiff in the writ of error is to be restored to all that he . .
CitedKleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council etc HL 29-Jul-1998
Right of Recovery of Money Paid under Mistake
Kleinwort Benson had made payments to a local authority under swap agreements which were thought to be legally enforceable when made. Subsequently, a decision of the House of Lords, (Hazell v. Hammersmith and Fulham) established that such swap . .
CitedWestdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council HL 22-May-1996
Simple interest only on rate swap damages
The bank had paid money to the local authority under a contract which turned out to be ultra vires and void. The question was whether, in addition to ordering the repayment of the money to the bank on unjust enrichment principles, the court could . .
CitedRodger v The Comptoir d’Escompte de Paris 1871
Judgment had been first given, but reversed on appeal. The money had been paid following judgment. The appeal court had ordered the return of the money and the question was whether there should also be interest on the money.
Held: Lord Cairns: . .
CitedTrustee of the Property of F C Jones and Sons (A Firm) v Jones CA 13-May-1996
A bankruptcy order was made in 1984. Under the 1914 Act the trustee in bankruptcy got title to all the assets of the bankrupt as of the date of the act of bankruptcy. So, the trustee owned the partnership assets. The wife drew andpound;11,700 out of . .
CitedBerkeley Administration Inc v McClelland CA 1990
There is no legally acceptable basis on which the benefit of an undertaking, to which a member of a group of companies is entitled, may be claimed on behalf of the group as a whole. The court discussed who had the benefit of cross undertakings given . .
CitedGreenwood County v Duke Power 1939
(United States) A ‘wrongful’ injunction granted at the behest of a power company had stopped the county from receiving or using Federal funds to build a rival power station. Upon reversal of the decision and dissolution of the injunction the county . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex parte Woolwich Equitable Building Society HL 25-Oct-1990
The society challenged the validity of transitional provisions in the 1986 regulations on the ground that they were ultra vires. The House considered the specific presumption against double taxation, and also a power in general terms to make . .
CitedMinnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co v Johnson and Johnson 1976
The court will normally only refuse a stay pending appeal against the award of an injunction if the successful injunctor is willing to give a cross-undertaking in damages should the appeal be successful . .
CitedExpert Clothing Service and Sales Ltd v Hillgate House Ltd CA 1985
Landlords took possession after a successful, at first instance, forfeiture claim. The tenant succeeded on appeal and then brought a claim for the wrong of breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment.
Held: The lease had been in existence all . .
CitedUnited Motor Service v Tropic-aire 1932
(Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit USA) The defendant said that he had suffered greater damage than the amount set down in a bond provided for security when the plaintiff requested an interim injunction. The action had failed.
Held: Judge . .
CitedHadley v Baxendale Exc 23-Feb-1854
Contract Damages; What follows the Breach Naturaly
The plaintiffs had sent a part of their milling machinery for repair. The defendants contracted to carry it, but delayed in breach of contract. The plaintiffs claimed damages for the earnings lost through the delay. The defendants appealed, saying . .
CitedCMS Dolphin Ltd v Paul M Simonet and Another ChD 23-May-2001
The claimant asserted that the defendant had, having at one point been a creative director of the claimant, left to set up an alternate competing business, and diverted business from the first company to the new one. There had been disagreements . .
CitedBaird Textiles Ltd v Marks and Spencer plc CA 28-Feb-2001
The more embryonic is an oral ‘agreement’, the less likely it is that the parties intended to create legal relations at that stage. For there to be an agreement formed by conduct, there must be a course of dealing from which a contract is . .
CitedArkadelphia Milling v St Louis Southwestern Railway 1918
(United States Supreme Court) A wrongful injunction had restrained a State Railroad Commission from enforcing its shipping tariffs. Two frequent shippers were also enjoined as representative defendants. The injunction was directed against ‘the . .
CitedMetal und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 27-Jan-1989
The claimants sued for negligent advice and secured judgment. The defendant company became insolvent, and so the plaintiff now sued the US parent company alleging conspiracy. The court considered a tort of malicious prosecution of a civil claim, . .
CitedNational Australia Bank Ltd v Bond Brewing Holdings Ltd 1991
(Supreme Court of Victoria) The court had appointed a receiver without requiring a cross-undertaking in damages. The order was then set aside, and compensation was sought. There had been no cross-undertaking.
Held: If it had power to award . .
CitedThe August Leonhardt CA 1985
For an estoppel by convention, a common understanding must actually be communicated by one party to the other: ‘All estoppels must involve some statement or conduct by the party alleged [to be estoppel on which the alleged representee was entitled] . .
CitedAlfred Mcalpine Construction Limited v Panatown Limited HL 17-Feb-2000
A main contractor who was building not on his own land, would only be free to claim damages from a sub-contractor for defects in the building where the actual owner of the land would not also have had a remedy. Here, the land owner was able to sue . .
CitedRepublic of India and Another v India Steamship Co Ltd (Indian Endurance and Indian Grace) (No 2) HL 23-Oct-1997
When a action in rem against a ship was in fact parallel to an action in personam begun in India and awaiting a decision; an action was not to be allowed here.
Lord Steyn: ‘It is settled that an estoppel by convention may arise where parties to . .
CitedThe Vistafjord CA 1988
A common assumption which was known to be so by both parties and upon which both acted, was enough to create an estoppel: Bingham LJ ‘Each [of the parties] was fully privy to the thinking of the other. Moreover we have very clear conduct crossing . .
CitedLinden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd and Others; St. Martins Property Corporation Ltd v Sir Robert McAlpine HL 8-Dec-1993
A contractor had done defective work in breach of a building contract with the developer but the loss was suffered by a third party who had by then purchased the development. The developer recovered the loss suffered by the purchaser.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242186

Konkola Copper Mines Plc and Another v Coromin Ltd. and others No.2: ComC 16 May 2006

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1093 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See AlsoKonkola Copper Mines Plc and Another v Coromin Ltd and others CA 17-Jan-2006
A stay was sought to allow other proceedings to continue.
Held: A stay of the court’s own proceedings in support of an arbitration elsewhere ‘required rare and compelling circumstances’. . .
See AlsoKonkola Copper Mines Plc v Coromin Admn 10-May-2005
Re-insurers liability under Part 20 claims. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241756

NJ v Essex County Council and Another; In re J (Care: Assessment: Fair Trial); Re J (a child) (care proceedings: fair trial): CA 11 May 2006

The family complained that the local authority had, in assessing the need for a care order, failed to follow the guideliens set down in In Re L, leading to an infringement of their human rights.
Held: Neither in the lower court nor here had the case of In re V been cited. It should have been and would have demonstrated that although minor breaches of the guidance should be rooted out, that did not mean that a minor breach was an infringement of the parent’s human rights.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wilson, Mr Justice Bennett Lord Justice Richards

Citations:

Times 21-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 545, [2006] 2 FCR 107

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRe M (Care: Challenging Decisions by Local Authority) FD 2001
Local authorities involved in care proceedings will infringe the rights of parents and other individual parties to them under both Article 6 and Article 8 of the Convention unless they conduct themselves with integrity, transparency and . .
CitedIn re L (Care: Assessment: Fair Trial) FD 2002
The court set out precepts to be followed by courts in preparing for care proceedings so as to ensure that they did not infringe the rights of the family to respect for their family life under article 8.
Munby J said: ‘ . . it must never be . .
CitedIn re V (a Child) (Care: pre-birth actions) CA 12-Oct-2004
Immediately after a child was born, the social worker began proceedings for it to be taken into care. The judge severely criticised the actions of the social worker before the birth. The local authority now appealed against an order at the . .

Cited by:

CitedBarracks v Coles and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 21-Jul-2006
The claimant sought to allege race discrimination and appealed refusal by the respondents to release required documents. She had been turned down for an appointment to the Trident task force, and sought disclosure of the reasons. The respondent said . .
CitedCheshire County Council and others v DS (Father) and others CA 15-Mar-2007
The court granted an appeal in care proceedings, but examined the relationship between the court and local authorities. There had been a late change in the proposed care plan and an application by grandparents to be made party. Some in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241649

Wylde v Culver: ChD 12 Apr 2006

The claimant sought to discontinue his probate action on the day of trial, and an order as to costs.
Held: The discontinuance should be allowed, there being no public interest to be served in a continuance. As to costs ‘in probate actions there is no stated presumption that a discontinuing claimant should pay the costs down to the discontinuance. However I approach the question of costs on the basis that the Claimant, in seeking to discontinue, should ordinarily pay the costs, and that the onus lies with him to show why there should be some different order. Shortly stated, in the absence of some good reason for a different order, it can be taken that the action was wrongly brought. This, after all, would be the starting point if the action went to trial and was dismissed. ‘ In this case, the claimant had been reasonable in acting on the issues on which the action was based, and he should not be ordered to pay the costs on the discontinuance. No order for costs was made.

Judges:

George Bompas QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 923 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 2674, [2006] 4 All ER 345

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGreen v Briscoe 9-May-2005
The Court had dismissed an action brought to obtain an order pronouncing against a will, revocation of the probate granted in respect of the will and a declaration of intestacy. The defendant executor had counterclaimed for a grant of probate in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs, Wills and Probate

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241462

Estate Acquisition and Development Ltd v Wiltshire and Another: CA 4 May 2006

The defendants appealed a decision that they had no sufficient reason for not attending court on the day of the trial.
Held: The fact that the defendants had a continuing commercial relationship with the claimants was not enough to justify an inference that they should be aware of proceedings served at a former address. In fact the defendant had not lived at the address since 1997. Once a party knew that proceedings had been served it became a duty in him to put in place a system for ensuring that he should receive communications from the court, but not before.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson Mr Justice Moses Lord Justice Jacob

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 533, [2006] CP Rep 32

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 39.3(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGoode v Martin CA 13-Dec-2001
The claimant had sought to amend her claim for damages for personal injuries. The application had been rejected as introducing a claim not based on the same facts. She had suffered severe head injuries, and had no memory of the accident. She served . .
CitedBrazil v Brazil CA 31-Jul-2002
The defendant appealed against an order for rectification of the registered title to land he occupied, and for which he had had a possessory title. The order had been made in his absence.
Held: A ‘good reason’ for non attendance at a hearing . .
CitedGoode v Owen and Another CA 20-Dec-2001
The claimant owned land from which he took silage. It was next to land belonging to one defendant and let to the other as a golf range. The claimant sought damages for nuisance for the 1,000 golf balls a year escaping onto his land. The judge said . .

Cited by:

CitedZambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others CA 9-Jul-2008
The claimant sought to allege fraud by its former president, and began proceedings to recover payments it said were fraudulent, including against a defendant Taylor in Switzerland, who now said that no letter before action or other explanation . .
CitedForcelux Ltd v Binnie CA 21-Oct-2009
Forcelux and Mr Binnie were the landlord and tenant of a flat in Lincoln. Under the lease, the tenant was obliged to pay ground rent and other charges. The lease contained a forfeiture provision in the event of non-payment of rent or charges. Mr . .
CitedKenny and Others v Abubaker and Others CA 23-Oct-2012
The defendant landlord sought to appeal against an order that he pay to the respondent tenants a penalty under the 2004 Act of three times the tenancy deposit. The court was now asked whether there was has any right to have set aside a judgment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241442

William v London Borough of Wandsworth; Bellamy v Hounslow London Borough Council: CA 4 May 2006

The parties had launched an appeal against the decision of the county court on the applicant’s application for housing for homelessness. In the meantime the authority commenced its own second review of its decision.
Held: The failure by the authority to inform the court of of the second review bordered on being an abuse of proces. Parties had a clear duty to keep the court informed. Witness statements also are ‘a proper vehicle for relevant and admissible evidence going to the issue before the court, and for nothing else. Argument was for advocates. Innuendo had no place at all.’

Judges:

Chadwick LJ, Sedley LJ, Arden LJ

Citations:

[2006] HLR 42, Times 06-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 535

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241445

Burmah Oil Ltd v Governor and Company of the Bank of England and another: HL 1 Nov 1979

The House considered an application for discovery of sensitive documents.
Lord Edmund-Davis said: ‘A judge may well feel that he cannot profitably embark on such a balancing exercise without himself seeing the disputed documents. May he take a peep?’ and ‘But it has been suggested that the position is otherwise where the ‘class’ claim is not challenged. I see no reason why this should be so once it is postulated that the ‘withheld’ class documents are ‘likely’ to contain material substantially useful to the party seeking discovery. That qualification is necessary for what is no more that a ‘fishing expedition’ ought not to be advanced by the judge’s having a peep to see whether they contain an attractive catch.’
Lord Keith of Kinkel said: ‘There can be no doubt that the court has the power to inspect the documents privately. This was clearly laid down in Conway v Rimmer . . I do not consider that the exercise of such power, in cases responsibly regarded by the court as doubtful, can be treated as itself detrimental to the public interest.’

Judges:

Lord Edmund-Davis, Lord Keith of Kinkel

Citations:

[1979] UKHL 4, [1980] AC 1090

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241352

Donnelly and others v Weybridge Construction Ltd: TCC 22 Mar 2006

Application for specific dicslosure order.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Coulson QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 721 (TCC), [2006] BLR 158

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedNottingham Building Society v Eurodynamics Systems plc 1993
The court laid down tests for the granting of mandatory interim injunctions. The court should consider whether there was a high degree of confidence that the applicant would succeed in establishing his right at trial. The higher that confidence, the . .

Cited by:

CitedDolphin Quays Developments Ltd v Mills and others CA 17-May-2007
The owner had agreed to sell a long lease of an apartment to the defendant. Part of the price was to be by way of set off of an existing debt, but ths was not set out in the contract. The claimant bought the land and the benfit of the contract from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240451

Dadourian Group Int Inc v Simms and others (No 1): CA 11 Apr 2006

The court was asked to consider how it should exercise its discretion to order a world-wide asset freezing order.
Held: It dismissed the appeal in this case, but took the opportunity to provide eight guidelines for the way in which the discretion should be exercised.
Arden LJ: ‘Guideline 1: The principle applying to the grant of permission to enforce a WFO abroad is that the grant of that permission should be just and convenient for the purpose of ensuring the effectiveness of the WFO, and in addition that it is not oppressive to the parties to the English proceedings or to third parties who may be joined to the foreign proceedings.
Guideline 2: All the relevant circumstances and options need to be considered. In particular consideration should be given to granting relief on terms, for example terms as to the extension to third parties of the undertaking to compensate for costs incurred as a result of the WFO and as to the type of proceedings that may be commenced abroad. Consideration should also be given to the proportionality of the steps proposed to be taken abroad, and in addition to the form of any order.
Guideline 3: The interests of the applicant should be balanced against the interests of the other parties to the proceedings and any new party likely to be joined to the foreign proceedings.
Guideline 4: Permission should not normally be given in terms that would enable the applicant to obtain relief in the foreign proceedings which is superior to the relief given by the WFO.
Guideline 5: The evidence in support of the application for permission should contain all the information (so far as it can reasonably be obtained in the time available) necessary to make the judge to reach an informed decision, including evidence as to the applicable law and practice in the foreign court, evidence as to the nature of the proposed proceedings to be commenced and evidence as to the assets believed to be located in the jurisdiction of the foreign court and the names of the parties by whom such assets are held.
Guideline 6: The standard of proof as to the existence of assets that are both within the WFO and within the jurisdiction of the foreign court is a real prospect, that is the applicant must show that there is a real prospect that such assets are located within the jurisdiction of the foreign court in question.
Guideline 7: There must be evidence of a risk of dissipation of the assets in question.
Guideline 8: Normally the application should be made on notice to the respondent, but in cases of urgency, where it is just to do so, the permission may be given without notice to the party against whom relief will be sought in the foreign proceedings but that party should have the earliest practicable opportunity of having the matter reconsidered by the court at a hearing of which he is given notice.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lady Justice Arden Lord Justice Moore-Bick

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 399, Times 23-May-2006, [2006] 3 All ER 48

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Cicil Procedure Rules 825

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDerby and Co Ltd v Weldon CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff sought damages for breach of contract, for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and deceit and conspiracy. It sought a world-wide injunction.
Held: A freezing order (Mareva injunction) can be made in respect of assets which were . .

Cited by:

See AlsoDadourian Group International Inc and others v Simms and others ChD 24-Nov-2006
The Claimants sought, principally, damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and conspiracy against the first to fourth Defendants and damages for breach of contract against the third and fourth Defendants.
Ownership and control of a company are . .
See AlsoDadourian Group International Inc and others v Simms and others CA 20-Dec-2006
The court considered the exercise by the court of its discretion to release a party who has obtained a freezing order from his undertaking not to use information obtained from the party against whom the freezing order is made in contempt proceedings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240358

Jasim v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Mar 2006

The court criticised the presentation of the immigration judge’s judgment which by using excessively long paragraphs had made his otherwise reasoned judgment difficult to follow.

Citations:

Times 17-May-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 342

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239751

Gover and others v Propertycare Ltd: CA 28 Mar 2006

The claimants appealed dismissal of their claims for unfair dismissal, on the basis that they had been substantially dismissed as sales agents after rejecting conditions imposed unilaterally by their employers. Their damages had been limited to the loss of the consultation period to which they would have been entitled.
Held: The appeal failed. The court noted that on the appeal the parties had sought to raise new points which had not been raised before the tribunal or the EAT, and nor on the notices of appeal, but rather on the morning of the court hearing. The jurisdiction was statutory, allowing an appeal on a point of law only. The new point was not to be allowed.

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Lloyd LJ, Richards LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 286, Times 01-May-2006, [2006] 4 All ER 69

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Employment Tribunals Act 1996 37(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoPropertycare Ltd v T Gower and others EAT 14-Nov-2003
EAT Contract of Employment – Definition of employee . .
Appeal fromT Gover and others v Propertycare Ltd EAT 22-Nov-2005
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Polkey deduction.
The ET had found basic failings in the way the employers had sought to change employment contracts. This led to constructive dismissals and a finding of unfair . .

Cited by:

CitedAlexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd EAT 12-Apr-2006
The company made selections for redundancy, but failed to give the appellants information about how the scoring system had resulted in the figures allocated. The calculations left their representative unable to challenge them on appeal. The . .
CitedSoftware 2000 Ltd v Andrews etc EAT 17-Jan-2007
EAT Four employees successfully established before the Employment Tribunal that they had been unfairly dismissed for redundancy. The Tribunal found that there had been procedural defects. In particular the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239740

Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd. and Another (No. 2): TCC 15 Mar 2006

The parties were awaiting the handing down of the judgment, and were negotiating and settled their differences.
Held: Whilst the court welcomed settlements, a good deal of judicial time had been wasted. Parties entering into negotiations which they anticipate will settle the matter, should notify the court so that the judge might delay working on a judgment until it was known whether it was to be needed.

Judges:

Peter Coulson QC J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 536 (TCC), Times 24-Apr-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoGurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd QBD 25-Jan-2006
It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239324

The President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Bank of Scotland International: PC 27 Feb 2006

(Guernsey) Lord Bingham said: ‘Norwich Pharmacal relief exists to assist those who have been wronged but do not know by whom. If they have straight forward and available means of finding out, then it will not be reasonable to achieve that end by overriding a duty of confidentiality such as that owed by banker to customer. If, on the other hand, they have no straightforward or available means of finding out, Norwich Pharmacal relief is in principle available if the other conditions of obtaining relief are met. Whether it is said that it must just be convenient in the interests of justice to grant relief or that relief should only be granted if it is necessary in the interests of justice to grant it, makes little or no difference of substance’.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2006] UKPC 7

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

CitedNorwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners HL 26-Jun-1973
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist
The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their . .

Cited by:

CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
CitedThe Rugby Football Union v Viagogo Ltd QBD 30-Mar-2011
The claimant objected to the resale through the defendant of tickets to matches held at the Twickenham Stadium. The tickets contained terms disallowing resales at prices over the face value. They sought orders for the disclosure of the names of the . .
CitedThe Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd SC 21-Nov-2012
The Union challenged the right of the respondent to resell tickets to international rugby matches. The tickets were subject to a condition rendering it void on any resale at above face value. They said that the respondent had advertised tickets in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238743

Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and Another v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd: ChD 16 Feb 2006

The patent application had been presented to the European Patent Office and granted only after 13 years. The claimant now appealed refusal to allow amendment of its claim to allow a claim in its sole name. The defendant argued that it was out of time.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘ the long-standing rule of practice is that the new claim should be advanced in a new action, where the defence can be tested. If (as the Hearing Officer rightly concluded) CPR 17.4 did not apply, then the long standing rule of practice was the relevant default rule. ‘ ‘Section 72 (2) bars the making of an application outside the two year limit, not merely the making of an order. In addition, section 74 (4) precludes the raising (outside the two year time limit) of invalidity on the ground that the patent was granted to a person not entitled to it in infringement proceedings (among others). ‘ and ‘section 37 (5) bars the making of a claim outside the two year time limit; not merely the grant of a particular remedy. ‘ The tribunal had its own inherent power to manage its afairs, but the rules gave the Comptroller his own discretion and limited its use. In that circumstance, the inherent power was not to be relied upon to restore a discretion withheld by parliament. There was a fundamental difference between carrying on existing proceedings as a result of a devolution of title once the proceedings have started and an enlargement of the scope of a dispute as a result of an amendment. If an amendment adding a new party or a new cause of action is made to a rule 54 statement, the amendment will not relate back to the date of the original reference, but (where the amendment is made in order to raise a claim of the kind contemplated by Article 23 of the CPC) will take effect from the time it was made. The underlying principles are: i) That permission to amend to introduce new parties or a new claim should not be granted where there is a clear limitation defence; and ii) Where the limitation defence is arguable, it should be tested in fresh proceedings.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

[2006] RPC 24, [2006] EWHC 160 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 37(5), Patents Rules 1995, Civil Procedure Rules 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedOcean Estates Ltd v Pinder HL 1969
The court asked whether the sufficiency of adverse possession might be qualified either by the intentions of the paper owner or the squatter’s willingness to pay for their occupation if asked. Lord Diplock: ‘Where questions of title to land arise in . .
CitedBoake Allen Ltd and others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 31-Jan-2006
The claimant companies had paid corporation tax under rules which had later been found to be discriminatory. They now sought repayment by virtue of double taxation agreements with the countries in which the parent companies were based.
Held: . .
CitedLangley v North West Water Authority 1991
A tribunal has an inherent power (subject to constraints) to regulate the procedure to be followed before it. . .
CitedPharmedica GMBH’s Trade Mark Application ChD 2000
The tribunal was asked whether an assignee of a trademark should be substituted in existing opposition proceedings for the assignor. The assignment had taken place after the proceedings had begun.
Held: A tribunal has an inherent power to . .
CitedMarkem Corporation and Another v Zipher Ltd CA 22-Mar-2005
A patent which was applied for as a result of a breach of confidence may be capable of giving the victim of the breach the benefit of an interest in the patent. In the UK at least the basis of an entitlement claim must be a breach of the claimant’s . .
CitedRegina v Comptroller-General of Patents Designs and Trademarks ex parte Ash and Lacey Building Products Ltd 2002
Revocation was sought on the ground that the patent was invalid because of anticipation by prior publication. The court considered its powers under section 77 in the context of such a revocation application: ‘ . . the power to revoke arises in . .
CitedParsons and Another v George and Another CA 13-Jul-2004
The claimant sought to begin proceedings to renew his business tenancy, but the proceedings were issued in the wrong name. He sought to amend the proceedings to substitute the correct defendant, but that application was out of time.
Held: . .
CitedLoveridge and Loveridge v Healey CA 20-Feb-2004
The landowner sought to recover possession of land occupied under an agreement by a mobile home owner.
Held: It was necessary for the land owner to show that he had complied with the requirements under the Act. It was insufficient for the . .
CitedGoode v Martin CA 13-Dec-2001
The claimant had sought to amend her claim for damages for personal injuries. The application had been rejected as introducing a claim not based on the same facts. She had suffered severe head injuries, and had no memory of the accident. She served . .
CitedCobbold v London Borough of Greenwich CA 9-Aug-1999
The tenant had sought an order against the council landlord for failure to repair her dwelling. The defendant appealed refusal of leave to amend the pleadings in anticipation of the trial, now due to start on the following day.
Held: Leave was . .
CitedWelsh Development Agency v Redpath Dorman Long Ltd CA 4-Apr-1994
A new claim was not deemed to have been made until the pleading was actually amended for limitation purposes, and should not be allowed after the limitation period had expired. The date of the application for leave to amend was not at issue. The . .
CitedAldi Stores Ltd v Holmes Buildings Plc CA 1-Dec-2003
What makes a claim a ‘new claim’ as defined in section 35(2) of the Limitation Act 1980 is not the newness of the case according to the type or quantum of the remedy claimed, but the newness of the cause of action that it involves. A cause of action . .
CitedLloyds Bank Plc v Rogers CA 16-Jul-1999
Where a claim had been made for possession of property under a legal charge, but no claim had been made for financial relief, and a later claim for such relief was made through an amended claim, the loss of the possible defence of limitation was a . .

Cited by:

CitedYeda Research and Development Co Ltd v Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and others CA 31-Jul-2006
The claimants sought to amend their claim which had previously been on the basis of a joint ownership, to one of sole ownership.
Held: The application for the amendment being made more han two years after the grant, the amendment could not be . .
Appeal fromYeda Research and Development Co Ltd v Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and others CA 31-Jul-2006
The claimants sought to amend their claim which had previously been on the basis of a joint ownership, to one of sole ownership.
Held: The application for the amendment being made more han two years after the grant, the amendment could not be . .
At First InstanceYeda Research and Development Company Ltd v Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and others HL 24-Oct-2007
The claimants said that the defendant had misused confidential information sent to him to found an application for a patent, claiming wrongly to have been its inventor. The claimant appealed a refusal by the court to allow amendments to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice, Limitation

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238685

Whitehouse v Jordan: HL 17 Dec 1980

The plaintiff sued for brain damage suffered at birth by use of forceps at the alleged professional negligence of his doctor. The Court of Appeal had reversed the judge’s finding in his favour.
Held: In this case most of the evidence at issue was that of expert witnesses, and the court might therefore be more ready to depart from findings of fact by the judge.
Lord Wilberforce said as to expert evidence: ‘While some degree of consultation between experts and legal advisers is entirely proper, it is necessary that expert evidence presented to the court should be, and should be seen to be, the independent product of the expert, uninfluenced as to form or content by the exigencies of litigation. To the extent that it is not, the evidence is likely to be not only incorrect but self defeating.’

Judges:

Lord Wilberforce, Lord Edmund-Davies, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, Lord Russell of Killowen, Lord Bridge of Harwich

Citations:

[1980] UKHL 12, [1981] 1 WLR 246, [1981] 1 All ER 267

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBland v Ross (Ship Julia) (Admiralty) PC 1860
The court considered the care needed in an appellate court in reversing a decision on the facts. Lord Kingsdown said that: ‘They, who require this Board, under such circumstances to reverse a decision of the court below upon a point of this . .
CitedThe Glannibanta CA 1876
‘Now we feel, as strongly as did the Lords of the Privy Council in the cases just referred to [The Julia 14 Moo P.C. 210 and The Alice L.R. 2 P.C. 245], the great weight that is due to the decision of a judge of first instance whenever, in a . .
CitedClarke v Edinburgh and District Tramways Co HL 1919
The House considered the ability of an appellate court to reconsider the facts.
Held: The privileges enjoyed by a trial judge extend not only to questions of credibility.
Lord Shaw said that the judge enjoys ‘those advantages, sometimes . .
CitedSS Hontestroom v SS Sagaporack HL 1927
The court discussed the weight to be given by an appellate court to findings of fact made by the court of first instance.
Held: Not to have seen the witnesses puts appellate judges in a permanent position of disadvantage as against the trial . .
CitedBolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
MentionedChin Keow v Government of Malaysia PC 1967
. .
CitedPowell v Streatham Manor Nursing Home HL 1935
Where the Judge at the trial has come to a conclusion upon the question which of the witnesses, whom he has seen and heard, are trustworthy and which are not, he is normally in a better position to judge of this matter than the appellate tribunal . .
ApprovedSS Hontestroom v SS Sagaporack HL 1927
The court discussed the weight to be given by an appellate court to findings of fact made by the court of first instance.
Held: Not to have seen the witnesses puts appellate judges in a permanent position of disadvantage as against the trial . .

Cited by:

CitedMeadow v General Medical Council Admn 17-Feb-2006
The appellant challenged being struck off the medical register. He had given expert evidence in a criminal case which was found misleading and to have contributed to a wrongful conviction for murder.
Held: The evidence though mistaken was . .
CitedToth v Jarman CA 19-Jul-2006
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for damages for nervous shock, associated with the alleged negligence of the defendant doctor in treating his son. It was said that the medical expert had not disclosed a conflict of interest.
Held: . .
CitedNational Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’) 1993
Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following:

1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the . .
CitedArmchair Passenger Transport Ltd v Helical Bar Plc and Another QBD 28-Feb-2003
Objection was made to the use of an expert witness who had formerly been a senior employee of the defendant.
Held: The court set out criteria for testing the independence of a proposed expert witness: ‘i) It is always desirable that an expert . .
CitedThe Queen v Crawford PC 11-Nov-2015
From the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands – The crown appealed against the quashing of the respondent’s conviction for possession of an unlicensed firearm. A gun was found where he had been seen to discard a gun whilst being chased. The . .
CitedSidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
Explanation of Medical Risks essential
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Professional Negligence

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238567

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another: HL 15 Feb 2006

Licensees appealed against the grant of judicial review of decisions granting special removal of old on-licences for premises. The grant had been challenged on the basis that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to make the award because the premises were unoccupied. The relevant legislation had been repealed by the time the matter reached the House but the parties still sought an answer.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Since the decision might still affect the parties, either as to costs, or as might arise from undertakings given, the appeal was not moot. There was no rule of law or practice to make it wrong for the House to continue with the case, though the House itself had a discretion whether to continue it.
Section 15 had to be looked at purposively. In that context, occupation by the local authority with a view to demolition in pursuance of some public interest, in this case the redevelopment of the area, was sufficient occupation to satisfy s15. The strict interpretation proposed by the objectors would bring haphazard results.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2006] UKHL 7, Times 20-Feb-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 496

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAinsbury v Millington (Note) HL 1987
There had been a dispute between the parties as to a council house tenancy, but by the time it came before the House, the tenancy had ceased to exist, and the action was academic.
Held: Once the parties have settled their dispute there remains . .
CitedSun Life Assurance Co of Canada v Jervis HL 1944
The parties had disputed the terms of an insurance policy. The House considered whether it could hear the case once the dispute had been settled.
Held: There was no remaining dispute for the House to settle. Viscount Simon LC said: ‘My Lords, . .
Appeal fromBushell and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant sought special removal of a justices on-licence from former premises to its new premises.
Held: The special removal procedure was limited to circumstances of urgency. The applicant had to show that the circumstances fell within . .
At first instnceBushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others Admn 15-Mar-2004
Objection was made to the removal of an old on-license by the magistrates.
Held: The justices had had no jurisdiction under section 15 because, at the time the application came before the justices, the premises of Mim’s Bar were not ‘occupied’ . .
CitedSirius International Insurance Company (Publ) v FAI General Insurance Limited and others HL 2-Dec-2004
The appellant had taken certain insurance risks on behalf of the respondents, subject to banking indemnities. Disputes arose and were settled under a Tomlin order, which was now itself subject to challenge.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The . .
CitedMadrassa Anjuman Islamia of Kholwad v Municipal Council of Johan-Nesburg PC 1922
‘The word ‘occupy’ is a word of uncertain meaning. Sometimes it denotes legal possession in the technical sense, . . At other times ‘occupation’ denotes nothing more than physical presence in a place for a substantial period of time, . . Its precise . .
CitedAssociated Cinema Properties Ltd v Hampstead Borough Council 1944
For the purposes of rating, where, in addition to legal possession, ‘use and enjoyment’ of the hereditament is required to establish occupation so as to give rise to liability. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238530

Bailey v Warre: CA 7 Feb 2006

The claimant had been severely injured in a road traffic accident. His claim was compromised and embodied in a court order, but later a question was raised as to whether he had had mental capacity at the time to make the compromise he had.
Held: The term ‘patient’ in this context had a meaning specific to the rules. A claimant could not become a patient within those rules until the commencement of the action. The compromise was valid and binding. In any event the actual agreement might well have been appropriate.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Arden LJ, Hallett LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 51, Times 20-Feb-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 821.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedKirby v Leather CA 1965
The plaintiff crashed into a van whilst riding his moped and suffered serious brain damage. An inquiry as to a party’s competence to conduct a case had to focus on his capacity to conduct the proceedings. In this case the plaintiff ‘was not capable . .
CitedDietz v Lennig Chemicals Limited HL 1969
Before proceedings, the plaintiff widow accepted the defendants’ offer to settle her and her infant son’s Fatal Accidents Acts claim ‘subject to the approval of the court’. A summons was then issued for the court to approve that settlement. The . .
CitedDrinkall (A Minor Who Sues By Her Mother and Litigation Friend) v Whitwood CA 6-Nov-2003
The claimant, a child, had sought damages. An agreement was made to compromise the claim. Later the child sought to withdraw from it.
Held: No court order had been made to approve the compromise, and therefore no binding arrangement existed. . .
CitedWhite v Fell 12-Nov-1987
The court was asked to decide whether the claimant had been incapable of managing her property and affairs in the context of a Limitation Act defence.
Held: There are three features to which it is appropriate to have regard when assessing a . .
CitedMasterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
CitedChapman v Hearse, Baker v Willoughby HL 26-Nov-1969
The plaintiff, a pedestrian had been struck by the defendant’s car while crossing the road. The plaintiff had negligently failed to see the defendant’s car approaching. The defendant had a clear view of the plaintiff prior to the collision, but was . .
CitedEagle v Chambers CA 24-Jul-2003
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was . .
CitedGillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Department of Health and Social Security HL 17-Oct-1985
Lawfulness of Contraceptive advice for Girls
The claimant had young daughters. She challenged advice given to doctors by the second respondent allowing them to give contraceptive advice to girls under 16, and the right of the first defendant to act upon that advice. She objected that the . .
CitedRe K (Enduring Powers of Attorney), In re F ChD 1988
The court allowed an appeal against the decision of the Master of the Court of Protection refusing registration to an enduring power of attorney on the ground that the donor, although capable of understanding the nature of the power, was herself . .
CitedMcNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Limited CA 26-Jul-2002
The Disability Rights Commission sought leave to intervene in a claim between the parties for disability discrimination.
Held: The Commission has important duties, but that did not give it the right, save in exceptional circumstances, to . .
CitedRe Birchall; Wilson v Birchall CA 1880
In the administration of his estate the widow of the deceased took out a summons asking for a declaration that a large amount of personal property was held by the deceased as trustee for her and so did not fall into his estate. A compromise was . .
CitedLiddell v Middleton CA 17-Jul-1995
A husband and wife crossed a road. The wife, appreciating that the danger from the traffic, ran across. The husband stood in the middle of the road and then went ahead, but was struck by a vehicle and injured. He was significantly affected by . .
CitedIn Re E (Mental Health Patient) 1985
Application for an order with regard to a mental health patient’s property. . .
CitedImperial Loan Co v Stone CA 1892
Contract without Capacity – Voidable not Void
A person of unsound mind was sued on a promissory note. He had signed it as surety. The jury found that he was insane when he signed the note but there was no finding as to the creditor’s knowledge of such insanity. The judge entered a verdict . .
CitedRe Taylor’s Application 1972
If the approval of the litigation friend is required and it appears that the litigation friend is acting unreasonably in withholding his consent, steps can be taken to remove him and appoint another litigation friend in his place. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238340

Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd: QBD 25 Jan 2006

It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so.

Judges:

His Honour Peter Coulson QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 43 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoGurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd. and Another (No. 2) TCC 15-Mar-2006
The parties were awaiting the handing down of the judgment, and were negotiating and settled their differences.
Held: Whilst the court welcomed settlements, a good deal of judicial time had been wasted. Parties entering into negotiations which . .
CitedDar v Vonsak and Another QBD 17-Dec-2012
The second defendant insurers appealed against a refusal by the court to allow it to withdraw an admission of liability in respect of a road traffic accident. The insurer said that the fact that it now saw the accident as fraudulent was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238467

Littlefair, Williamson, and Beardall v Vinamul Ltd: CA 1 Feb 2006

The parties had been involved in personal injury litigation, which the defendants said had been compromised on a drop hands basis. The claimants wished to go ahead.
Held: The parties legal representatives had not sufficiently recorded their dealings. However notes on both sides of telephone conversations spelled out that the claimants were not proceedings with claims for one aspect of their injury, and that claim could not proceed.

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 31

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238248

Hawley v Luminar Leisure Plc Ase Security Services Limited, Mann: CA 1 Feb 2006

The defendant had made a part 36 offer of settlement. The claimant did not accept it, but then tried to accept it after the trial had begun.
Held: The risks of litigation were such that situations would often alter when a case came on for trial. It was implied in a part 36 offer that it was open to acceptance only until the trial concluded. Once the judge retired to consider his verdict the offer was no longer available.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Lord Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 30, Times 14-Feb-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules Part 36

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoHawley v Luminar Leisure Ltd and others CA 24-Jan-2006
The claimant was assaulted and severely injured at a night club by a doorman supplied to the club by a third party company now in liquidation. He claimed the club was the ‘temporary deemed employer’ of the doorman. He also sought to claim under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238219

Boake Allen Ltd and others v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 31 Jan 2006

The claimant companies had paid corporation tax under rules which had later been found to be discriminatory. They now sought repayment by virtue of double taxation agreements with the countries in which the parent companies were based.
Held: The double agreements required the taxation provisions should not treat worse ‘other similar enterprises of that first-mentioned state’ in the UK. The claimant had submitted that ‘other similar enterprises’ had to refer to the UK subsidiaries of UK parent companies. The Revenue contended that it was the group which was being referred to. That submission was not accepted. To limit the availability of group income elections to subsidiaries of UK companies would be a discriminatory breach.
However section 788 did not operate to incoporate the double taxation agreements into UK law, and therefore there was no remedy available to the taxpayers.
The question how restitutionary relief should be assessed was not settled by La Pintada, as the claim was not for an entitlement to interest, as creditors, on a debt or on damages by way of compensation for loss of the use of the money that was unjustly demanded and retained by the defendant.
The role of pleadings has not been abolished by the CPR. Mummery LJ said: ‘While it is good sense not to be pernickety about pleadings, the basic requirement that material facts should be pleaded is there for a good reason – so that the other side can respond to the pleaded case by way of admission or denial of facts, thereby defining the issues for decision for the benefit of the parties and the court. Proper pleading of the material facts is essential for the orderly progress of the case and for its sound determination. The definition of the issues has an impact on such important matters as disclosure of relevant documents and the relevant oral evidence to be adduced at trial. In my view, the fact that the nature of the grievance may be obvious to the respondent or that the respondent can ask for further information to be supplied by the claimant are not normally valid excuses for a claimant’s failure to formulate and serve a properly pleaded case setting out the material facts in support of the cause of action. If the pleading has to be amended, it is reasonable that the party, who has not complied with well known pleading requirements, should suffer the consequences with regard to such matters as limitation.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Lloyd Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 25, Times 10-Feb-2006, [2006] STC 606, [2006] BTC 266, 8 ITL Rep 819, [2006] STI 32, [2006] Eu LR 755

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 788(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMetallgesellschaft Ltd and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another Hoechst Ag and Another v Same ECJ 8-Mar-2001
The British law which meant that non-resident parent companies of British based businesses were not able to recover interest on payments of advance corporation tax, was discriminatory against other European based companies. Accordingly the law was . .
CitedNEC Semi-Conductors Limited and Other Test Claimants v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue ChD 24-Nov-2003
UK companies were subsidiaries of companies resident abroad, and complained that they were unable to make group income elections.
Held: The prohibition infringed non-discrimination provisions of double taxation agreements – non-discrimination . .
CitedPresident of India v La Pintada Compagnia Navigacia SA (‘La Pintada’) HL 1985
The house decided against altering the rule in Page -v- Newman. ‘The common law does not award general damages for delay in payment of a debt beyond the date when it is contractually due’ The power given to the court under s 35A is discretionary. It . .

Cited by:

CitedRhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and Another v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd ChD 16-Feb-2006
The patent application had been presented to the European Patent Office and granted only after 13 years. The claimant now appealed refusal to allow amendment of its claim to allow a claim in its sole name. The defendant argued that it was out of . .
Appeal fromBoake Allen Ltd and others v Revenue and Customs HL 23-May-2007
The revenue appealed against a decision that provisions which did not allow the defendants, as companies with foreign parents, the right to make group income elections which would have allowed them to pay on their profits to their parent companies . .
CitedSempra Metals Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another HL 18-Jul-2007
The parties agreed that damages were payable in an action for restitution, but the sum depended upon to a calculation of interest. They disputed whether such interest should be calculated on a simple or compound basis. The company sought compound . .
CitedTest Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue SC 23-May-2012
The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European . .
CitedBenedetti v Sawiris and Others SC 17-Jul-2013
The claimant appealed against reduction of the sum awarded on his claim for a quantum meruit after helping to facilitate a very substantial business deal for the defendants.
Held: The correct approach to the amount to be paid by way of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Corporation Tax, Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238206

Right Hon Aitken MP and Preston; Pallister and Guardian Newspapers Ltd: CA 15 May 1997

The defendants appealed against an order that a defamation trial should proced before a judge alone.
Held: ‘Where the parties, or one of them, is a public figure, or there are matters of national interest in question, this would suggest the need for a jury trial; but a question relating to a person’s ‘fitness for public office’ is one needing detailed consideration of documents, and a jury trial may not then be appropriate. Given the overall complexity of the case resulting from the proliferation of issues and sub-issues, the amount of detail, the body of documentation and the number of witnesses, the interests of justice were best served by a painstaking, dispassionate, impartial, orderly approach to deciding where the truth lies. It was in the public interest and in the interest of each of the parties that the case should culminate in findings, for or against the plaintiff, on each of the main issues in controversy. A general verdict of a jury could leave room for doubt and continuing debate whether, on important and hotly contested issues, the plaintiff or the defendants had been vindicated. A reasoned judgment, giving the judge’s conclusions and his detailed reasons for reaching them, would by contrast settle, one would hope once and for all, whether or not the plaintiff had misconducted himself in each and every one of the ways charged. It also seems to me a serious disadvantage of jury trial that there should be a first trial of liability only immediately followed, if the general verdict were in the plaintiff’s favour, by a further trial on quantum. This would almost certainly lead to the recalling of certain witnesses and it would lead to the leading of considerable evidence concerning the aggravation of damages which is pleaded in this case with unusual fullness.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ

Citations:

Times 21-May-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1710, [1997] EMLR 415

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRothermere v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 1973
The court considered whether to order a defamation trial to be heard by judge alone, rather than before a jury.
Held: The criterion that the trial requires a prolonged examination of documents is basic and must be strictly satisfied, and it is . .
CitedBeta Construction Ltd v Channel Four Television Co Ltd CA 1990
When considering the number of documents to be considered when deciding whether a defamation case should proceed before a judge or judge and jury, the court was entitled to look also at any specialised technical content of the documents and also . .
CitedTaylor v Anderton (Police Complaints Authority Intervening) CA 19-Jan-1995
Reports, which had been prepared for the purposes of a police complaint procedure, could be entitled to protection from disclosure under a public interest immunity certificate. The court also considered the relationship between the documentation and . .
CitedGoldsmith v Pressdram Ltd CA 1988
The court considered whether to order a defamation trial to be before a judge alone, or with a jury.
Held: The word ‘examination’ has a wide connotation, is not limited to the documents which contain the actual evidence in the case and . .

Cited by:

CitedCollins Stewart Ltd and Another v The Financial Times Ltd QBD 20-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages for defamation. The claimed that the article had caused very substantial losses (andpound;230 million) to them by affecting their market capitalisation value. The defendant sought to strike out that part of the claim. . .
CitedFiddes v Channel Four Television Corporation and Others CA 29-Jun-2010
The claimants in a defamation case made an interlocutory appeal against an order for trial by judge alone. The parties had agreed for trial by jury, but the defendants made a late application for trial by judge alone.
Held: The claimant’s . .
CitedCook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 29-Mar-2011
The claimant, an MP, complained in defamation of the defendant’s description of his rejected expenses claim regarding an assistant’s charitable donation. The paper pleaded a Reynolds defence. The claimant said that when published the defendant knew . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.142106

In re I (Children): CA 24 May 2019

The court considered the approach to be taken where a court having sent to the parties a draft judgment, he received from counsel a request for clarification of a paragraph in it.

Judges:

Bean, King, Singh LJJ

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 898, [2019] WLR(D) 311

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.637975

Real Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd and others: ChD 15 Dec 2006

The defendant company resisted disclosure of documents saying that they had been supplied by the Financial Services Authority in confidence, and that to disclose them would be an offence.
Held: The information had already in principle been known to the defendants before the FSA investigation, and were not protected from disclosure.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

Times 23-Jan-2007, [2006] EWHC 3249 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 31.19(5), Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 348

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromReal Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd and others CA 9-Mar-2007
The defendants had declined to produce documents saying that they had been obtained under conditions of confidence from the Financial Services Authority. The claimants said that the documents were not protected since the defendant already had the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Financial Services, Litigation Practice, Information

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.247405

Kuenyehia and others v International Hospitals Group Ltd: CA 25 Jan 2006

Service of litigation documents by fax was not an acceptabe departure from the rules where the party being served had not beforehand given consent to service in this manner. The mere advertisement of a fax number did not amount to such consent. Such service could not be characterised as no more than a minor departure from the rules.
Neuberger LJ said: ‘we do not consider that the claimants can rely on the absence of prejudice to the defendant as a reason for letting the Judge’s decision to stand. In our view . . the time limits in the CPR, especially with regard to service of the claim form where the limitation period may have expired, are to be strictly observed, and extensions and other dispensations are to be sparingly accorded, especially when applied for after time has expired. While there may be exceptional cases, we consider that prejudice is only relevant in this sort of case to assist a defendant, where the court would otherwise think it right to dispense with service. In other words, prejudice to the defendant is a reason for not dispensing with service, but the absence of prejudice cannot usually, if ever, be a reason for dispensing with service’ and ‘Service on the defendant’s solicitors was ineffective under the CPR, and it cannot be said to have been a ‘minor departure’ from the permitted methods of service to serve on solicitors who had not been nominated by the defendant. In any event, for the reasons already given, this would not have been an exceptional case. Quite apart from any other point, it can fairly be said that it would have been only too easy for the claimants’ solicitors to ask the defendant, with whom they had been in fairly close contact, to nominate its solicitors’ address as its address for service in accordance with r.6.5(2), but they never did so.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 21, Times 17-Feb-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBrown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others ComC 19-Jun-2009
The claimants served proceedings by fax. The defendants denied that it was effective saying that they had not confirmed that they were instructed to accept service or that as required by the rules they had confirmed that they would accept service by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Limitation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.238134

Collier v Williams and others: CA 25 Jan 2006

Various parties appealed refusal and grant of extensions of time for service of claim forms.
Held: The court gave detailed guidance. The three central issues were the proper construction of the rule, the question of whether the court could reconsider an application made without notice and on paper, and whether the Hashtroodi guidance was being followed properly. The court was concerned that it appeared to be a view on the part of the legal profession that if an order had been obtained ex parte, it was possible to apply under rule 3.1(7) to have it set aside. This would be a means of circumventing the central position of the Civil Procedure Rules that orders should in future be appealed, and not merely be taken to a judge in chambers to be reviewed.
The court considered the meaning and effect of CPR Part 6 and CPR rule 7.6, and the meaning of the phrase ‘no solicitor acting’ in rule 6.5(6) providing that, ‘Where (a) no solicitor is acting for the party to be served; and (b) the party has not given an address for service, the document must be sent or transmitted to, or left at, the place shown’ in a table set out.
Held: The expression ‘no solicitor acting’ meant ‘no solicitor acting so that he can be served’ and ‘We put it that way because, unless the claimant has been made aware by the defendant or his solicitor that the solicitor is authorised to accept service, the claimant would be ill-advised to serve on the solicitor’.
Because the claimants had not been told by [the defendant’s solicitors] that they were acting on behalf of the defendant and were authorised to accept service, there was no solicitor ‘acting’ for the defendant within the meaning of CPR rule 6.5(6): there was no solicitor acting so that he or she could be served’.
. . And ‘We agree that the power given by CPR r.3.1(7) cannot be used simply as an equivalent to an appeal against an order with which the applicant is dissatisfied. The circumstances outlined by Patten J are the only ones in which the power to revoke or vary an order already made should be exercised under r.3.1(7). . . ‘The possibility of recourse to CPR r.3.1(7) remains to be considered. As we have said earlier, this rule gives a very general power to vary or revoke an order. It appears to be unfettered. But it is a wrong exercise of this power to vary or revoke an order where there has been no material change of circumstances since the earlier order was made and/or no material is brought to the attention of the second court which was not brought to the attention of the first. . . In short, therefore, the jurisdiction to vary or revoke an order under CPR r.3.1(7) should not normally be exercised unless the applicant is able to place material before the court, whether in the form of evidence or argument, which was not placed before the court on the earlier occasion.’

Judges:

Waller LJ, Dyson LJ, Neuberger LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 20, Times 03-Feb-2006, [2007] 1 All ER 991, [2006] 1 WLR 1945

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6 7.6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHashtroodi v Hancock CA 27-May-2004
The claimant had issued proceedings in time, but then the limitation period expired before it was served, and in the meantime the limitation period had expired. The defendant appealed against an automatic extension of time for service granted to the . .
ApprovedLloyds Investment (Scandinavia) Ltd v Ager-Hanssen ChD 15-Jul-2003
The defendant sought a variation under Part 3.1(7) of an order setting aside an earlier judgment in default of defence, on terms requiring a substantial payment into court with which the defendant, who was a litigant in person, had not complied.

Cited by:

CitedShaw and Another v Massey Foundation and Pilings Ltd TCC 12-Mar-2009
The appellants had argued that they were not subject to the construction arbitration system because they were residential occupiers. They now said that as consumers vis a vis the construction contract. . .
See AlsoHarlow and Milner Ltd v Teasdale (No 2) TCC 15-Mar-2006
The fact that a paying party has commenced substantive arbitration proceedings is usually irrelevant to the successful party’s right to enforcement of any judgment. . .
CitedBrown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others ComC 19-Jun-2009
The claimants served proceedings by fax. The defendants denied that it was effective saying that they had not confirmed that they were instructed to accept service or that as required by the rules they had confirmed that they would accept service by . .
CitedKojima v HSBC Bank Plc ChD 22-Mar-2011
The defendant had been found to owe money to the bank. In order to avoid damaging his career he agreed to execute a charge to secure the judgment. He now sought release from that order, and to withdraw his admission of the debt. He had acted in . .
CitedEdwards v Golding and others CA 3-Apr-2007
The claimant appealed against an order that his claim in defamation had failed for limitation, the judge having held that time ran from publication even though the claimant did not know the identity of the author.
Held: The appeal was . .
CitedKamali v City and Country Properties Ltd CA 24-Jul-2006
The defendant tenant appealed against judgment saying that the proceedings in the County Court had not been correctly served. Though the documents had been sent to his address under the lease, he had been out of the jurisdiction when the claim was . .
CitedVenulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd and Others TCC 22-May-2013
The claimant sought an extension of time to serve the Particulars of Claim. The solicitors said that they had misread the relevant Rules.
Held: The solicitors had acted on the basis of the former practice, but the rules had been substantially . .
CitedThevarajah v Riordan and Others SC 16-Dec-2015
The defendants had failed to comply with an ‘unless’ order requiring disclosure, and had been first debarred from defending the cases as to liability. They applied to a second judge who granted relief from sanctions after new solicitors had complied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.238131

Nduka, Regina (on the Application of) v Her Honour Judge Riddel: Admn 21 Oct 2005

Attempt to avoid normal civil appeal process by use of judicial review – whether abuse of process. The underlying claim had been struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. Permission to appeal had been refused. Permission to bring judicial review of that decision had itself been refused on the basis that the CPR provided a comprehensive system of appeals, which could not be circumvented by judicial review. The claimant now appealed against that refusal.
Held: The County Court had been given extensive and draconian case management powers, and the decisions challenged fell welll within those case management powers. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Wilkie J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 3115 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 54

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.238163

Morrison and Another v AWG Group Ltd and Another: CA 20 Jan 2006

The defendants requested the judge to recuse himself because one witness was well known to the judge. He declined, saying that arrangements had been made for him not to be called. The defendant appealed.
Held: There was no allegation of actual bias, only the risk of apparent bias. The judge should have stood down. The judge acknowledged that they had known each other for 30 years, and that if he had had to assess the witness’ evidence he would be placed in difficulty. The witness had such a close connection with the party that he could not be separated from it. The calling of alternate witnesses did not resolve the difficulty.
Mummery LJ said: ‘The test . . is that, having ascertained all the circumstances bearing on the suggestion that the judge was (or would be) biased, the court must ask ‘whether those circumstances would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility . . that the tribunal was biased’ ‘

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Latham LJ, Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 6, [2006] 1 WLR 1163

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTaylor and Another v Lawrence and Another CA 25-Jan-2001
Boundary dispute appeal – whether court has apparent bias. The court must ask ‘whether those circumstances would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility . . that the tribunal was biased.’ . .
CitedTaylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .
CitedIn Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2); Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Proprietary Articles Trade Association CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimants alleged that a connection between a member of the Restrictive Practices Court, who was to hear a complaint and another company, disclosed bias against them. She had not recused herself.
Held: When asking whether material . .
CitedLawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
CitedRegina v Gough (Robert) HL 1993
The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with . .
CitedLocabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd CA 17-Nov-1999
Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias
In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The mere . .

Cited by:

CitedTibbetts v The Attorney General of The Cayman Islands PC 24-Mar-2010
(Cayman Islands) The defendant appealed against his conviction for money laundering, alleging apparent bias in a juror who was said to have been acquainted with one witness.
Held: The appeal failed. The juror had correctly replied to the . .
CitedBegraj and Another v Heer Manak Solicitors and Others EAT 17-Jun-2014
begraj_manakEAT0614
EAT Practice and Procedure : Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity – An Employment Judge was approached by Police Officers part way through a lengthy hearing. They gave her information prejudicial . .
CitedHewitt, Regina (on The Application of) v Denbighshire Magistrates’ Court Admn 22-Oct-2015
The claimant, a hunt protester appealed against her conviction for harassment saying that the judge had given the appearance of being biased. He had, on being asked denied being a member of the hunting community. She said that he had whilst in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237739

Wallace and Another v Crossley and Another: CA 2 Nov 2005

The defendants sought leave to appeal against an order acknowledging a drainage easement over their land. The easement of drainage was subject to a condition that it did not come to be a nuisance. It was found so to have become.
Held: The allegations of bias in the judge were not made out: ‘there was nothing in the judge’s language that could possibly be said to evidence actual bias, or to have given rise to an appearance of bias from the point of view of a fair minded and informed observer, which is the relevant legal test.’

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1463

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoWallace and Another v Crossley and Another CA 10-Jul-2009
Appeal against refusal on stay of order for sale of house to pay costs after loss in litigation. . .
See AlsoWallace and Another v Crossley and Another CA 24-Jul-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Nuisance, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237500

Schmidt v Wong: CA 7 Dec 2005

The claimant began a personal injury claim against her landlord. She wanted a freezing order, but began her claim in the County court. When she became aware that the county court had no jurisdiction to grant such an order, he sought to have the matter transferred to the High Court.
Held: Since the County Court had jurisdiction to deal with the substantive issue, the case could not be transferred.

Judges:

The Master of the Rolls Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1506, Times 13-Dec-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

County Courts Act 1984 842

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSiskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA HL 1979
An injunction was sought against a Panamanian ship-owning company to restrain it from disposing of a fund, consisting of insurance proceeds, in England. The claimant for the injunction was suing the company in a Cyprus court for damages and believed . .
CitedRe NP Engineering and Security Products Ltd; Official Receiver and Another v Pafundo and Another CA 22-Oct-1996
The official receiver began director disqualification proceedings, but before the proceedings commenced, the company was wound up. Where, on an application for the disqualification of a director, the official receiver and the Secretary of State . .
CitedMercedes Benz Ag v Leiduck PC 24-Jul-1995
Mareva relief is not available against a foreigner outside the UK in order to support a court action abroad. A Mareva injunction is not itself a substantive relief and so was not available to support foreign proceedings. A freezing order has to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237453

Baird v Thurrock Borough Council: CA 7 Nov 2005

The defendant council appealed a finding of negligence after a dustbinman had been injured when he was struck by a wheelie bin. He had said that a malfunction in the mechanism loading the wheelie bin caused him to be hit by one.
Held: The judge had failed to recount properly his findings on the evidence. Whilst judges were properly encouraged to keep their judgments brief, the parties had to be left in a position to assess how the decision had been reached. A judge does not have to deal with each and every point in issue, but must deal with the fundamental points. There had to be a re-trial.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Keene LJ, Gage LJ

Citations:

Times 15-Nov-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 1499

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedEnglish v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd; etc, (Practice Note) CA 30-Apr-2002
Judge’s Reasons Must Show How Reached
In each case appeals were made, following Flannery, complaining of a lack of reasons given by the judge for his decision.
Held: Human Rights jurisprudence required judges to put parties into a position where they could understand how the . .

Cited by:

CitedBates v Malyon QBD 10-Oct-2008
The defendant had driven into the rear of the claimant’s car. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim by the judge who said he had not discharged the burden of proof of negligence.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had reached a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237491

Mason v Desnoes and Geddes Ltd: PC 2 Apr 1990

(Jamaica) A section enabled the Court to set aside a judgment where a party had not appeared at the trial.
Held: The reference to ‘the Court or a Judge’ made it clear that the jurisdiction may be exercised by a judge in chambers and: ‘ . . the application to set aside a default judgment is not the invocation of an appellate jurisdiction but of a specific rule enabling the court to set aside its own orders in certain circumstances where the action has never been heard on the merits.’

Citations:

[1990] 2 AC 729, [1990] UKPC 15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

CitedStrachan v The Gleaner Company Limited and Stokes PC 25-Jul-2005
PC (Jamacia) The plaintiff challenged an order setting aside a default assessment of damages in his claim for defamation. After the action was lost, two witnesses had come forward who might have allowed a defence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237248

JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation: CA 20 Dec 2005

The defendants appealed against an order striking out four paragraphs of its defence and counterclaim.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke (Vice President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1602

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 14-Mar-2005
The defendants had invested money through the claimants, but had suffered severe losses. The claimants sought a declaration that they had no liability for such losses. The defendants counterclaimed that the claimants were liable in negligence, . .

Cited by:

See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation CA 2-Mar-2006
The parties disputed the attempt to strike out part of the defendant’s claim relating to shipping losses. . .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 3-Nov-2006
. .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation Comc 27-May-2008
The company alleged negligence by its financial advisers.
Held: Gloster J said that the absence of a written advisory agreement is a strong pointer against the existence of a free-standing duty of care to give investment advice.
Gloster . .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation and others ComC 25-Jul-2008
. .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 21-Nov-2008
. .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 20-Feb-2009
The court heard an application for leave to appeal against orders. . .
See AlsoSpringwell Navigation Corporation v JP Morgan Chase Bank and Others CA 1-Nov-2010
The court was asked as to whether representations has been made.
Held: Aikens LJ referred to a provision stating ‘no representation or warranty, express or implied, is or will be made . . in or in relation to such documents or information’, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236570

Charman v Charman: CA 20 Dec 2005

The court considered orders to third parties abroad to produce docments for use in ancillary relief proceedings. The husband had built up considerable assets within an offshore discretionary trust. The court was asked whether these were family assets.
Held: Asking what would be the approach of an English court, a request would not be met if it was a fishing expedition, but if only oral evidence was required the question was whether there was reason to believe that he had knowledge of matters relevant to the issues at trial. The letters of request were to be subject to a minor modification, but otherwise the appeal against the order granting it was rejected.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wilson Lord Justice Lloyd Sir Mark Potter President of the Family Division

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1606

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Proceedings Rules 1991 3.1, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBrowne v Browne CA 1989
The court considered under what circumstances money held in trust for a party could be included within assets to be considered in an application for ancillary relief in family proceedings.
Held: The question is more appropriately expressed as . .
CitedWhite v White HL 26-Oct-2000
The couple going through the divorce each had substantial farms and wished to continue farming. It had been a long marriage.
Held: Where a division of the assets of a family would satisfy the reasonable needs of either party on an ancillary . .
CitedKhanna v Lovell White Durrant (A Firm) ChD 19-Jul-1994
The practice of requiring a third party to produce documents with a subpoena ad duces tecum at an interlocutory stage was a good one and was designed to produce evidence at an earlier stage, reducing costs. No greater inconvenience was suffered by . .
CitedIn re Westinghouse Uranium Contract HL 1978
‘The fact, if it be so, that evidence so obtained may be used in other proceedings and indeed may be central in those proceedings is no reason for refusing to allow it to be requested’ Lord Fraser said: ‘in judging the nature of the letters rogatory . .
CitedIn re Asbestos Insurance Coverage HL 1985
A London insurance brokerage company had been ordered to produce documents pursuant to a letter of request issued by a Californian court in proceedings brought by manufacturers of asbestos against their insurers. The 1975 Act empowered the court to . .
CitedIn re State of Norway’s Application (No 1) CA 1987
There were taxation proceedings in Norway. One question was whether the Norwegian taxpayer controlled a trust which owned some shares. Letters rogatory issued by the Norwegian Court requested the oral examination of two witnesses in the United . .
CitedIn re State of Norway’s application (Nos 1 and 2) HL 1989
The House considered an application by a foreign state seeking assistance in obtaining evidence here to be used in enforcing its own revenue laws at home.
Held: Rule 3 of the Convention encapsulated a ‘fundamental rule of English Law’, but did . .
CitedPanayiotou and Others v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd ChD 21-Jul-1993
The rules do not limit the inherent jurisdiction of the court to make requests to foreign courts to ensure the production of documents from abroad. There is no logical reason why the principles by reference to which the court determines whether, and . .
CitedNetbank v Commercial Money Center 2004
(Supreme Court of Bermuda) Before the court was an issue as to the enforcement of a letter of request from Ohio for oral evidence to be taken from employees in Bermuda of an insurance company. The island’s Evidence Act 1905 had provisions identical . .
CitedLetterstedt v Broers PC 22-Mar-1884
(Supreme Court of the Cape of Good Hope) Lack of harmony may be of itself a good reason for a trustee to resign or be dismissed. Lord Blackburn approved a passage in Story’s Equity Jurisprudence, s 1289: ‘But in cases of positive misconduct, courts . .
CitedMorgan v Morgan 1977
In ancillary relied proceedings the wife’s father was ordered to disclose his testamentary intentions toward his daughter.
Held: Such an order was oppressive, and he should be protected against it. . .
CitedParra v Parra CA 20-Dec-2002
The court considered the division of family assets on an ancillary relief application where a family company assets were involved but the assets had been divided equally: ‘The parties have, perhaps unusually, ordered their affairs during the . .
CitedZakay v Zakay 1998
In financial proceedings in England following divorce the wife alleged – and the husband denied – that he was the beneficial owner of shares held by a Gibraltarian trust company. The English court had ordered the issue of a letter of request to the . .
CitedD v D (Production Appointment) FD 29-Nov-1995
An accountant’s professional privilege was overborne by the court, and a wider disclosure was approved. The court set a wide boundary around the scope of the documents which he was ordering the wife’s accountant to produce: ‘If the boundary is set . .
CitedB v B (Matrimonial Proceedings: Discovery) CA 1978
The wife applied for ancillary relief, and sought disclosure from a third party.
Held: Whilst a party must disclose all documents in his possession, custody or power the court has a discretion whether to order inspection. ‘Custody’ in RSC Ord . .
CitedFrary v Frary CA 1993
A spouse’s wealthy cohabitant, who had been ordered to produce evidence not just as to the support provided by her (or him) to the spouse but as to her (or his) overall resources may be able successfully to invoke the courts jurisdiction to protect . .

Cited by:

See AlsoCharman v Charman (No 2) FD 27-Jul-2006
Ancillary relief claim – very substantial assets. The court provided for a possible substantial debt by a reverse contingent lump sum. . .
See AlsoCharman v Charman CA 11-Dec-2006
Ancillary relief – substantial assets – application by the respondent wife in relation to an appeal by the appellant husband from a judgment and order in ancillary relief proceedings. The judge ordered the husband to pay pounds 40 million to the . .
See AlsoCharman v Charman (No 4) CA 24-May-2007
The court considered what property should be considered in an ancillary relief claim on divorce, and said: ‘To what property does the sharing principle apply? The answer might well have been that it applies only to matrimonial property, namely the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236566

Kearsley v Klarfeld: CA 6 Dec 2005

The defendants had suggested three doctors to examine the claimant. The claimants suggested a Dr P to prepare a report, but when asked for his CV instructed him anyway. The defendant’s unqualified motor examiner said the accident had occurred at less than a speed sufficient to cause injury. The doctor described whiplash. The defendants wished to argue fraud, and sought directions accordingly.
Held: The court gave guidance on the admission of additional expert evidence, and as to the relationship of pleading to evidence. Brooke LJ said: ‘To obviate such difficulties in future, and to ensure that factual issues in medical cases are economically and efficiently tried, the following procedure should be adopted. First, a party who seeks to contradict a factually pleaded case on the basis of medical records or reports should indicate that intention in advance, either by amendment of his pleadings or by informal notice. Then, the opposite party must indicate the extent to which they take objection to the accuracy of the records. When the area of dispute is identified, a decision will have to be taken as to whether the records need to be formally proved.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1510, [2006] 2 All ER 303

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCasey v Cartwright CA 5-Oct-2006
There had been a low impact traffic accident, with conflicting evidence as to the damages suffered and capable of beingcaused by such an accident. The court considered the correct practice for the court in allowing additional expert evidence in . .
CitedCharnock and Others v Rowan and Others CA 20-Jan-2012
14 passengers in a bus hit from behind at a slow speed had all claimed whiplash injury. The expert had said that the accepted speed required to produce such an injury was a change of 3mph, which would require an impact at 30mph, whereas the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235724

Thakerar v Lynch Hall and Hornby (a Firm): ChD 21 Oct 2005

An order was sought to declare the claimant to be a vexatious litigant. The respondent answered that some of her applications had succeeded.
Held: It was not necessary to show that all applications by the claimant had been without merit.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

Times 30-Nov-2005, [2005] EWHC 2751 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 1511

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 3.11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBhamjee v Forsdick and Others (No 2) CA 25-Jul-2003
The Court set out the range of remedies available to protect court processes from abuse by litigants who persist in making applications totally devoid of merit. The courts are facing very serious contemporary problems created by the activities of . .

Cited by:

CitedCourtman v Ludlam and Another; In re Ludlam (Bankrupts) ChD 6-Aug-2009
The applicant trustee in bankruptcy sought an extended civil restraint order against the respondents, saying that they had made unmeritorious claims in the proceedings.
Held: The rules required there to be shown that person had ‘persistently . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235499

AWG Group Ltd and Another v Morrison and Another: ChD 1 Dec 2005

Application was made for the judge to recuse himself from a forthcoming trial when he indicated that an intended witness was known to him personally.
Held: The test to be applied was to include: ‘all circumstances which have a bearing on the suggestion that I might arrive at a conclusion in the case through bias would lead ‘a fair minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility’ that that might be the result of my failure to withdraw.’ The party had proposed to call alternative witnesses instead. The judge did not withdraw.

Judges:

Evans-Lombe J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2786 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTaylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .
CitedLocabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd CA 17-Nov-1999
Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias
In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The mere . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235508

De Crittenden v Bayliss: CA 21 May 2001

The defendant sought leave to appeal saying the agreement under which the plaintiff had sued was champertous. Leave given.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 916

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGiles v Thompson, Devlin v Baslington (Conjoined Appeals) HL 1-Jun-1993
Car hire companies who pursued actions in motorists’ names to recover the costs of hiring a replacement vehicle after an accident, from negligent drivers, were not acting in a champertous and unlawful manner. Lord Mustill said: ‘there exists in . .
Full AppealDe Crittenden v Bayliss CA 17-Jan-2002
The defendant appealed a judgment saying the arrangement under which the plaintiff had conducted the litigation was champertous.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘[A]lthough some of what Mr De Crittenden did could be described as ‘solicitors work’, . .

Cited by:

Leave givenDe Crittenden v Bayliss CA 17-Jan-2002
The defendant appealed a judgment saying the arrangement under which the plaintiff had conducted the litigation was champertous.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘[A]lthough some of what Mr De Crittenden did could be described as ‘solicitors work’, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.218161

Bournemouth and Boscombe Athletic Football Club Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc: CA 10 Dec 2003

Appeal from refusal of extension of time to serve particulars of claim and strike out.

Judges:

Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1755

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBournemouth and Boscombe Athletic Football Club Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc ChD 16-Apr-2003
. .
CitedWilliam Stirling The Younger v Maitland And Boyd 1864
Cockburn CJ stated: ‘I look on the law to be that, if a party enters into an agreement which can only take effect by the continuance of a certain existing state of circumstances, there is an implied engagement on his part that he shall do nothing of . .

Cited by:

Appealed toBournemouth and Boscombe Athletic Football Club Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc ChD 16-Apr-2003
. .
See AlsoBournemouth and Boscombe Athletic Football Club Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc CA 28-Jun-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.188685

Magor and St Mellons Rural District Council v Newport Corporaion: HL 1951

The Court of Appeal had tried to fill in the gaps in a statute where parliament had intended an effect.
Held: Rights to compensation are well capable of falling within the definition of ‘property of a company’ in the relevant provisions of the Corporations Law. The courts should ‘construe very narrowly any substantive or procedural barriers against having recourse to courts for the rectifying of wrongs’. However, in the construction of a statute the duty of the court is limited to interpreting the words used by the legislature and it has no power to fill any gaps disclosed. To do so would be to usurp the function of the legislature. Referring to the speech of Lord Denning MR, Lord Simonds said that: ‘It appears to me to be a naked usurpation of the legislative function under the thin disguise of interpretation.’
Lord Simonds said:’The duty of the court is to interpret the words that the legislature has used; those words may be ambiguous, but, even if they are, the power and duty of the court to travel outside them on a voyage of discovery are strictly limited. If a gap is disclosed, the remedy lies in an amending Act and not in a ‘usurpation of the legislative function under the thin disguise of interpretation’.’

Judges:

Lord Simonds

Citations:

[1951] 2 All ER 839, [1952] AC 189

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromMagor and St Mellons Rural District Council v Newport Corporaion CA 1950
Lord Denning considered the strict interpretation rule: ‘We do not sit here to pull the language of Parliament to pieces and make nonsense of it. We sit here to find out the intention of Parliament and carry it out and we do this better by filling . .

Cited by:

CitedFisher v Bell QBD 10-Nov-1960
A shopkeeper displayed a flick-knife in his window for sale. A price was also displayed. He was charged with offering it for sale, an offence under the Act. The words ‘offer for sale’ were not defined in the Act, and therefore the magistrates . .
CitedPountney v Griffiths; Regina v Bracknell Justices, Ex parte Griffiths HL 1976
The applicant was a male nurse at Broadmoor Special Hospital. He was on duty while patients were saying goodbye to visitors. He approached the detained patient telling him to ‘come on’ and allegedly punched him on the shoulder. The patient brought . .
CitedSeal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 4-Jul-2007
The claimant had sought to bring proceedings against the respondent, but as a mental patient subject to the 1983 Act, had been obliged by the section first to obtain consent. The parties disputed whether the failure was a procedural or substantial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.185106

Asia Pacific (Hk) Ltd. and others v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania): ComC 7 Nov 2005

Various cargo owners sought damages against the owners of the ship which had suffered an explosion with the loss of the cargo. The defendants asserted limitation. Some claimants had agreed an extension of time. Proceedings were then issued but served only eventually made with letters claimed to be equivocal. The question was what constituted service.
Held: ‘[T]he party serving the documents delivers it into the possession or control of the recipient or takes steps to cause it to be so delivered. But, as the authorities recognise, a party delivering the claim form may say that he is not delivering it by way of service, but for information only. If he does so he is to be taken at his word. ‘ The form sent by fax ‘delivered to HTD, by a permitted method of service, a claim form, and thereby not only brought to their attention the fact that that the claim form had been issued but also provided them with a copy of it. Mays Brown did not indicate that the form was provided to them subject to a condition that it was for information only, or that, although delivered, it was not to be regarded as served. When a claim form is delivered to the recipient in a manner provided for by the rules it is, in my view, served unless it is made clear by the person who delivers it that, whilst he is delivering the form by such a method he is not in fact serving it. ‘ They had not said that the form was sent for information purposes only, and the form was served.

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2443 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6.9

Citing:

AppliedCranfield and Another v Bridgegrove Ltd; Claussen v Yeates etc CA 14-May-2003
In each case claims had been late in being served and extensions in time were sought and refused.
Held: The recent authorities were examined. The words ‘has been unable to serve’ in CPR 7.6(3)(a) include all cases where the court has failed to . .
CitedGodwin v Swindon Borough Council CA 10-Oct-2001
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim for personal injuries. The claim had been issued in time, but not served. An extension of time was granted, and the notice sent by first class post the day before that period expired. The . .
CitedAnderton v Clwyd County Council (No 2); Bryant v Pech and Another Dorgan v Home Office; Chambers v Southern Domestic Electrical Services Ltd; Cummins v Shell International Manning Services Ltd CA 3-Jul-2002
In each case, the applicant sought to argue that documents which had actually been received on a certain date should not be deemed to have been served on a different day because of the rule.
Held: The coming into force of the Human Rights Act . .
CitedWilkey and Another v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another CA 22-Oct-2002
The applicant’s claim had been dismissed for late service. The defendant had in fact received the documents, but the service appeared deemed to be out of time. The subsequent decisions of Anderton and Godwin meant that the judge’s reasoning no . .
CitedMorgan Est (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd CA 17-Feb-2005
The defendant appealed an order adding two new claimants.
Held: Cases decided under the old RSC were not apposite for matters covered by the new Civil Procedure Rules. The court was not bound by the Sardinia Sulcis rules: ‘The Sardinia Sulcis . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234736

In re MB (A Patient) (Court of Protection: Appeal): CA 1 Nov 2005

The applicant appealed an order that a statutory will be executed for the patient, who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. The will substituted a solicitor for the applicant as executor, and made technical improvements. The court considered its jurisdiction to hear an appeal without leave to appeal having been obtained.
Held: The 1983 Act allowed for the nomination of judges to hear applications. High Court judges would be nominated to these posts. A statutory right of appeal lies from the nominated judge to the Court of Appeal: ‘Although a nominated judge derives his position from his office as a judge of the High Court, when exercising his jurisdiction under Part VII of the Mental Health Act 1983 he is not sitting in the High Court. Accordingly the permission requirements imposed by CPR Part 52.3 do not apply to an appeal from his decision delivered in the course of such jurisdiction. ‘

Judges:

Sir Peter Gibson (President)

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1293, Times 10-Nov-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 105(1), Cvil Procedure Rules 52.3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRe Cathcart 1893
The jurisdiction to appoint judges to deal with the assets of those with mental health problems is vested in the Lord Chancellor, but is exercised by certain appointed/nominated judges of the High Court. . .
CitedColley v Council for Licensed Conveyancers CA 17-Jul-2001
The applicant had sought to exercise his statutory right of appeal from a decision by his professional body. The judge had considered that leave was necessary under the rules, and granted limited permission. The applicant appealed, saying that his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231673

GKR Karate (UK) Ltd v Yorkshire Post Newspapers Ltd and others (No.1): CA 11 Jan 2000

The claimants alleged defamation by the respondent in articles suggesting that they were not fit people to teach karate. The respondent claimed justification. A order had been made for trial of two preliminary issues against which order the claimants now appealed.

Judges:

May, Tuckey LJJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 420, [2000] CP Rep 47, [2000] 2 All ER 931, [2000] 1 WLR 2571, [2000] EMLR 396

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGrobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
The claimant had been awarded andpound;85,000 damages in defamation after the defendant had wrongly accused him of cheating at football. The newspaper sought to appeal saying that the verdict was perverse and the defence of qualified privilege . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231541

Tajik Aluminium Plant (Tadaz) v Hydro Aluminium As and others: CA 24 Oct 2005

Application for leave to appeal against refusal to grant witness orders to attend arbitration. The respondent had argued that the request was too vague and broad.
Held: Moore-Bick LJ said: ‘In order to answer the question raised in this case I think it is necessary to return to first principles with such assistance as may be gained from the earlier authorities. A witness summons, unlike an order for disclosure, requires the person to whom it is addressed to attend court on a specified occasion and to produce to the court the documents to which it refers. It is a requirement reinforced with a penal sanction. Justice demands, therefore, that the person to whom it is addressed should be told clearly when and where he must attend and what he must bring with him. Anything less is unfair to the witness; it also makes supervision and enforcement by the court extremely difficult, as Miss Reffin was forced to admit. For these reasons I consider that the view put forward in Phipson, to which I referred earlier, is to be preferred. Ideally each document should be individually identified, but I do not think it is necessary to go that far in every case. In In re Asbestos Insurance Coverage Cases [1985] 1 WLR 331 the court was concerned with an application under section 2 of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 under which the High Court is empowered to make orders for the production of documents for use as evidence in proceedings abroad pursuant to a request from a foreign court. Subsection (4) of section 2 expressly provides that an order made under that section shall not require the person to whom it is addressed to state what documents are or have been in his possession, custody or power or to produce any documents other than particular documents specified in the order and subsection (5) provides for the payment of conduct money, expenses and loss of time. This strongly suggests that the draftsman was seeking to equate an order to produce documents made under section 2 with the writ of subpoena duces tecum and to draw a distinction between such an order and what at that time would have been an order for discovery. However, despite the express requirement that an order under this section must specify particular documents, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, with whom the other members of their Lordships’ House agreed, considered that ‘a compendious description of several documents’ would suffice provided that the exact document in each case was clearly indicated. By way of example he drew a distinction between an order for the production of ‘monthly bank statements for the year 1984 relating to [your] current account’ with a named bank, which he thought would satisfy the requirements of the Act, and ‘all [your] bank statements for 1984’, which he thought would not: see pp 337-338.
Rule 34.2 does not contain any provision comparable to section 2(4) of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975, but Lord Fraser’s observations are none the less helpful because they provide an example of the ways in which, without describing them individually, it may be possible to identify the documents to be produced with sufficient certainty to leave no real doubt in the mind of the person to whom the summons is addressed about what he is required to do. In my view that is the test that should be applied when considering whether documents have been sufficiently identified in a witness summons. Whether it has been met is likely to depend, at least in part, on the particular circumstances of the case. It is unlikely to be met if the documents are described simply by reference to a particular transaction or event which is itself described in broad terms, although in cases where the transaction is self-contained and sufficiently well-defined that might be satisfactory. In general, I think that doubts about the adequacy of the description should be resolved in favour of the witness.
In the present case the documents are described in the schedule to each of the witness summonses in broad terms of the kind that would be appropriate to an application for disclosure but which fail to identify the documents with sufficient certainty to enable the witness to know what is required of him. I am satisfied, therefore, that the judge was right to set aside the witness summonses on this ground and that it is unnecessary to consider the other matters on which the witnesses relied in support of their applications.’

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1218

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedIn re Asbestos Insurance Coverage HL 1985
A London insurance brokerage company had been ordered to produce documents pursuant to a letter of request issued by a Californian court in proceedings brought by manufacturers of asbestos against their insurers. The 1975 Act empowered the court to . .

Cited by:

CitedFinancial Services Authority (FSA) and Others v AMRO International Sa and Another CA 24-Feb-2010
The FSA appealed against an order refusing its request for inquiries and production of accounting records by the defendant accountants to satisfy a request issued by the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
Held: The FSA had properly . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231465

Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd: TCC 31 Aug 2005

A third party television company sought access to the particulars of claim and other pleadings.
Held: HH Judge Wilcox said: ‘There can be no legitimate distinction drawn between decisions made in interlocutory proceedings and those at final trial when the requirement for open justice is considered. Interlocutory decisions may often be decisive as to the whole or a significant part of a complex case.’

Judges:

His Honour Judge David Wilcox

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2101 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See AlsoInterserve Industrial Services Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd TCC 6-Feb-2006
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd TCC 5-Jun-2006
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another CA 20-Dec-2006
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No. 2) TCC 31-Jan-2007
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd TCC 8-Feb-2007
Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction . .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd (No. 2) TCC 6-Mar-2007
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No 3) TCC 12-Mar-2007
. .
See AlsoCleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 27-Apr-2007
The court construed an agreement supplemental to a construction contract. . .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another CA 21-Dec-2007
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Construction Ltd v Cleveland Bridge Ltd and Another CA 6-Feb-2008
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 7-Feb-2008
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 19-Mar-2008
. .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another (No 7) TCC 29-Sep-2008
Last stage of the Wembley stadium construction dispute. Jackson J, interpreting Carver said that it set out: ‘how the court ought to approach the matter in circumstances where: (a) one party has made an offer which was nearly but not quite . .
See AlsoMultiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 29-Sep-2008
. .
See AlsoCleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 19-Feb-2010
. .
See AlsoCleveland Bridge Uk Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 31-Mar-2010
. .
CitedABC Ltd v Y ChD 6-Dec-2010
There had been proceedings as to the misuse of confidential information. X, a non-party, now sought disclosure of papers used in that case. The case had been settled by means of a Tomlin Schedule, and that, subject to further order, non-parties . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231285

Beckham and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 20 Oct 2005

The defendants in the libel action sought disclosure of papers said to be in the possession of the claimants, including any public relations plans of action, and mobile telephone records, including text messages.
Held: Assorted undertakings and orders were made accoriding to the nature of the several documents sought.

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2252 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231280

P and O Nedloyd BV v Arab Metals Co and Others (‘The UB Tiger’): QBD 22 Jun 2005

The claimants sought to amend their particulars of claim to add a request for declarations with regard to a bill of lading and contract for carriage.
Held: The application to amend was made more than six years after the cause of action accrued. It was in its nature a new claim. The additional possibility that the new facts are substantially the same as those already relied on is limited to: ‘something going no further than minor differences likely to be the subject of enquiry but not involving any major investigation and/or differences merely collateral to the main substance of the new claim, proof of which would not necessarily be essential to its success.’ Though a declaration was discretionary claim, it was not an equitable one, and did not fall within section 36(1).

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1276 (Comm), Times 03-Aug-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 3733

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 36(1), Civil Procedure Rules 17.4(2)

Cited by:

Appeal fromP and O Nedlloyd Bv v Arab Metals Co and others CA 28-Mar-2006
. .
CitedBerezovsky v Abramovich ComC 22-May-2008
Applications were made to amend pleadings and for consequential orders. The claimant sought damages of $4.3 billion alleging breach of trust. The claimant sought to add claims which the defendant said were out of time.
Held: The proposed . .
CitedAspect Contracts (Asbetos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc SC 17-Jun-2015
Aspect had claimed the return of funds paid by it to the appellant Higgins under an adjudication award in a construction contract disute. The claimant had been asked to prpare asbestos surveys and reports on maisonettes which Higgins was to acquire . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Limitation

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231184

CF v Secretary of State for the Home Department: FD 30 Jan 2004

The court considered the choice or procedures arising in relation to a baby ward of court living with its mother in prison. The sentence to be served would take the child beyond the maximum age provided for in mother and baby units.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 111 (Fam), [2004] 2 FLR 517

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prison Rules 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPractice Direction (Family Proceedings: Court Bundles) 10-Mar-2000
There should at be lodged with the court a summary of the background to the hearing; a statement of the issue or issues to be determined; a summary of the order or directions sought by each party; a chronology; and skeleton arguments. . .

Cited by:

CitedE v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council FD 1-Jun-2005
The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be . .
CitedRe A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice, Prisons

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231166

Ebert v Official Receiver: CA 11 May 2001

Application for an order that a court order be set aside for abuse of process, forgery and perjury, an order that the application for possession be struck out as an abuse of process, an order to set aside a possession order as having been made without jurisdiction, as well as an order to restore the position forthwith, and an order for damages for torture, harassment, trespass, defamation and fraud.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 708

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.218163

Bain v Hugh LS McConnell Ltd: 1991

The court discussed procedures to correct fundamental miscarriages of justice.

Citations:

1991 SLT 691

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAlexander Cameron (Ap) v Ian Macintyre Gibson, As Executor Dative of the Late Dugald Macintyre and Another SCS 2-Dec-2003
An adoption order had been made, but at the time, the adopted child was over the maximum age. Application was made to set it aside.
Held: Adoption orders could not be set aside save for where some fraud could be demonstrated to have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Litigation Practice

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.194032

Kuwait Oil Tanker Company S A K Sitka Shipping Incorporated v UBS Ag: CA 25 Jan 2002

Officers of the claimant had been found to have defrauded the plaintiff of many millions of pounds. Money had been paid through the defendant, a Swiss bank, and a garnishee order was sought. There was no presumption that, merely because a debt was a foreign debt, garnishee relief should be refused. The real issue was any possibility of double jeopardy, not whether the order of an English court would be recognised. Swiss law debarred disclosure of any of the details suggested, and payment under a garnishee order would not discharge the bank’s debt to its client. The debt constituted by a bank account is located in whatever country the account is kept. Nevertheless the order was being sought to be enforced in England, and the Swiss courts did not have exclusive jurisdiction. The case was remitted to the divisional court to consider the issue of double jeopardy.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Laws, And, Lord Justice Longmore,

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 34, [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 351

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1988 Art 16(5), Civil Procedure Rules 50.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedReichart v Dresdner Bank ECJ 1992
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules, International

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.167540

HM Revenue and Customs v Smart Price Midlands Ltd and Another: CA 16 May 2019

The court considered the extent of disclosure of documents that should be provided by the Appellants (‘HMRC’) when a trader who has been refused approval for the operation of a wholesale alcohol supply business challenges that refusal before the First-tier Tribunal.

Judges:

Lady Justice Rose

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 841

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.637322

Crozier v Storke: 1790

Upon a motion, for leave to plead three pleas, it appeared ; that two of the pleas were immaterial; and it was said; that the giving leave to plead these two pleas would answer no other end, than putting the plaintiff to the expence of taking them out, and demurring to them.

Citations:

[1790] EngR 443, (1790) Say 28, (1790) 96 ER 792 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.363496