Category: Litigation Practice

Forster v Friedland: CA 10 Nov 1992

The defendant admitted that he considered himself honour bound by an agreement, but said that if it came to litigation he would deny any legal obligation. On the facts, this was held to be ‘very far from blackmail’. As an exception to the rule that without prejudice revelations are not admissible, there is the situation where a statement can be admitted because of an ‘unambiguous impropriety’ – ‘the value of the without prejudice rule would be seriously impaired if its protection could be removed from anything less than unambiguous impropriety.’

Judges:

Hoffmann LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 10 November 1992, Transcript No 1052 of 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Unilever plc v Procter and Gamble Company CA 4-Nov-1999
The defendant’s negotiators had asserted in an expressly ‘without prejudice’ meeting, that the plaintiff was infringing its patent and they threatened to bring an action for infringement. The plaintiff sought to bring a threat action under section . .
Cited – Savings and Investment Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) v Fincken CA 14-Nov-2003
Parties to litigation had made without prejudice disclosures. One party sought to give evidence contradicting the dsclosure, and the other now applied for leave to amend based upon the without prejudice statements to be admitted to demonstrate the . .
Cited – BNP Paribas v A Mezzotero EAT 30-Mar-2004
EAT Appeal from ET’s decision, at directions hearing, permitting evidence to be adduced, at the forthcoming hearing of a direct sex discrimination and victimisation complaint, of the Applicant’s allegation that, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.188464

Motorola Solutions, Inc and Others v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd and Others: ComC 24 Apr 2020

Grant of domestic freezing injunction to support US proceedings.

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 980 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Motorola Solutions Inc and Another v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd and Another CA 11-Jan-2021
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, International

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.651153

Air Canada and Others v Emerald Supplies Limited and Others: CA 14 Oct 2015

Appeal against case management directions given by Peter Smith J.

Judges:

Elias, Gloster LJJ, Sir Bernard Rix

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 1024, [2015] WLR(D) 411, [2016] Bus LR 145

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Quinn v Leathem HL 5-Aug-1901
Unlawful Means Conspiracy has two forms
Quinn was treasurer of a Belfast butchers’ association. Leathem, who traded as a butcher, employed some non-union men, although when the union made difficulties he asked for them to be admitted to the union, and offered to pay their dues. The union . .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Another v British Airways Plc ChD 8-Apr-2009
The claim was for damages after alleged price fixing by the defendants. The claimants sought to recover for themselves and as representatives of others who had similarly suffered. The defendants sought that the representative element of the claim be . .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Another v British Airways Plc CA 18-Nov-2010
. .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc and (3513) ChD 28-Oct-2014
A hearing of an Application whereby the Claimants requested the Court to review (with such judicial assistance as might be necessary) the appropriateness / lawfulness of the redactions made by the Defendant airline (‘BA’) and other airlines to the . .
Appeal from – Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways ChD 22-Jul-2015
The judge was hearing a very substantial action between the parties. He had recently travelled to Italy and came back on one of the defendant’s aircraft. The defendant lost the luggage of all passengers and had failed to deal adequately or at all . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others SC 2-Jul-2021
Economic tort of causing loss by unlawful means
The Court was asked whether the ‘dealing requirement’ is a constituent part of the tort of causing loss by unlawful means; whether a necessary element of the unlawful means tort is that the unlawful means should have affected the third party’s . .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Another v British Airways Plc CA 18-Nov-2010
. .
Cited – Micula and Others v Romania SC 19-Feb-2020
The appellant sought to enforce a international arbitration award against the respondent. The award was made under an arrangement which became unlawful on Romania’s accession to the EU, and Romania obtained s stay pending resolution by the CJEU.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.553437

In Re Fletcher: CA 12 Jun 1984

The appellant challenged an order declaring him a vexatious litigant, saying that the order had been made by a court of two judges, where the Act required that only one judge should sit.
Held: Only a single judge of the Hight Court has jurisdiction to hear such an application.

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-1984

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 19(3) 42

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.229290

Reavey and others v Century Newspapers Ltd and Another: QBNI 4 May 2001

The plaintiffs sought orders against the defendants and each of them to enable the plaintiffs to sue for defamation or malicious falsehood certain persons whose identities are at present unknown to the plaintiffs but which are allegedly known to the defendants and each of them and who were the source of information relayed by the two defendants in Parliament and under absolute privilege. The plaintiffs aver that the defendants and each of them are, or have been, in possession of certain documents and information which would identify those persons thus enabling the plaintiffs to sue them for defamation.

Citations:

[2001] NIQB 17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.202146

Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Ltd v The Corporate Officer of the House of Commons: TCC 29 Jun 2000

The company began a claim for damages for the failure to complete an award of a contract, but then went into voluntary liquidation. The defendant refused payment claiming that it would be used only for payment of the insolvency practitioner’s costs. The new CPR rules disapplied old assumptions, and the overriding objective should apply. An interim payment was ordered limited to reflect the risk of a failure to secure recovery in the case of a failure of the action.

Citations:

Gazette 20-Jul-2000, [2000] EWHC Technology 84

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
See Also – Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Limited v The Corporate Officer of The House of Commons TCC 28-Oct-1999
The claimant said that the respondent had awarded a contract for works at the House of Commons disregarding its obligations under European law as regards open tendering. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Harmon CFEM Facade (UK) Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) v Corporate Officer of the House of Commons QBD 15-Nov-2000
If an award of interim damages was properly payable, then it remained payable notwithstanding that the claimant was impecunious, and that in principle the damages might be come repayable where the claimant could have become unable to repay. It was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Company, Litigation Practice, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201812

Dubai Aluminium Company Ltd v Deloitte Haskins and Sells and others: ComC 4 Dec 2000

The claimant sued its professional advisers, alleging that they had failed to advise the claimant of the fraudulent activities of its own executive. A substantial action was under way, and the parties sought directions from the court in the transition to the new Civil Procedure Rules.

Citations:

[2000] EWHC 209 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Professional Negligence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201691

Gregory and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v Turner and Another: CA 7 Dec 2001

Application for leave to appeal.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1952

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Application for leave – Gregory and Gregory v Turner, Turner; Regina (Morris) v North Somerset Council CA 19-Feb-2003
The parties were involved in a boundary dispute. One granted an enduring power of attorney, and sought to appear as a litigant in person through the power.
Held: The right of a litigant in person to represent himself was a personal right, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201556

Ropaigealach v Allied Irish Bank Plc: CA 12 Nov 2001

Judges:

Hale LJRix LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1790, [2001] 47 EGCS 146, [2002] 1 EGLR 83, [2002] 03 EG 130

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charging Orders Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Ropaigealach v Allied Irish Bank Plc CA 29-Aug-2001
Use of charging orders to enforce payment of costs orders. . .
Cited – Roberts Petroleum Ltd v Bernard Kenny Ltd HL 2-Jan-1983
The plaintiff supplied petrol to the defendant but had not been paid. Anticipating the defendant winding up, the plaintiff got judgment and a charging order nisi. The defendant appealed against that order being made absolute, saying that this gave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201526

Asiansky Television Plc and Another v Bayer-Rosin: CA 19 Nov 2001

The court considered the circumstancs allowing a striking out.
Held: Consideration should be given to the question whether striking out the claim or defence would be disproportionate and, except perhaps where striking it out would be plainly proportionate, the judge should give reasons why it was proportionate in the particular case. Only in a case of ‘flagrant’ abuse would a court be likely to strike out an action where a fair trial was still possible. ‘The essential question in every case is: what is the just order to make, having regard to all the circumstances of the case? As May LJ put it [in Purdy v Cambran [2000] CP Rep 67 at para 51] it is necessary to concentrate on the intrinsic justice of a particular case in the light of the overriding objective. The cases to which I have referred emphasise the flexible nature of the CPR and the fact that they provide a number of sanctions short of the draconian remedy of striking out the action. It is to my mind important that the Master or Judge exercising his discretion should consider alternative possibilities short of striking out.’
As to a review, Clarke LJ said: ‘On a review of a decision like that of Master Eyre which involved the exercise of discretion the appeal court, subject to one proviso [ where the appeal court receives fresh evidence], is limited to considering whether he took account of irrelevant considerations, or failed to take account of relevant considerations, or whether he was wrong in the sense described by Lord Fraser in G v G in the passage quoted by Brooke L.J.’

Judges:

Clarke, Mance, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1792, [2002] CPLR 111, [2001] EWCA 1792

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Purdy v Cambran 17-Dec-1999
It is necessary to concentrate on the intrinsic justice of a particular case in the light of the overriding objective. ‘For the reasons which I have just given, I think that the question is whether the claim has no real prospect of succeeding at . .

Cited by:

Cited – Di Placito v Slater and others CA 19-Dec-2003
The parties had earlier compromised their dispute, with the claimant undertaking not to lodge any further claim unless he did so within a certain time. They now sought to commence action.
Held: When considering whether to discharge such an . .
See Also – Asiansky Television Plc and Another v Bayer-Rosin CA 11-Nov-2003
. .
See Also – Asiansky Television Plc and Another v Bayer-Rosin (A Firm) CA 22-Nov-2005
Renewed application for permission to appeal. . .
Cited – Raja v Van Hoogstraten and others ChD 12-Jun-2006
The claimant sought the strike out of the defendants pleadings. The first defendant was found to have been responsible for the killing of the deceased. The proceedings had been prolonged by procedural challenges by the defendant.
Held: The . .
Cited – C v V CoP 25-Nov-2008
The court heard an appeal objecting to the appointment of a sibling as Deputy for the parents now lacking capacity. Both daughters had at one time been appointed under Enduring Powers of Attorney, acting jointly, but the daughters became estranged. . .
Cited – Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers SC 27-Jun-2012
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201463

Afrika and others v Cape Plc and others; X Y Z and Others v Schering health Care Ltd; Sayers and Others v Merck, Smithkline Beecham plc MMR/MR vaccine litigation: CA 21 Dec 2001

Claimants sought damages for personal injuries after immunisation with the MMR vaccine.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 2027

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation) CA 1987
The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under Order 62 of the Rules of the Supreme Court included the power to make a pre-emptive order for costs.
Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘In these circumstances the judge . .

Cited by:

See Also – Sayers and Others v Smith Kline Beecham plc and Others; X, Y, Z and Others v Schering Health Care Ltd and Others; Afrika and Others v Cape plc CA 21-Dec-2001
The case concerned the management of substantial multi-party actions, and in particular the form of costs orders. The claimants sought a payment of the ‘common costs’ element to be made payable as the appropriate relative common issues were . .
See Also – XYZ and others v Schering Health QBD 29-Jul-2002
The court heard seven lead claims in group litigation against three drug companies in respect of their combined oral contraceptive products. . .
See Also – XYZ v Schering Health Care: Oral Contraceptive Litigation SCCO 31-Mar-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201544

Bentley v Jones Harris and Company: CA 2 Nov 2001

Latham LJ said: ‘it will only be in a rare case that the judge should be asked to determine the issues before him before all the evidence has been completed. However, it seems to me that, if a judge concludes at the end of a claimant’s evidence, whether on the application of the defendant or of his own motion, that the claimant has no real prospect of success or, in other words, is bound to fail, on his assessment of the evidence before him at that stage, he is in my view entitled to give judgment for the defendant, in the same way as if there had been an application at an earlier stage in the proceedings for summary judgment under CPR Part 24.2. In that way he will be giving effect, in the circumstances of a trial, to the overriding objective and in particular to the need to contain within limits the expenditure of time and costs on the particular case before him.’

Judges:

Latham LJ, Burton J

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1678, [2001] EWCA Civ 1724

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Neina Graham v Chorley Borough Council CA 21-Feb-2006
The defendant had submitted after the close of the claimant’s case that it had no case to answer. The judge did not put the defendant to its election as to whether to call evidence, but instead decided to accede to the submission. The claimant now . .
Cited – Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers SC 27-Jun-2012
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201469

Fuller v Strum: CA 11 Oct 2001

The appellant was to challenge admission to probate of the will. He now sought fuller disclosure of the assets in the estate and their values for the purposes of the appeal.
Held: Application refused. The issue at the appeal would be not the value now but when the will was executed.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1551

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Fuller v Strum CA 7-Dec-2001
The appellant challenged a finding that only part of a will was valid. The part made a gift to his son, ‘albeit very grudgingly’, saying ‘I hate him like poison, that Irish bastard.’
Held: The onus on the propounder of a will to show that it . .
At first instance – Fuller v Strum ChD 20-Dec-2000
Mr Strum had come to England as a refugee from Nazi Germany. He had then left to live in Israel, but retained his property in London. A will was challenged on the basis that the signature had been forged. The two attesting witnesses asserted that . .
See Also – Fuller v Strum CA 16-Feb-2001
The family sought to challenge admission to probate of the will saying that the signature on the will had been forged. They now sought permission to appeal.
Held: Leave was granted. The circumstances were extraordinary. The decision was . .

Cited by:

See Also – Fuller v Strum CA 7-Dec-2001
The appellant challenged a finding that only part of a will was valid. The part made a gift to his son, ‘albeit very grudgingly’, saying ‘I hate him like poison, that Irish bastard.’
Held: The onus on the propounder of a will to show that it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201393

Markos v Goodfellow and Barke and Barke: CA 26 Jul 2001

There was a boundary dispute. The judge in the County Court had made an error. Counsel had offered to apply to amend the order under the slip rule, and therefore the judge had refused leave to appeal.
Held: This was an application for leave to apply for a second appeal, and such appeals only very rarely succeed. The procedure adopted was not open to the judge under the rules. Whilst the applicant should not be encouraged to continue the dispute because the likely costs would be disproportionate, ‘I well understood [the] J wishing to bring an end to matters and doing so in the manner he did to achieve proportionality. But the proper processes of the law are involved, and in my judgment it is arguable that the procedure which he followed was not a[n] appropriate one in the circumstances.’

Judges:

Pill LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1324

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999, Civil Procedure Rules 52.2.(3) 52.2.(4) PD 52 4.8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clark v Perkes 2000
The court gave guidance on the practice and procedure on second appeals. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Markos v Goodfellow and others CA 30-Nov-2001
The parties had been involved in a bitter and protracted boundary dispute. The judge had found a minimal encroachment, and awarded nominal damages. He had made an error in the order. At an appeal counsel was given leave to apply to amend the oder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201263

Melhuish v Waters: CA 5 Jul 2001

A settlement had been reached on the morning of the trial, embodied in a consent order. The applicant sought leave to appeal, denying that he had consented. He now applied for an adjournment of his application.
Held: The application for the adjournment was unsupported by justification and was too late. The applications for adjournment and for leave were refused.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1174

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201265

Nayler and Another v Beard: CA 24 Jul 2001

Application for permission to appeal against an order made in civil non-matrimonial proceeding. The appeal raises questions as to the circumstances in which affidavits of means sworn by a party in matrimonial proceedings may be the subject of disclosure and inspection in separate civil proceedings to which he is a party and as to the identity of the court which should be asked to resolve any such issue.

Judges:

Hale LJ, Wilson J

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1201, [2001] 2 FLR 1346, [2001] CP Rep 104, [2001] 3 FCR 61, [2001] Fam Law 801

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Family

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201269

Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy and Another: CA 25 Jul 2001

Application to amend order under slip rule.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1306

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (In Receivership) v Koshy and Others (No 2) ChD 30-Mar-2000
The new Civil Procedure Rules had not substantially affected the rules on costs following the event of a trial. The discretion in a judge as to the order for costs had been correctly stated in Elgindata, and approved in Phonographic Performance Ltd . .
See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy and others CA 3-Dec-2002
Second application further to amend court order . .

Cited by:

See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (In Receivership) v Koshy and Others (No 2) ChD 30-Mar-2000
The new Civil Procedure Rules had not substantially affected the rules on costs following the event of a trial. The discretion in a judge as to the order for costs had been correctly stated in Elgindata, and approved in Phonographic Performance Ltd . .
See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy and others CA 3-Dec-2002
Second application further to amend court order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201243

J J Harrison (Properties) Ltd v Harrison: CA 16 Jul 2001

Application for permission to appeal, an application for permission to adduce fresh evidence on the appeal, and an application for an extension of time in which to appeal.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1295

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Application for leave – JJ Harrison (Properties) Ltd v Harrison CA 11-Oct-2001
A director had bought land belonging to the company, without disclosing its development potential.
Held: He had acquired the property as a constructive trustee for the company, and was accordingly accountable for it. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201256

Grupo Torras Sa and Another v Al-Sabah and others: CA 30 Jul 2001

The hearing followed others concluding that the claimant had been defrauded of substantial sums by the defendants. The parties sought clarifications.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1370

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Grupo Torras Sa and Another v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah and Others CA 26-May-1995
A UK court may continue to hear a Spanish company’s claim against it’s own directors if a court was first seized of the matter here. Where a case concerned matters as to the constitution of a company, the courts of the company in which the company . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Torras Hostench London Limited v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah and others (2) CA 21-Mar-1997
The Court of Appeal should interfere with Judge’s case management decisions only with great reluctance. . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Torras Hostench London Limited v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al-Sabah Et Al CA 2-Oct-1997
A party choosing to provide discovery of substantial documents on a Compact Disk must ask the court first before charging extra for the service. . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Another v Al-Sabah and others Lst CA 6-Feb-1998
. .
See Also – Barbara Alison Al-Sabah and Another v Grupo Torras S A and Others PC 10-Oct-2000
PC (Jersey) The board refused special leave to appeal: ‘Normally all such questions of case management are matters for the courts concerned and are not suitable for any further review before their Lordships’ . .
See Also – Khaled Naser Hamoud Al-Sabah and Juan Jose Folchi Bonafonte v Grupo Torras SA CA 2-Nov-2000
The court discussed the approach to be taken when asked to act upon evidence which it found to be unreliable, though the witness’s credibility had not been destroyed. In a claim for dishonest assistance it is not necessary to show a precise causal . .
See Also – Al Sabah and Al Sabah v Grupo Torras SA Culmer as trustee of the property of Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah, bankrupt PC 11-Jan-2005
PC (Cayman Islands) The claimant complained of an order of the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands, requiring him to comply with a letter of request from the Grand Court of the Bahamas.
Held: In earlier . .

Cited by:

See Also – Grupo Torras Sa and Another v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah and Others CA 26-May-1995
A UK court may continue to hear a Spanish company’s claim against it’s own directors if a court was first seized of the matter here. Where a case concerned matters as to the constitution of a company, the courts of the company in which the company . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Torras Hostench London Limited v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah and others (2) CA 21-Mar-1997
The Court of Appeal should interfere with Judge’s case management decisions only with great reluctance. . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Torras Hostench London Limited v Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al-Sabah Et Al CA 2-Oct-1997
A party choosing to provide discovery of substantial documents on a Compact Disk must ask the court first before charging extra for the service. . .
See Also – Grupo Torras SA and Another v Al-Sabah and others Lst CA 6-Feb-1998
. .
See Also – Barbara Alison Al-Sabah and Another v Grupo Torras S A and Others PC 10-Oct-2000
PC (Jersey) The board refused special leave to appeal: ‘Normally all such questions of case management are matters for the courts concerned and are not suitable for any further review before their Lordships’ . .
See Also – Khaled Naser Hamoud Al-Sabah and Juan Jose Folchi Bonafonte v Grupo Torras SA CA 2-Nov-2000
The court discussed the approach to be taken when asked to act upon evidence which it found to be unreliable, though the witness’s credibility had not been destroyed. In a claim for dishonest assistance it is not necessary to show a precise causal . .
See Also – Al Sabah and Al Sabah v Grupo Torras SA Culmer as trustee of the property of Sheikh Fahad Mohammed Al Sabah, bankrupt PC 11-Jan-2005
PC (Cayman Islands) The claimant complained of an order of the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands, requiring him to comply with a letter of request from the Grand Court of the Bahamas.
Held: In earlier . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201242

McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: CA 12 Jun 2001

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Chadwick LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 871, [2001] EMLR 34

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Limited; Clarke and Neil (1) CA 25-Nov-1998
. .
See Also – McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others (2) CA 26-May-1999
The new Civil Procedure Rules did not change the circumstances where the Court of Appeal would interfere with a first instance decision, but would apply the new rules on that decision. Very extensive pleadings in defamation cases should now be . .
See Also – McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 7-Jun-2000
The new civil procedure rules did not change the basic rules of evidence. The old rule prevented a party putting in evidence a witness statement which he knew conflicted substantially with the case he wished to place before the jury, and then be . .

Cited by:

See Also – McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd; Liam Clarke and and Andrew Neil (No 3) CA 12-Jun-2001
In defamation proceedings the defendant had invited one issue to be left to the jury. After losing the case, the defendant sought to appeal, arguing that the jury’s verdict was perverse. It was held that such an appeal amounted to an abuse of . .
See Also – McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd (No 4) CA 3-Jul-2001
The fact that a defendant had not acted unreasonably in pursuing a case after an offer of settlement, was not a reason for not awarding costs to be paid on an indemnity basis. Such an award had no penal element, and did not first require any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Defamation

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201163

CIBC Mellon Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg: CA 15 Jun 2001

Application for leave to appeal, for an extension of time to appeal, and for a stay of execution pending the hearing of the appeal.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 982

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – CIBC Mellon Trust Company and Others v Stolzenberg and Others ChD 3-Feb-2003
Application to set aside judgments entered on failure to comply with ‘unless’ orders.
Held: Etherton J said: ‘The Court of Appeal has laid down guidance as to the approach of the Court when considering an application for relief from sanctions . .
See Also – CIBC Mellon Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg and others CA 13-Feb-2004
. .
See Also – Stolzenberg and others v CIBC Mellon Trust Co Ltd and others CA 30-Jun-2004
The court considered the issue of the use of a strike out as a sanction for non-compliance with a court order.
Held: The approach of the court in a case considering relief for sanctions – exemplified by RC Residuals v Linton Fuel was bound to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201117

Pervaiz v Chelsea Building Society: CA 1 May 2001

No jurisdiction to hear appeal from refusal of leave to appeal.

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 767

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Faiza Pervaiz v Chelsea Building Society CA 18-Aug-1999
Formal putting back of application for application for permission to appeal. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201074

Banks and Another v Cox and Another: CA 17 May 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 821

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 3-Apr-2001
. .
See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 20-Apr-2001
. .
See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-Jul-2000
The court considered the principles of admitting new evidence on appeal after the introduction of the new rules. Moritt LJ: ‘In my view the principles reflecting in the rules in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 remain relevant to any application . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201029

Riniker v University College London (Practice Note): CA 5 Apr 2001

The Employment Appeal Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal which does not set out to disturb any part of the order made by the original tribunal. There is no inherent power in the Court of Appeal to bypass the prohibition in subsection of the 1999 Act against hearing an appeal from a refusal of permission.

Citations:

[2001] 1 WLR 13

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 54(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Riniker v University College London EAT 5-Feb-1997
. .
See also – Riniker v University College London EAT 12-Dec-1995
. .
See also – Regina v Lord Chancellor and others ex parte Riniker CA 28-Feb-1997
The applicant sought judicial review of a refusal of her request that a judgment of the Court of Appeal should not be published.
Held: The applicants complaints were not well founded. ‘Her attempt to restrain publication of the Court of Appeal . .
Appeal from – Riniker v University College London EAT 23-Aug-1999
EAT Contract of Employment – Breach of Contract
EAT Contract of Employment – Breach of Contract. . .
See also – Riniker v University College London CA 25-Nov-1998
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Jolly v Jay and Another CA 7-Mar-2002
The applicant sought to appeal a refusal to grant him permission to renew an oral application for leave to appeal. The respondent had appeared at the initial unsuccessful application, and had been awarded costs although there appeared to be no . .
Cited – The Law Society v Kamlesh Bahl EAT 7-Jul-2003
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct
The complainant had been suspended from her position as Vice President of the Law Society. The Society and its officers appealed findings of sex and race discrimination . .
Cited – Baker v Rowe CA 6-Nov-2009
H and W, though very elderly, set out for a divorce. A former son-in-law now appealed against a costs order made against him as an intervener under the 1996 Act. The parties disputed his right to appeal without permission.
Held: Under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201000

Clarkson v Gilbert and others: CA 1 May 2001

Application for permission to appeal by the claimant against a decision which effectively precludes her from continuing with her proceedings against 19 named defendants who were members with her of the Gestalt Psychotherapy Training Institute at the relevant time.

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 766

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Company

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201038

Cornish v Hutchins: CA 1 May 2001

Application for leave to reinstate an application for permission to appeal an order by which the judge refused to extend time for the applicant’s appeal against an order and awarded costs to the respondent.

Judges:

Sir Philip Otton

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 846

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201041

Ayobiojo v Easyspace Ltd and Another: CA 4 May 2001

Application for leave to appeal against refusal to grant interim mandatory injunction – no prospect of such order being made on interim basis.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 665

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Ayobiojo and Another v Easyspace Ltd CA 29-Jul-2004
Production of falsified divorce petition to support opposition to charging order on former matrimonial home despite transfer to wife. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Ayobiojo and Another v Easyspace Ltd CA 29-Jul-2004
Production of falsified divorce petition to support opposition to charging order on former matrimonial home despite transfer to wife. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201026

Banks and Another v Cox and Another: CA 20 Apr 2001

Judges:

Jonathan Parker LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 589

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 3-Apr-2001
. .
See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-Jul-2000
The court considered the principles of admitting new evidence on appeal after the introduction of the new rules. Moritt LJ: ‘In my view the principles reflecting in the rules in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 remain relevant to any application . .

Cited by:

See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-May-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200955

Banks and Another v Cox and Another: CA 3 Apr 2001

Judges:

Sedley LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 492

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-Jul-2000
The court considered the principles of admitting new evidence on appeal after the introduction of the new rules. Moritt LJ: ‘In my view the principles reflecting in the rules in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 remain relevant to any application . .

Cited by:

See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 20-Apr-2001
. .
See Also – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-May-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200954

Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others: CA 14 Feb 2001

The court granted permission to appeal.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 247

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Idisi and others CA 25-Jan-2001
An order was made for the defendant to put up security for costs in order to pursue an appeal. The order had been for the security to be in cash. Application was now made for the security to be by way of a guarantee or bond.
Held: The proposed . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Idisi and others ComC 26-Nov-1999
Application to deny to defendants the right to file evidence on application to set aside summary judgment where they were in contempt of court.
ComC Applications by claimant for summary judgment and an . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd v Idisi ComC 22-Nov-2000
Application to commit defendant to prison for contempt of court. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company v Idisi CA 2001
The defendant was found to have committed a serious breach of a freezing injunction.
Held: A committal order is appropriate where there is serious contumacious flouting of orders of the court. The sentence imposed was three months suspended on . .

Cited by:

See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and others v Idisi and others CA 9-Mar-2001
Application for permission to appeal against assessment of damages. Refused. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Co Ltd and others v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others CA 15-Mar-2004
Appeal against award of costs against person who was not party to the original proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200808

Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Idisi and others: CA 25 Jan 2001

An order was made for the defendant to put up security for costs in order to pursue an appeal. The order had been for the security to be in cash. Application was now made for the security to be by way of a guarantee or bond.
Held: The proposed bond was not satisfactory.

Judges:

Mance LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 54

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd v Idisi ComC 22-Nov-2000
Application to commit defendant to prison for contempt of court. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Idisi and others ComC 26-Nov-1999
Application to deny to defendants the right to file evidence on application to set aside summary judgment where they were in contempt of court.
ComC Applications by claimant for summary judgment and an . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company v Idisi CA 2001
The defendant was found to have committed a serious breach of a freezing injunction.
Held: A committal order is appropriate where there is serious contumacious flouting of orders of the court. The sentence imposed was three months suspended on . .

Cited by:

See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others CA 14-Feb-2001
The court granted permission to appeal. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and others v Idisi and others CA 9-Mar-2001
Application for permission to appeal against assessment of damages. Refused. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Co Ltd and others v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others CA 15-Mar-2004
Appeal against award of costs against person who was not party to the original proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200748

Bracknell Forest Borough v N and Others: CA 25 Oct 2006

Counsel was unable to attend an application for permission to appeal, and a request was made for an adjournment.
Held: Such applications were not made for the convenience of counsel, and junior counsel should properly attend if necessary.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lady Justice Smith and Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

Times 06-Nov-2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.247628

Lewis v Freighthire Ltd: CA 1 Feb 1999

Application for amendment of pleadings – basis whether there exists ‘a serious issue to be tried.’

Citations:

Unreported, 01-Feb-99

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Fiona Trust Holding Corp and others v Privalov and others ComC 21-May-2007
Allegations were made of different varieties of fraud. Applications were made for freezing orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.252444

White v Greensand Homes Ltd and Another: CA 28 Jun 2007

The second defendant had made an admission in the pleadings which he now sought to withdraw.
Held: Permission was required. It would be granted in order to give effect to the overriding objective to deal with a case justly, having regard to the prejudice which might be suffered by either party if the amendment was not allowed.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ, Latham LJ, Thomas LJ

Citations:

Times 19-Jul-2007

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.254618

Joyce v King: CA 6 Jul 1987

An appeal was made against a refusal of an adjournment.
Held: Although the question of whether to grant an adjournment is essentially a matter of discretion, only if the decision refusing to grant an adjournment was wholly wrong should the Court of Appeal interfere. If it is not possible to obtain justice without an adjournment, then, regardless of the inconvenience thereby occasioned, the adjournment should be granted. Woolf LJ: ‘It would have been perfectly proper for Mrs. King [the applicant] perhaps to have been subject to an a order for costs which made her liable for the costs of the adjournment in any event.’ and ‘As is apparent as a result of a further application which is before this court by Mrs. King, which it is not necessary for the court to deal with specifically, (Mrs. Kings is – she will forgive me saying so – a somewhat eccentric lady) and without the assistance of a surveyor it is quite clear that she had no prospects whatsoever of properly putting her case before the court. However, in the absence of Mr. Allen, the recorder took the greatest care, insofar as it was possible for him to do so, to investigate the plaintiffs’ claim. But, having investigated the plaintiffs’ claim, he came to the conclusion it was fully made out.
In my view the situation was one where it was quite impossible for justice to be done to Mrs. King once the decision had been taken to refuse an adjournment. In my view this is one of the exceptional cases where, while it is understandable that the learned recorder should have taken the view he did about the adjournment, his decision was clearly wrong. The balance of justice in favour of granting the adjournment was of a different proportion to the hardship if any which would be caused to the plaintiffs if an adjournment was granted. This was one of those unfortunate situations which the courts are faced with from time to time, where there is really no alternative if justice is to be done but to grant an adjournment, albeit that it is highly inconvenient and highly frustrating to the courts if that course is taken.’

Judges:

Woolf LJ

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Smith v Chief Constable of Kent CA 26-Jan-1998
The plaintiffs had sought to claim against the defendants for tort of malicious prosecution The trial had been vacated once on the defendants paying costs, and they made a second application, saying that more days were needed. That application was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.229222

Colledge v Crossley: CA 18 Mar 1975

The Master of the Rolls discussed undertakings given to support injunctions: ‘. that it was unfortunate that the undertaking in damages was not put into the original order. It was an automatic undertaking which was invariably inserted when an interim injunction was granted. If afterwards at the trial there was shown to be no right to the injunction the plaintiff would have to pay damages as the price of getting the interim injunction. Undoubtedly the failure to include the undertaking came within the slip rule. The undertaking should be inserted.’

Citations:

Times 18-Mar-1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Smithkline 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.231209

Burgess v Stafford Hotel Ltd: CA 1990

The court considered an application to strike out a notice of appeal on the basis that it showed no reaonable ground.
Held: The court had such a power. It was ‘exercisable on the same basis as an application to strike out a pleading under RSC Ord 18, r19, where there is no possibility that the grounds in the notice are capable of argument or that the court would entertain new grounds relating to matters not raised in the court below. Such a power should be confined to clear and obvious cases, and should not be utilised where any extensive inquiry into the facts is necessary.’

Citations:

[1990] 1 WLR 1215

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – B M Samuels Group Limited and Nelsons Solicitors (a Firm) v McAllister CA 4-Nov-1997
The defendants sought to have struck out the claimant’s notice of appeal.
Held: The appeal had no prospects of success, and the court exercised its power to strike out the notice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.225392

Phillips, Harland (Administrators of the Estate of Michailidis), Papadimitriou; Symes (A Bankrupt), Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership), Domercq etc: ChD 30 Jul 2004

Under the Ciivil Procedure Rules, experts have acquired greater responsibilities to the court. Those responsibilities transcend their perceived obligations to the parties whom they give evidence.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1887 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Masterman-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 . .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Robin James Symes and Robin Symes Ltd ChD 9-Jul-2001
English proceedings were issued to claim against a partnership. Simultaneously proceedings were issued in Greece, but the Greek proceedings were served on the London parties first. The plaintiffs in Greece asked the English court to issue a stay of . .
See Also – Phillips v Symes CA 2003
Courts should be reluctant to exclude altogether evidence merely because it is written. If the purpose of the order sought was to trace assets it would be wrong to permit cross-examination which was designed to show that there had been a contempt of . .

Cited by:

Cited – EPI Environmental Technologies Inc and Another v Symphony Plastic Technologies Plc and Another ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimant had developed an additive which would assist in making plastic bags bio-degradable. They alleged that, in breach of confidentiality agreements, the defendants had copied the product. The defendants said the confidentiality agreement was . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq ChD 20-Oct-2004
Dr Z had given expert evidence in the principal proceedings. It was now said that that evidence had not been given in the proper way, and a remedy was now sought in costs.
Peter Smith J had held that: ‘It seems to me that in the administration . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq etc ChD 20-Oct-2004
. .
See Also – Symes v Phillips and others CA 6-May-2005
. .
See Also – Symes v Phillips and others CA 19-May-2005
The applicant was in contempt of court. He successfully appealed a sentence of two years imprisonment, with the sentence being reduced to one year. Legally aided, he sought his costs from the claimant. The claimant replied that their part was only . .
See Also – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis) v Symes (A Bankrupt), Nussberger, Galerie Nefer Ag, Geoff Rowley ChD 19-Aug-2005
The court allowed the appellant’s application to dispense with service of a claim form under the rule. The High Court became seised of the matter as at 19 January 2005. Further directions were given. . .
See Also – Phillips and others v Symes and others ChD 12-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Symes and Others (No 6) CA 19-May-2006
Proceedings were issued in England for service on the defendant in Switzerland, but because of an error by the Swiss Court were not properly served. Proceedings were then issued in Sitzerland, and seisin was claimed for the Swiss Court. The claimant . .
See Also – Phillips and others v Symes and others ChD 16-Oct-2006
. .
See Also – Phillips and Another v Symes and others HL 23-Jan-2008
Various parties had sought relief in the English courts and in Switzerland after an alleged fraud. There had been a mistake in service of the proceedings in England. The high court had dispensed with service an backdated the effect of the order to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199821

Scribes West Limited v Relsa Anstalt and Another (No 2) (Practice Note): CA 20 Jul 2004

The court gave guidance on the destination of appeals from county court cases. It was vital to identify the precise nature of the order under appeal: ‘The judges of this court (and the staff at the Civil Appeals Office) have to interpret the order of the lower court as we find it. The relevant decision is the Court’s order, and the Destination Order determines where appeal should lie from that order . . The appeal court must be the one that is readily ascertainable from the face of the court’s order, and not one which would or might have been ascertainable if the judge had made a different order. It would be intolerable if appeal courts had to be subjected to a complicated examination of the types of order that might have been made if the parties had dealt with things differently in the lower court, merely for the purpose of determining whether they possess jurisdiction. The destination of the appeal should be ascertainable from the language of the order.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2005] 1 WLR 1839, [2004] EWCA Civ 965, [2004] 4 All ER 653

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Scribes West Limited v Relsa Anstalt and Another (No 1) CA 1-Jul-2004
The court handed down a New Practice Direction 52 for grounds of appeal, decisions in permissions to appeal, notices to respondents of appeals, appeal bundles etc. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Scribes West Ltd v Relsa Anstalt and others CA 20-Dec-2004
The claimant challenged the forfeiture of its lease by a freeholder which had acquired the registered freehold title but had not yet registered its ownership. The second defendant had forfeited the lease by peacable re-entry for arrears of rent, and . .
Cited – Neina Graham v Chorley Borough Council CA 21-Feb-2006
The defendant had submitted after the close of the claimant’s case that it had no case to answer. The judge did not put the defendant to its election as to whether to call evidence, but instead decided to accede to the submission. The claimant now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199314

Parsons 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: Proceedings under the 1954 Act were not within the proceedings listed by CPR 19.5 since the 1954 Act was silent as to the addition or substitution of parties to proceedings. The assumption was that such amendments were to be allowed because the Act did not proscribe them. The extension of CPR 17.4 to limitation periods in some other statutes is within the powers of the rules committee.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Vice-Chancellor, The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2004] EWCA (Civ) 912, Times 28-Jul-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 3264

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Part II, Civil Procedure Rules 29(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Piper v Muggleton CA 1956
For proceedings applying for a new tenancy under the Act, it is necessary that at every stage of those proceedings the person joined as ‘the landlord’ should in fact answer that description according to the statutory definition, and that if there is . .
Cited – Ketteman v Hansel Properties Ltd HL 1987
Houses were built on defective foundations. The purchasers sued the builders and later the architects who designed them. The defendants argued that the houses were doomed from the start so that the cause of action accrued, not when the physical . .
Cited – Liff v Peasley CA 1980
The court will not add a person as a defendant to an existing action if the claim was already statute-barred and he wished to rely on that defence, and if the court allows such addition ex parte it will not, on objection allow the addition to stand. . .
Cited – Mitchell v Harris Engineering Co Ltd CA 1967
The plaintiff was seeking to claim against his employers for personal injuries. There was correspondence with them before action that did not lead to a settlement. When the writ was issued a junior clerk made a mistake and issued it in the very . .
Cited – Davies v Elsby Brothers Ltd CA 1961
The writ was issued within the limitation period for the claim against ‘Elsby Brothers (a firm)’. In fact, the firm’s business had been taken over by Elsby Brothers Ltd before the proceedings had been issued. By the time the plaintiff applied for . .
Cited – Ketteman v Hansel Properties Ltd HL 1987
Houses were built on defective foundations. The purchasers sued the builders and later the architects who designed them. The defendants argued that the houses were doomed from the start so that the cause of action accrued, not when the physical . .
Cited – Signet Group Plc v Hammerson UK Properties Plc CA 9-Dec-1997
An application was made for a new tenancy within the four month period prescribed by section 29(3) of the LTA. The applicants named in error in the application were ‘Signet Group plc’ and not ‘Ernest Jones Ltd’. Hammerson had not been misled and was . .
Cited – The Sardinia Sulcis CA 1991
The power to change a party after the expiry of a limitation period can be exercised where a party has been wrongly identified, but ‘it was possible to identify the intending claimant or intended defendant by reference to a description which was . .
Cited – The Jay Bola 1992
A writ was issued against defendants ‘O’ who had been owners of the Jay Bola, just prior to the expiry of the one year time bar under the Hague Rules. The judge laid emphasis on the fact that Article 6 III r.6 discharged from all liability unless . .
Cited – Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another CA 18-Dec-2001
The court has a power to order substitution of a party though the limitation period, and even the ‘long stop’ limitation period had expired. The claimant child sought damages after a vaccination. The batch had been attributed to the wrong . .

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198712

Regina (Mahajan) v Central London County Court and Department of Constitutional Affairs: CA 30 Jun 2004

The High Court has power to make a general civil restraint order to prevent the litigant commencing proceedings in the County Court as well as the High Court.

Judges:

Brooke LJ

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-2004, [2004] EWCA Civ 946

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Ebert v Venvill (Trustee In Bankruptcy); Woolf; Midland Bank Plc and Rabinowicz (a Solicitor) CA 5-Jul-1999
The court refused leave to appeal from the High Court. It would be absurd if, when an order was made restricting commencement of proceedings by a vexatious litigant, that the High Court should not have power to restrain by the same order also . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198720

Pelling v Bruce-Williams, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening: CA 5 Jul 2004

The applicant sought an order that his application for a joint residence order should be held in public.
Held: Though there was some attractiveness in the applicant’s arguments, the issue had been fully canvassed by the ECHR. The time had come for the court to consider in each case whether a proper balance of competing rights requires the anonymisation of any report of the proceedings and judgment but only following a hearing which was conducted in public and therefore open to all who cared to attend. Otherwise the application failed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Thorpe Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

(2004) 2 FLR 823, [2004] EWCA Civ 845, [2004] 3 All ER 875

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.16, Children Act 1989 97(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – P-B (a Minor) (child cases: hearings in open court) CA 20-Jun-1996
The applicant sought to have his application for a residence order heard in open court: ‘Article 6 (1) provides for the public hearing and the public pronouncement of judgment of cases, but with the proviso of exclusion of the press and the public . .
Cited – B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Apr-2001
The procedures in English law which provided for privacy for proceedings involving children did not in general infringe the human right to family life, nor the right to a public hearing. Where relatives more distant than immediate parties were . .
Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Appeal from – P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public) FD 2003
The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing.
Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the . .
Cited – Allan v Clibbery (1) CA 30-Jan-2002
Save in cases involving children and ancillary and other situations requiring it, cases in the family division were not inherently private. The appellant failed to obtain an order that details of an action under the section should not be disclosed . .
Cited – In Re G (Minors) (Celebrities: Publicity) CA 4-Nov-1998
Where extra publicity might attach to proceedings because of the celebrity of the parents, it was wrong to attach extra restrictions on reporting without proper cause. There remains a need to balance the need for the freedom of speech and the . .
Cited – Re A CA 4-Feb-2003
The court considered whether publicity should be allowed in a children’s application: ‘On the one hand, there is the need to protect the welfare of children. This can arise in a variety of ways. Children can be directly affected by the publication . .
Cited – X v Dempster FD 9-Nov-1998
The columnist Nigel Dempster had written that the mother in forthcoming proceedings relating to a child was a bad mother.
Held: The article was a contempt of court. Such an allegation required proof to the criminal standard. At common law the . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Cited – R (Mrs) v Central Independent Television Plc CA 17-Feb-1994
The court did not have power to stop a TV program identifying a ward of court, but which was not about the care of the ward. The first instance court had granted an injunction in relation to a television programme dealing with the arrest and the . .
Cited – In Re R (Minor) (Court of Appeal: Order Against Identification) CA 1-Dec-1998
The applicant sought to set aside the standard form of order incorporated into the dismissal on 17th November 1997 of his appeal against the making of a section 91(14) order, preventing the identification of a child involved.
Held: It is now . .
Cited – Re Z (A Minor) (Freedom of publication) 1996
. .
Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Harb v King Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz CA 26-May-2005
The wife sought an order for reasonable maintenance from His Majesty King Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz. He replied that he was immune from suit.
Held: The King as king was immune. The judge at first instance had been wrong to give the case fictitious . .
Cited – Clayton v Clayton CA 27-Jun-2006
The family had been through protracted family law proceedings and had been subject to orders restricting identification. The father now wanted to discuss his experiences and to campaign. He could not do so without his child being identified.
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Haigh FD 22-Aug-2011
The Council sought to have certain aspects of a care application put into the public domain which would normally have remained private. Application was also made (by the father and the child) for an order restricting the right of the mother to make . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
See Also – Pelling v Bruce-Williams CA 25-Jul-2006
Application to discharge injunction – court considering it spent. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198576

Marlwood Commercial Inc v Kozeny: CA 25 Jun 2004

Letters of request. The claimants brought an action for fraudulent misrepresentation. The documents disclosed by the defendants indicated there had been criminal conduct including bribery of the Azeri authorities. The Director of the SFO served notices under section 2 of the CJA 1987 requiring both parties to produce the relevant documents to the SFO. The claimants sought permission under CPR 31.22 to hand over the documents. The defendants opposed that application. The court granted permission as sought by the claimants. Rix LJ, delivering the judgment of the court, noted that the court was resolving a conflict between the public interest in the proper disclosure of documents in civil litigation and the separate public interest in the investigation of allegations of serious fraud. He then proceeded to weigh up those two conflicting interests, paying close attention to the particular circumstances of the case under appeal. Rix LJ concluded that ‘the public interest in the investigation or prosecution of a specific offence of serious or complex fraud should take precedence over the merely general concern of the courts to control the collateral use of compulsorily disclosed documents’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Longmore

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 798, [2004] 3 All ER 648, [2005] 1 WLR 104

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1987 2, Civil Procedure Rules 31.22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Tchenguiz v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others CA 31-Oct-2014
The appellant challenged an order of the Commercial Court refusing permission for documents disclosed in English litigation to be used in litigation proceedings in Guernsey. The principal issue is whether the judge correctly weighed up the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198406

Stolzenberg and others v CIBC Mellon Trust Co Ltd and others: CA 30 Jun 2004

The court considered the issue of the use of a strike out as a sanction for non-compliance with a court order.
Held: The approach of the court in a case considering relief for sanctions – exemplified by RC Residuals v Linton Fuel was bound to be different from that in Arrow Nominees v Blackledge, as there was no ‘unless’ order in the latter case. Her Ladyship stated: ‘The fact that an ‘unless’ order has been made inevitably means that there is an additional factor to consider. Had there been a relevant order in Arrow Nominees, that, too, would have been a factor. It is only a factor to be weighed in the balance. Moreover, compliance with orders of the court is not a question of judicial amore propre. It goes to the essence of the rule of law that parties subject to the court’s jurisdiction . . should comply with the court’s orders. The gravity of the matter of non-compliance is plainly increased where the non-compliance results from a conscious decision, as in this case. It follows, as Ward LJ said in High Tech Limited v Coventry City Council [1997] 1WLR 1666 at 1674 to 1675, that, ‘If a party intentionally or deliberately . . flouts the order, he can expect no mercy’. He has to persuade the court that in all the circumstances the injustice to him outweighs the interests of the administration of justice and the injury to the other party.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lady Justice Arden Sir William Aldous

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 827

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gluckstein v Barnes; Re Olympia Ltd, ex parte Gluckstein HL 1900
Directors’ hidden profits disclosable
Promoters of a company had acquired a property intending its resale through the sale of shares in the company. In doing so the original directors made a substantial profit which they did not disclose (though it was discoverable). The company became . .
Cited – R C Residuals Ltd (formerly Regent Chemicals Ltd) v Linton Fuel Oils Ltd CA 2-May-2002
The applicant had failed to comply with an unless order, delivering his expert evidence some 20 minutes late. The evidence had not been allowed. They appealed.
Held: The claim was re-instated. This was not the first occasion of default. . .
See Also – CIBC Mellon Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg CA 15-Jun-2001
Application for leave to appeal, for an extension of time to appeal, and for a stay of execution pending the hearing of the appeal. . .
Appeal from – CIBC Mellon Trust Company and Others v Stolzenberg and Others ChD 3-Feb-2003
Application to set aside judgments entered on failure to comply with ‘unless’ orders.
Held: Etherton J said: ‘The Court of Appeal has laid down guidance as to the approach of the Court when considering an application for relief from sanctions . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tisson v Telewest Communications Group Ltd EAT 19-Feb-2008
The claimant’s claim had been struck out for his failure to comply with an order to serve a list of documents.
Held: The appeal failed. The principles applied under the Civil Procedure Rules should be applied in Employment Tribunals. The . .
See Also – Venulum 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198474

Harmony Shipping Co SA v Saudi Europe Line Limited (‘The Good Helmsman’): CA 1979

One party objected to the use of the same expert handwriting witness by its opponent. The expert had already given his opinion to both sides, and the question was whether he could be compelled to appear at the trial.
Held: There is no property in an expert witness and any contract purporting to impose an obligation to give evidence for only one side in a dispute would be contrary to public policy. The plaintiff could not prevent the defendant from adducing the evidence of the expert, who could properly be made the subject of a subpoena to appear at trial.
Lord Denning MR said: ”So far as witnesses of fact are concerned, the law is as plain as can be. There is no property in a witness. The reason is because the court has a right to every man’s evidence. Its primary duty is to ascertain the truth. Neither one side nor the other can debar the court from ascertaining the truth either by seeing a witness beforehand or by purchasing his evidence or by making communication to him. In no way can one side prohibit the other side from seeing a witness of fact, from getting facts from him and from calling him to give evidence or from issuing him with a subpoena . . There being no such property in a witness, it is the duty of a witness to come to court and give his evidence in so far as he is directed by the judge to do so.’
and ‘Many of the communications between the solicitor and the expert witness will be privileged. They are protected by legal professional privilege. They cannot be communicated to the court except with the consent of the party concerned . . subject to that qualification it seems to me that an expert witness falls into the same position as a witness to fact. The court is entitled, in order to ascertain the truth, to have the actual facts which he has observed adduced before it and to have his independent opinion on those facts. In this particular case the court is entitled to have before it the documents in question and it is entitled to have the independent opinion of the expert witness on those documents and on those facts – excluding, as I have said, any of the other communications which passed when the witness was being instructed or employed by the other side.’
and ‘The expert witness can be seen beforehand and give a proof on these limited matters I have mentioned and give evidence accordingly.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1979] 1 WLR 1380

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – General Medical Council v Professor Sir Roy Meadow, Attorney General CA 26-Oct-2006
The GMC appealed against the dismissal of its proceedings for professional misconduct against the respondent doctor, whose expert evidence to a criminal court was the subject of complaint. The doctor said that the evidence given by him was . .
Cited – Versloot Dredging Bv v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others ComC 8-Feb-2013
The defendants had engaged an expert witness, and he had undertaken investigations at the claimant’s premises. The claimant now sought an injunction to restrain the defendants from preventing the expert talking to them independently of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.245755

Hi-Lite Electrical Ltd v Wolseley UK Ltd: QBD 17 Jul 2009

The claimant sought a contribution from the defendant towards its liability for a fire at its premises, as found in earlier proceedings against the now claimant. The defendant had filed a defence merely not admitting, and not denying, responsibility for the fire. The claimant now requested that that defence be struck out as an abuse of process, since it challenged the findings of fact already made by the judge in the case brought against the claimant in the earlier proceedings. The defendants were receiving ongoing but yet incomplete advice from their expert as to the cause.
Held: The defendant’s insurers should have acknowledged receipt of the pre-action correspondence from the claimant’s solicitors. However, the times notified by the claimant had been themselves inadequate, and had the pleading included a denial, the claimant’s position would remain the same.

Judges:

Burnett J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3075 (QB), [2010] BLR 225

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994, Directive 98/37/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Henderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
Cited – Hollington v E Hewthorn and Co Ltd CA 1943
Decisions of an earlier tribunal were not binding or admissible in later proceedings where the earlier proceedings were before a court of criminal jurisdiction. Evidence of a prior conviction would not have been admissible in separate criminal . .
Cited – Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .
Cited – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.431289

Bacon v Automattic Inc and Others: QBD 6 May 2011

The court was asked whether a defendant domiciled in the United States of America be served by means of email with a claim form issued in England.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1072 (QB), [2012] 1 WLR 753, [2011] All ER (D) 37, [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 852

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Abela and Others v Baadarani SC 26-Jun-2013
The claimants sought damages alleging fraud in a company share purchase. They said that their lawyer had secretly been working for the sellers. The claim form had been issued, but the claimant had delayed in requesting permission for its service . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.439674

Birmingham City Council v RL and Others: FD 14 Feb 2011

Application made on behalf of the Children’s Guardian inviting the Judge to recuse himself from further hearing this matter which concerns the welfare of three children.
Held: Refused -criticism of attempts by the parties to bypass the court’s decisions.

Judges:

Robert Owen QC J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1299 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.440079

Sherrin v Brand: CA 1956

The landlord had obtained a possession order against his secure tenant. The order was suspended, but the landlord then failed to enforce the order after the date and when the tenant had failed to comply with the terms of the suspension. The tenant died. There was in the meantime a statutory succession and the court had to decide whether here remained a tenancy to succeed to.
Held: The court interpreted the order to mean that that the tenant was to remain on as tenant subject to the added obligation that he had to pay off the arrears by instalments ‘and subject also to this, that if default was made, the plaintiff could then take the appropriate steps mentioned by getting a warrant to execute the order without further or separate proceedings.’ Birkett LJ emphasised the wide powers given to the judge. A possession order did not terminate the statutory tenancy so as to prevent a statutory succession.
Sir Raymond Evershed MR: ‘It is always within the jurisdiction of the court, in my judgment (assuming that the conditions for the exercise of the jurisdiction have arisen) to make an order for possession, but to postpone the effectiveness of the order by making the continued occupation of the tenant conditional, for example, on his paying arrears of rent and costs in such manner as is provided by the order – such a provision being within the language which I have read from section 4 (2) – or to postpone the date of possession for such period or periods as it thinks fit, and subject to such conditions, in regard to payment by the tenant of arrears of rent and otherwise, as the court thinks fit. That indeed is, as I think, plainly the effect of the order of December 2, 1953; and, if that is the effect of the order, it certainly does not necessarily involve the result (as I read section 15 (1)) that, during the period of the postponement of possession, the so-called statutory tenancy ceases altogether, and the tenant wholly ceases to have the protection of the Act.’
Birkett LJ: ‘[T]he widest possible discretion is given to the county court judge, and one can understand why it is done. He is told: ‘You can postpone possession if the facts warrant it; you can postpone the date for possession for such time as you think proper; and, moreover, you can lay down such conditions as you think proper.’ Then at the end of the section come the all-important words: ‘and, if such conditions are complied with, the court may, if it thinks fit, discharge or rescind any such order or judgment.’
What the Act of Parliament was clearly intending to do was to invest the county court judge with the widest possible powers, because of the infinite variety of circumstances in which people are placed in regard to their housing, and in which they are compelled to go to the county court either as landlords or as tenants. The statute says: ‘You can adjourn it if you wish when the facts are such that, if you do adjourn it, that may be an end of the whole matter. If the facts indicate that it is the proper thing to do, you may make an order for possession. If it is a reasonable thing to do, make it. It is quite true that you may suspend the order’ – and, as the county court judge pointed out, during that period of suspension, there may be any number of applications to the court for a suspension of the order; that, at any rate, is in a category by itself. Then the third matter is the wide discretion vested in the court for postponing the date of possession as it thinks fit for such period as it thinks fit and on such terms as it thinks fit; and if those conditions are fulfilled, the court may also, if it thinks fit, discharge the order altogether.’
Romer LJ said: ‘the judgment for possession was not intended to have an immediate effect, and would never indeed take effect at all provided that the conditions as to payment were fulfilled. If this be the true meaning and construction of the order, it is clear that it cannot have resulted in determining Phelps’s statutory tenancy on the date upon which it was made, for the object of the order was to preserve Phelps’s position (albeit conditionally) and preservation is the antithesis of destruction. At Phelps’s death there was a tenancy which was subsisting, and not defunct; and I can see no valid reason why the defendant should not be entitled to it by succession.’

Judges:

Sir Raymond Evershed MR, Birkett LJ, Romer LJ

Citations:

[1956] 1 QB 403

Statutes:

Rent Restriction Act 1923 4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bristol City Council v Hassan and Glastonbury CA 23-May-2006
The council had obtained possession orders for two properties from secure tenants, but the orders were suspended for so long as rent arrears were being discharged. The judges had understood that a date must appear on the possession order.
Explained – Thompson v Elmbridge Borough Council CA 1987
The wife was the secure tenant of the premises, against whom the local authority landlord obtained a possession order on grounds of arrears of rent, not to be enforced on payment of a weekly sum off the arrears in addition to what the order . .
Cited – White v Knowsley Housing Trust and Another CA 2-May-2007
The tenant was an assured tenant. She fell into arrears of rent and a possession order was made, but suspended on terms. The court considered whether she continued to be an assured tenant, and could assert a right to buy the property as an assured . .
Cited – Payne v Cooper CA 1958
An absolute possession order had been made against the statutory tenant, but, on later application to suspend, vary or discharge this order under section 4 of the 1923 Act, the statutory tenant obtained a further order postponing the date for . .
Cited – Knowsley Housing Trust v White; Honeygan-Green v London Borough of Islington; Porter v Shepherds Bush Housing Association HL 10-Dec-2008
The House considered situations where a secure or assured tenancy had been made subject to a suspended possession order and where despite the tenant failing to comply with the conditions, he had been allowed to continue in occupation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.242156

British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd: CA 7 May 1980

Lord Denning MR said that the Norwich Pharmacal case opened ‘a new chapter in our law’ and ‘Mr Irvine suggested this was limited to cases where the injured person desired to sue the wrongdoer. I see no reason why it should be so limited. The same procedure should be available when he desires to obtain redress against the wrongdoer – or to protect himself against further wrongdoing.’
Templeman LJ: ‘In my judgment the principle of the Norwich Pharmacal case applies whether or not the victim intends to pursue action in the courts against the wrongdoer provided that the existence of a cause of action is established and the victim cannot otherwise obtain justice. The remedy of discovery is intended in the final analysis to enable justice to be done. Justice can be achieved against an erring employee in a variety of ways and a plaintiff may obtain an order for discovery provided he shows that he is genuinely seeking lawful redress of a wrong and cannot otherwise obtain redress. In the present case BSC state that they will not finally determine whether to take legal proceedings or whether to dismiss the employee or whether to obtain redress in some other lawful manner until they have considered the identity, status and excuses of the employee. The disclosure of the identity of the disloyal employee will by itself protect BSC and their innocent employees now and for the future and is essential if B.S.C. are to redress the wrong.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Templeman LJ

Citations:

[1981] 1 All ER 435

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Norwich 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:

Appeal from – British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
Cited – Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contempt of Court, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.193375

Regina v The Lord Chancellor Ex Parte Stockler: QBD 4 Dec 1995

Judge may sit as an acting judge beyond the maximum retirement age in order to complete his own case lists.

Citations:

Times 04-Dec-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v the Lord Chancellor, Ex Parte Stockler CA 7-May-1996
A Judge may give judgment in a case finished he had only after reaching the maximum permitted retirement age. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v the Lord Chancellor, Ex Parte Stockler CA 7-May-1996
A Judge may give judgment in a case finished he had only after reaching the maximum permitted retirement age. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.88172

Perotti v Collyer-Bristow (A Firm): CA 21 May 2004

The claimant had been dissatisfied with the way in which the defendant had administered the estate of his deceased uncle. The court had faced 14 applications by him.
Held: ‘They are all totally devoid of merit. They were all made long after the hearing ended on 29th November 2002.’ ‘Chadwick LJ dismissed 11 further applications by Mr Perotti on the same grounds. It has been drawn to the court’s attention that, putting on one side certain pending matters, since 1997 Mr Perotti has made 80 different applications to the court in different matters, of which two have been allowed, 75 refused, and three have been disposed of by different orders. ‘
A Grepe v Loam order and civil restraint orders had been made against him. Neuberger J considered that in his experience of litigants in person, Mr Perotti was second to none in terms of his persistence, and in terms of the aggressiveness, rudeness and unreasonableness with which he conducted his applications. The existing extended civil restraint order was to be extended yet further.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke Vice-President Of The Court Of Appeal (Civil Division) And Lord Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 639, [2004] 4 All ER 53

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Perotti v Watson and others CA 26-Feb-2004
The appellant seeking leave to appeal had previously asked for legal assistance. Mr Perottis had been involved in litigation against his father’s administrator over many years. A civil restraint order had been made against him. The first defendant . .
Cited – Grepe v Loam; Bulteel v Grepe CA 1887
The court was asked for an order restricting the right of a group of litigants be restrained from beginning further court actions without first obtaining the court’s consent, they having been accused of issuing vexatious proceedings.
Held: The . .
Cited – Bhamjee v Forsdick and Others (No 2) CA 25-Jul-2003
The Court set out the range of remedies available to protect court processes from abuse by litigants who persist in making applications totally devoid of merit. The courts are facing very serious contemporary problems created by the activities of . .

Cited by:

See also – Perotti v Watson and others CA 26-Feb-2004
The appellant seeking leave to appeal had previously asked for legal assistance. Mr Perottis had been involved in litigation against his father’s administrator over many years. A civil restraint order had been made against him. The first defendant . .
See also – Angelo Perotti v Iliffes Booth Bennett (A Firm), Bird and Bird (A Firm), Richard Francis Dudley Barlow (Sued As Francis Barlow) ChD 28-Oct-2003
. .
See also – Perotti v Collyer-Bristow (A Firm) and others CA 6-Oct-2003
So far as civil proceedings are concerned, the funding of particular cases by civil legal aid was a matter for the Legal Services Commission. The courts have no residual power to make an order for assistance. The most it could do would be to . .
Cited – Grace, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 9-Jun-2014
What is ‘totally without merit’?
The claimant had sought judicial review. Her case had been certified as being ‘totally without merit’, thus denying to her any opportunity to renew her application for leave at an oral hearing, leaving only recourse to a judge of the Court of Appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.197054

Wiltshire v Powell and others: CA 7 May 2004

The claimant sought a declaration as to the ownership of an aircraft. Saying he had bought it in good faith from E H and S, who in turn similarly claimed to have bought it from Ebbs. The defendant had obtained a judgment that he was owner as against Mr Ebbs after the sale to E H and S, but before the sale to the claimant.
Held: Since the issue of ownership had been determined before his purchase and against one through whom he claimed to derive title, the claim failed. The doctrine of privity applies in the same manner to a judgment determining the ownership of goods as it does to one determining the ownership of land.
Latham LJ expressed his conclusion: ‘where title to goods is in dispute . . a person claiming title is privy to the interests of those through whom he claims that title for the purposes of the operation of the doctrine of estoppel per rem judicatam but only if the title he claims was acquired after the date of the judgment.’
Arden LJ said ‘Res judicata promotes the important public policy of finality in legal proceedings and thus legal certainty . . If there was no estoppel per rem judicatam in this situation the result would always be that a defendant to an action about the ownership of property could always avoid the result of an adverse judgment by disposing of the property before the judgment was enforced. That would clearly be an intolerable state of affair . . ‘
Holman J said: ‘If after A has obtained a final judgment establishing that a chattel belongs to A rather than B, A wishes to sell it, it is essential that a purchaser can rely on the judgment as against B for otherwise A cannot really benefit from his judgment. Any alternative view would lead to uncertainty and commercial chaos.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Latham Lady Justice Arden Mr Justice Holman

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 534, Times 03-Jun-2004, [2004] 3 All ER 235, [2004] 3 WLR 666, [2005] QB 117

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Wiltshire v Powell and others (Costs) CA 7-May-2004
. .
Cited – Gleeson v J Wippell and Co Ltd ChD 1977
The court considered the circumstances giving rise to a plea of res judicata, and proposed a test of privity in cases which did not fall into any recognised category. ‘Second, it seems to me that the sub-stratum of the doctrine is that a man ought . .
Cited – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
Cited – Doe v The Earl of Derby 1834
For a plea of res judicata to arise as between claimants to the title to goods, the same title must have come into question in both actions, because there must be an identity of interest between the party to the first action and the party to the . .
Cited – Wytcherley v Andrews 1871
Lord Penzance said: ‘There is a practice in this court, by which any person having an interest may make himself a party to the suit by intervening; and it was because of the existence of that practice that the judges of the Prerogative Court held, . .
Cited – Carl Zeiss Stiftung v Rayner and Keeler Ltd (No 2) HL 1966
An agency had to be proved in a search to identify an entity which the law recognised (a) existed and (b) was legally responsible for the acts in issue in the proceedings. The House was asked whether the fact that an issue had already been . .
Cited – Westland Helicopters Ltd v Sheikh Al-Hejailan QBD 13-Jul-2004
. .
Cited – Hodson v Walker CEC 1872
Premises known as the Red Lion Inn, Grasmere and certain outbuildings were let. In February 1852, Walker allowed one Usher, who owned the Red Lion Inn, to build a shed on his (Walker’s) adjoining land in return for a rent of 1s. a year. In November . .
Cited – House of Spring Gardens v Waite CA 1991
The principle of abuse of process is capable of applying where the relevant earlier proceedings have taken place before a foreign court (Ireland). In this case the defendants argued that the judgment obtained in Ireland had been obtained . .
Cited – Pople v Evans ChD 1969
The court discussed the doctrine of res judicata: ‘ . . the title relied on to establish such privity must arise after the judgment on which the res judicata is based, or at any rate after the commencement of the proceedings in which that judgment . .
Cited – Mercantile Investment and General Trust Company v River Plate Trust, Loan and Agency Company 1894
Romer J said: ‘A prior purchaser of land cannot be estopped as being privy in estate by a judgment obtained in an action against the vendor commenced after purchase.’ . .
Cited – Re de Burgho’s Estate 1896
The court considered the necessary elements of issue estoppel: ‘According to the clear principles of the law of estoppel, it is necessary, in order to estop the objector, to show that he derives title under Dwyer by act or operation of law . .
Cited – Nana Ofori Atta (II) v Nana Abu Bonsra (II) PC 1958
(West Africa) Care must be taken in respect of the notion that merely standing by and waiting to see the outcome of a case in which the non-party has an interest, without more, involves an abuse of process. The parties now disputed title to land, . .
Cited – Brotherton and others v Aseguradora Colseguros S A and Another ComC 26-Feb-2003
. .
Cited – Hornsby v Greece ECHR 19-Mar-1997
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6-1; Preliminary objection rejected; Just satisfaction reserved – Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award
The rights . .
Cited – Wenman v McKenzie 1855
Coleridge J, quoting Lord Chief Baron Gilbert: ‘nobody can take benefit by a verdict that had not been prejudiced by it, had it gone contrary’. . .

Cited by:

See also – Wiltshire v Powell and others (Costs) CA 7-May-2004
. .
Cited – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others ComC 21-Sep-2012
The claimant company alleged that the defendants had variously received assests (shares and cash) acquired by a former partner in the claimant company and held on his behalf, in breach of his obligations to the caimant partnership. The defendants . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196776

Haly v Barry: CA 1868

A judgment creditor had obtained a charging order nisi but before it was made absolute a decree was made for the administration of the debtor’s estate. An injunction was sought in order to restrain further proceedings by the judgment creditor, but that was refused on the basis that the charging order nisi having been made, it could only be defeated by something prior to it. The Master held that the charging order nisi was not to be regarded as something different from the charging order absolute.
Held: A charging order absolute takes effect from the date of the charging order nisi. Page Wood LJ said ‘I do not think that such a case can be treated as one in which the creditor’s title is incomplete.’ Selwyn LJ: ‘The language of the [Common Law Procedure Act 1852] appears to me quite opposed to this view, it speaks of one order which is at first an order nisi and is afterwards made absolute.’

Judges:

Page Wood LJ

Citations:

(1868) 3 Ch App 452

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Overruled – Clarke v Coutts and Co CA 17-Jun-2002
The respondent bank had obtained a charging order nisi against the applicant’s property. The applicant then obtained an order under s252 of the act requiring any further action against his estate to be stayed. The bank nevertheless obtained an order . .
Cited – Brereton v Edwards 1888
Money in the control of the Court may be the subject of execution with the leave of the Court. The Judgments Acts did not apply to money held in Court. Lord Esher MR said: ‘section 14 does not apply to money . . it applies only to Government stock, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.182280

Bruen v Bruce (Practice Note): CA 1959

Citations:

[1959] 2 All ER 375, [1959] 1 WLR 684

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Jarvis v Swans Tours Ltd CA 16-Oct-1972
The plaintiff had booked a holiday through the defendant travel tour company. He claimed damages after the holiday failed to live up to expectations.
Held: In appropriate cases where one party contracts to provide entertainment and enjoyment, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.181100

Rofa Sport Management AG v DHL International (UK) Ltd: CA 1989

After an action had been stayed, it remained technically in being. It cannot proceed or resume without a court order, but it cannot properly be regarded as dead, in the same way as it might had it been dismissed or discontinued by order.

Judges:

Neill LJ

Citations:

[1989] 1 WLR 902

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wagstaff v Colls and Another CA 2-Apr-2003
The action had been stayed by an order on agreed terms. The claimant sought a wasted costs order against the defendants’ solicitors on the ground that they had witheld certain facts during the litigation. The defendants argued that they should first . .
Cited – Cockeril v Tambrands Limited CA 21-May-1998
Even if a case is quite unsuitable for automatic directions, the plaintiff has an obligation to apply instead for specific manual directions to stand in their stead. It would be wrong to allow a plaintiff to escape from the discipline of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.181181

Meon Valley Engineering Limited v Reinforced Plastic Products Limited: CA 19 Feb 1997

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1048

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hoskins v Wiggins Teape (UK) Limited CA 1994
The plaintiff had delayed the action. It had been transferred from the High Court in July 1991, and was then automatically struck out. The plaintiff sought re-instatement.
Held: The court attempted to put into proper context the problems that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.141444

Bonzel v Intervention Ltd: 1991

‘the duty placed upon the patentee to make full disclosure of all relevant documents (which is required in amendment proceedings) is one which should not be fettered by any action of the courts. Reluctance of this court to go into camera to hear evidence in relation to documents which are privileged which could be used in other jurisdictions, would tend to make patentees reluctant to disclose the full position. That of course would not be in the interest of the public.’

Citations:

[1991] RPC 231

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Bonzel (T) v Intervention Ltd (No3) 1991
. .

Cited by:

Cited – HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 13-Jan-2006
The claimant had for many years kept private journals, whose contents were circulated within a small circle of friends. He now sought to claim confidentiality and copyright in them when the defendant sought to publish them.
Held: There was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.237699

Gezer v Secretary of State for Home Department and others: CA 2 Apr 2004

Application adjourned pending decision of House of Lords

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 510

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gezer, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 14-Apr-2003
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Gezer v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 17-Dec-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196085

Worldwide Corporation Limited v Marconi Communications Limited (Formerly GPT Limited) and GPT (Middle East) Limited: 22 Jun 1999

Application for leave to appeal. Original leading counsel had consented to the abandonment of parts of the claim. New leading counsel now sought to revive them.
Held: The claim had little prospect of success. Leave to appeal refused.

Judges:

Waller, Mance LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1650

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Arthur J S Hall and Co (A Firm) v Simons etc CA 14-Dec-1998
The court considered the limits on liability for professional negligence for lawyers in conduct associated with litigation, but outside the courtroom.
Held: Though the court must balance the need for protection against negligence by lawyers . .
Cited – Sayle v Cooksey 1969
The court questioned whether the availability of an alternate remedy for a party against his solicitors should affect the decision to strike out a plaintiff’s claim. . .
Cited – Birkett v James HL 1977
Exercise of Power to Strike Out
The court has an inherent power to strike out an action for want of prosecution, and the House set down the conditions for its exercise. The power is discretionary and exercisable only where (a) there has been inordinate and inexcusable delay and . .
Cited – Hytec Information Systems Limited v Council of City of Coventry CA 4-Dec-1996
The Court directed that unless particulars were served by a specified date the defendant’s claim should be struck out. The defendant served some particulars but it was decided that the defendant had deliberately flouted the unless order and its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196072

Garratt v Saxby: CA 18 Feb 2004

There had been a Part 36 offer to settle the action. It was disclosed inadvertently to the judge.
Held: There had been no serious procedural irregularity, and fairness and justice did not require a rehearing before different judge.

Judges:

Ward, Buxton, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 341, Gazette 18-Mar-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 2152

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
Cited – Berg v IML London Ltd 2002
A judge should recuse himself in a civil case only if, subjectively, he considered that the knowledge he acquired of privileged communications disabled him from fairly continuing with the case or, objectively, a fair-minded and informed observer . .

Cited by:

Cited – Beasley v Alexander QBD 9-Oct-2012
The parties had disputed liability for personal injuries in a road traffic accident. The court had held the defendant liable, but held over the assessment of damages. The defendant sought to refer to the fact of his offer of settlement when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Negligence, Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195527