Category: Litigation Practice

IDA Ltd and others v The University of Southampton and others: CA 2 Mar 2006

The claimants sought sole ownership of a patent.
Held: The judge had erred when he reversed the decision of the hearing officer that the claimant was sole owner of the patent. The court expressed its regret that the matter had not been resolved without proceedings. Entitlement proceedings were inevitably complicated and expensive. They were more likely in the absence of writing. It was not satisfactory where proceedings continued in two tribunals. The comptroller’s jurisdiction should be limited to more straightforward cases, and a claimant might also start proceedings in the High Court and seek a transfer of the comptroller proceedings. Such disputes were particularly apt for mediation.
Jacobs LJ: ‘the s.8 jurisdiction, although based on an entitlement, is free-standing with its own remedies. The Comptroller is given a very wide discretion once a finding of entitlement is made: he can order licences, cross-licences, the power to sub-licence and amendment of the patent, all to fit the justice of the case – see s.8(2). There is no need for an all-or-nothing solution. So if B, having taken A’s idea, genuinely adds inventive material of his own, there is ample power to produce an equitable and fair commercial solution.’

Judges:

Jacobs LJ

Citations:

[2006] RPC 21, [2006] EWCA Civ 145, Times 31-Mar-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – IDA Ltd and others v University of Southampton and others; University of Southampton’s Applications Patc 28-Jul-2004
Disclosure and enablement are distinct concepts in patents law, each of which has to be satisfied and each of which has its own rules. As to sufficiency: ‘In my view, devising an invention and providing enabling disclosure are two quite different . .

Cited by:

Cited – Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd v Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and others CA 31-Jul-2006
The claimants sought to amend their claim which had previously been on the basis of a joint ownership, to one of sole ownership.
Held: The application for the amendment being made more han two years after the grant, the amendment could not be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.238786

Re Seaford Dec’d: CA 1968

A decree of divorce was made absolute by the court on the same day as, but some hours later than, the husband respondent had died. The court considered the general rule that a judicial act takes effect at the start of the day on which it is made.
Held: The rule did not apply in family proceedings. Willmer LJ said that the rule could not be relied upon so as to confer upon the Court a jurisdiction which it did not have at the time when the order was made. The marriage having been determined by the husband’s death, the Court had no power to dissolve it when the order was made.
Davies LJ rejected the submission that the order took effect at te beginning of the day and said that this legal fiction had no relevance when there was evidence as to the real facts.

Judges:

Willmer LJ, Davies LJ

Citations:

[1968] P 53

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re Palmer (A Deceased Debtor), Palmer v Palmer CA 6-Apr-1994
Property had been conveyed to the deceased and the appellant, his widow, to be held as joint tenants. The deceased dies whilst under investigation for defalcations as a solicitor, and an insolvency administration order was obtained in the estate. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice, Wills and Probate

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.267521

In re Padstow Total Loss and Collision Assurance Association: CA 1882

The High Court had made a winding up order against an insolvent association under a section of the Companies Act 1862 which applied to unregistered companies. The Act prohibited the formation of an unregistered company with more than twenty members. The association, which was not registered under the Act, consisted of more than twenty members.
Held: The statutory provision under which (if at all) the association could be wound up applied only to companies which could be lawfully formed and not to companies like the association the formation of which was forbidden. Accordingly the winding up order was made without jurisdiction.
Sir George Jessel MR considered the effect of the order: ‘The first point to be considered is whether, assuming that the association was an unlawful one, and that the Court had no jurisdiction to make the order, an appeal is the proper method of getting rid of it. I think it is. I think that an order made by a Court of competent jurisdiction which has authority to decide as to its own competency must be taken to be a decision by the Court that it has jurisdiction to make the order, and consequently you may appeal from it on the ground that such decision is erroneous.’
Brett LJ: ‘In this case an order has been made to wind up an association or company as such. That order was made by a superior Court, which superior Court has jurisdiction in a certain given state of facts to make a winding-up order, and if there has been a mistake made it is a mistake as to the facts of the particular case and not the assumption of a jurisdiction which the Court had not. I am inclined, therefore, to say that this order could never so long as it existed be treated either by the Court that made it or by any other Court as a nullity, and that the only way of getting rid of it was by appeal.’

Judges:

Sir George Jessel MR Brett and Lindley LJJ

Citations:

(1882) 20 Ch D 137

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.237252

A T and T Istel Ltd and Another v Tully and Others: CA 15 Jan 1992

An order that the results of disclosure were not to be used in criminal proceedings was enough to protect the defendant. The privilege against self incrimination could be over-ridden in this way, even if that privilege should be lightly set aside.

Judges:

Lord Donaldson MR and Neill LJ

Citations:

Gazette 15-Jan-1992, [1992] 2 WLR 112, [1992] 2 All ER 28, [1992] 1 QB 315

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – A T and T Istel Ltd v Tully HL 9-Sep-1992
The second plaintff had agreed to supply computer systems to a health authority. New owners of the company discovered allegations that the contract had been operated fraudulently. An order had been obtained for production of documents, but the order . .
Cited – Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same ChD 25-Feb-2011
The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.77584

Attorney General v Jones: CA 1990

A section 42 order embraced applications to or in the Court of Appeal as well as below. A person against whom a vexatious litigant order was sought could not seek to argue anew the findings which had already been made against him by the courts in which he had been litigating. In dealing with an application under the section it is not the court’s task to revisit and reconsider the merits of the individual underlying actions upon which the Attorney General relies. The court is entitled to go by the conclusions of the judges who determined earlier proceedings.
Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR: ‘The fifth and last issue of law arose out of Mr Jones’ wish to challenge the conclusion of various judges in the underlying proceedings that his conduct in those particular proceedings had been vexatious or had involved an abuse of the process of the court. We ruled that he was not free to do so. If any such conclusion was, or was thought by Mr Jones to be, erroneous, the remedy was to appeal in those proceedings or, where it was said that the judgment was vitiated by the fraud of other parties, to take appropriate steps to have the judgment set aside. But if that was not done, the decision must stand and is capable of forming the basis for the court being satisfied upon an application under section 42 that Mr Jones had habitually and persistently and without any reasonable ground acted in the manner referred to in subsection (1)(a) and/or (b).’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR

Citations:

[1990] 1 WLR 859

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 42

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – HM Attorney General v Pepin Admn 27-May-2004
Civil proceedings order. The defendant had commenced ten sets of proceedings which the court held amounted to serial and repeated litigation of the same points.
Held: The fact that new details had emerged which might throw new light on the . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v Foden Admn 7-Apr-2005
Application for Civil Proceedings Order.
Held: ‘This defendant has become a compulsive litigant who has lost touch with reality. Her remorseless pursuit of litigation is wholly without merit, is clearly vexatious and has perpetrated a waste of . .
Cited – Attorney General v Perotti Admn 10-May-2006
The respondent had been subject first to a Grepe v Loam order and then to an extended civil restraint order. The court had still faced many hopeless applications. An order was now sought that any future application for permission to appeal be heard . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.197959

Meadows Indemnity Co Ltd v The Insurance Corporation of Ireland plc and Another: CA 1989

A claim was made for declaratory relief.
Held: The Claimant, a re-insurer, did not have locus to claim a declaration that the main insurer could avoid the main contract of insurance, to which the Claimant was not a party. The court considered ‘the general policy of the law to resolve disputes between all parties in one set of proceedings’.
May LJ said: ‘Meadows’ interests are not ‘vitally affected’ within the meaning one must give to that phrase on the authorities. I accept the general submission that was made to us that a person who is not a party to a contract has no locus, save perhaps in exceptional circumstances, to obtain a declaration in respect of the rights of other parties to that particular contract.’

Judges:

Neill, May and Nourse LJJ

Citations:

[1989] 2 Lloyds Rep 298

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Considered – Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers HL 26-Jul-1977
The claimant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent Trades Union calling on its members to boycott mail to South Africa. The respondents challenged the ability of the court to make such an order.
Held: The wide wording of the statute . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cabvision Ltd v Feetum and others CA 20-Dec-2005
The company challenged the appointment of administrative receivers, saying there had been no insolvency.
Held: No question arises of a derivative action arose here. The claimant had standing to apply for declaratory relief since they were . .
Cited – Cabvision Ltd v Feetum and others CA 20-Dec-2005
The company challenged the appointment of administrative receivers, saying there had been no insolvency.
Held: No question arises of a derivative action arose here. The claimant had standing to apply for declaratory relief since they were . .
Cited – Cabvision Ltd v Feetum and others CA 20-Dec-2005
The company challenged the appointment of administrative receivers, saying there had been no insolvency.
Held: No question arises of a derivative action arose here. The claimant had standing to apply for declaratory relief since they were . .
Cited – Feetum v Levy CA 2006
Jonathan Parker LJ discussed the granting of declarations: ‘things have indeed moved on since the Meadows case was decided; and the courts should not nowadays apply such a restrictive meaning to the passage in Lord Diplock’s speech in Gouriet’s . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Insurance

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.236580

WEA Records v Visions Channel 4 Ltd: CA 1983

Sir John Donaldson MR explained that: ‘In terms of jurisdiction, there can be no doubt that this court can hear an appeal from an order made by the High Court upon an ex parte application. This jurisdiction is conferred by section 16 (1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981. Equally there is no doubt that the High Court has power to review and to discharge or vary any order, which has been made ex parte. This jurisdiction is inherent in the provisional nature of any order made ex parte and is reflected in R.S.C., Ord. 32, r. 6 . . As I have said, ex parte orders are essentially provisional in nature. They are made by the judge on the basis of evidence and submissions emanating from one side only. Despite the fact that the applicant is under a duty to make full disclosure of all relevant information in his possession, whether or not it assists his application, this is no basis for making a definitive order and every judge knows this. He expects at a later stage to be given an opportunity to review his provisional order in the light of evidence and argument adduced by the other side and, in so doing, he is not hearing an appeal from himself and in no way feels inhibited from discharging or varying his original order. This being the case it is difficult, if not impossible, to think of circumstances in which it would be proper to appeal to this court against an ex parte order without first giving the judge who made it or, if he was not available, another High Court judge an opportunity of reviewing it in the light of argument from the defendant and reaching a decision. This is the appropriate procedure even when an order is not provisional, but is made at the trial in the absence of one party: see R.S.C., Ord. 35, r. 2 (1), and Vint v. Hudspith (1885) 29 Ch.D. 322 to which Mr. Tager very helpfully referred us this morning.’

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson MR

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 721

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – S v Suren and Another QBD 10-Sep-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.549469

In Re Boaler: CA 1915

The court was asked whether the 1896 Act which permitted a court to make an order that a person could not institute proceedings without the leave of the court, applied to the institution of criminal proceedings.
Held: It did not. Scrutton J said: ‘In the case of this statute the legislature clearly intends to interfere with some rights of persons, and uses words capable of extension to rights of litigation in criminal matters, but in my opinion more suitable to the subject-matter of rights of litigation in civil matters only. In my view, looking at the enacting part of the statute only, the presumption against the interference with the vital rights and liberties of the subject entitles, even compels, me to limit the words to the meaning which effects the least interference with those rights.’ but ‘The object of the court is, from the words used, construed in reference to the subject-matter in which they are used, to get at the intention of the legislature and give effect to it. When the legislature has used general words capable of a larger and a narrower meaning, those words may be restricted by innumerable presumptions all designed to give effect to the reasonable intent of the legislature.’
‘One of the valuable rights of every subject of the King is to appeal to the King in his Courts if he alleges that a civil wrong has been done to him, or if he alleges that a wrong punishable criminally has been done to him, or has been committed by another subject of the King. This right is sometimes abused and it is, of course, quite competent to Parliament to deprive any subject of the King of it either absolutely or in part. But the language of any such statute should be jealously watched by the Courts, and should not be extended beyond its least onerous meaning unless clear words are used to justify such extension.’

Judges:

Scrutton J

Citations:

[1915] KB 21

Statutes:

Vexatious Actions Act 1896

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury Admn 24-Apr-2008
The applicants were suspected of terrorist associations. Their bank accounts and similar had been frozen. They challenged the Order in Council under which the orders had been made without an opportunity for parliamentary challenge or approval.
Cited – Chester v Bateson 1920
A Regulation brought in under the 1914 Act prohibited the bringing of possession proceedings against a munitions worker without the consent of the Minister.
Held: The prohibition was unlawful. It was a grave invasion of the rights of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Constitutional

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.267159

Varsani v Relfo Ltd: CA 27 May 2010

The defendant appealed against refusal of a declaration that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. He said that he lived in Kenya, and the claimant had failed first to apply for leave to serve out of the jurisdiction. The claimant had served notice of the proceedings at premises owned by the defendant in England. He was a British citizen with a British Passport, and had, in proceedings in Singapore, described the English address as his home.
Held: The appeal failed. Whether a defendant’s use of a property characterises it as his or her ‘residence’, that is to say the defendant can fairly be described as residing there, is a question of fact and degree. Given the circumstances her, including also that the defendant’s family lived in the house, and that his visits were to the extent allowed by his work in Kenya, the judge was entitled to find it an ordinary residence of the defendant.

Judges:

Etherton LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 560

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6.9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Canada Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg and others (2) CA 29-Oct-1997
The court looked at questions relating to domicile and jurisdiction; standard of proof, date to be determined and duties before service.
Held: The court is endeavouring to find an imprecise concept which reflects that the plaintiff must . .
Mentioned – Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2) HL 12-Oct-2000
The plaintiffs alleged the involvement of the defendant in a conspiracy to defraud. He had been domiciled in England, but had moved to Germany. He denied that the UK court had jurisdiction. The court of appeal said that jurisdiction was determined . .
Cited – Bols Distilleries VB (T/A As Bols Royal Distilleries) and Another v Superior Yacht Services Ltd PC 11-Oct-2006
(Gilbraltar) The parties disputed the management contract for a racing yacht, and also the juridiction of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar to hear the case. Bols said that under regulation 2(1) Gibraltar had no jurisdiction.
Held: The English . .
Cited – OJSC Oil Company Yugraneft v Abramovich and others ComC 29-Oct-2008
The claimants sought damages alleging a massive fraud by the defendants. The court considered whether the parties could receive a fair trial of the action in Russia.
Held: They could. Christopher Clarke J said: ‘Firstly, this case is in no way . .
Cited – Cherney v Deripaska ComC 3-Jul-2008
Renewed application for leave to serve proceedings out of jurisdiction. The court considered a submission that a fair trial would not be possible in Russia: ‘An English court will approach with considerable circumspection any contention that a . .
Cited – Levene v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1928
Until 1919 Mr. Levene had been both resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. Then, for five years he spent about five months (mainly in the summer) each year, staying in hotels in the UK and receiving medical attention or pursuing religious and . .

Cited by:

Cited – Grimason v Cates QBD 26-Jul-2013
The claimant tenant appealed against frfeiture of her leas saying that she had not received any notices. The parties disputed whether the addresss was the usual or last known address, and also that the forfeiture gave the landlord an unjust . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.416107

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell: QBD 14 Jun 2019

Request fro order to defendant to destroy confidential email sent to him in error.

Judges:

Warby J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1527 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell QBD 22-Jul-2019
Claim is brought by the Advertising Standards Authority (‘ASA’) for an injunction to restrain the use or disclosure of information which was mistakenly passed to the defendant, when a member of the claimant’s staff misaddressed an email, seeking . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.641712

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell: QBD 22 Jul 2019

Claim is brought by the Advertising Standards Authority (‘ASA’) for an injunction to restrain the use or disclosure of information which was mistakenly passed to the defendant, when a member of the claimant’s staff misaddressed an email, seeking legal advice in relation to an advertising standards complaint. The defendant is one of those to whom the complaint related.

Judges:

Warby J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1958 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell QBD 14-Jun-2019
Request fro order to defendant to destroy confidential email sent to him in error. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.641713

Qureshi v Association of Conservative Clubs Ltd (on Refusal of Permission To Appeal): ChD 9 May 2019

Reasons for refusal of leave to appeal.

Judges:

Sarah Worthington QC HHJ

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1684 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Qureshi v Association of Conservative Clubs Ltd (on Costs) ChD 9-May-2019
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.640876

Secretary of State for Justice v LSM Professional Ltd and Another: QBD 16 May 2012

Reasons for rejection of applications to amend the pleadings: ‘They represent a wholly new factual case as to what the Secretary of State would or could have done if the alleged wrongdoing had not taken place ten years ago and, what is more, it is one that could have been pleaded at any stage. It seems that the idea was inspired not by the discovery of new facts but by the content of his own expert report served earlier this year.’

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1280 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.457761

Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd: QBD 4 Jul 2011

The claimants sought very substantial damages against the bank, arising from the bank’s delay in executing four transactions. The defendant said that it suspected that the proposed transactions concerned criminal property and that, in those circumstances, they were not required to comply with the payment instructions. The claimant complained at this point of the redaction of the names of staff involved in the decisions.
Held: The redaction exercise was to be re-done by the defendant in accordance with the process outlined.

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1713 (QB), [2011] Lloyd’s Rep FC 48, [2011] Lloyd’s Rep FC 485

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd QBD 26-Jan-2009
The claimants sought damages after delays by the bank in processing transfer requests. The bank said that the delays were made pending reports of suspected criminal activity. The bank’s delay had stigmatised the claimant causing further losses. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.441425

Floor v Davis (Inspector of Taxes): HL 1979

The House considered whether the meaning of the phrase ‘a person having control’ extended to control by more than one person. This depended on whether the word ‘person’ in the singular was to be construed as including the plural.
Held: The House applied the 1889 Act. A permissible aid to construction of a stautute is to ask whether, if the defined meaning is used in a particular provision, that provision would be unworkable or produce a result that Parliament could not have intended would be produced.
Viscount Dilhorne said that if a construction of a provision was ‘unworkable, or if not workable [leads] to a result that Parliament could not have intended, then it can be concluded that an intention contrary to the application of the Interpretation Act appears.’ and ‘It must be borne in mind that the Interpretation Act is to apply unless a contrary intention is shown. It is not the case that an intention that the Act should apply has to be shown for it to apply.’
Lord Wilberforce said: ‘It does not require authority to establish that the Act is one for the convenience of drafting: ‘for further shortening the language used in Acts of Parliament’, nor that a contrary intention may be gathered from the sense an intention of the Act in question. Though the Act appears to state a presumption this is not a strong one. Speaking of the common law presumption (which applied before the Interpretation Act 1889) that ‘person’ in an Act of Parliament includes ‘corporations’ Lord Blackburn said in Pharmaceutical Society v London and Provincial Supply Association Ltd (1880) 5 App Cas 857, 869: ‘Circumstances, and indeed circumstances of a slight nature in the context, might show in which way the word is to be construed in an Act of Parliament … whenever you can see that the object of the Act requires that the word ‘person’ shall have the more extended or less extended sense, then, whichever sense it requires, you should apply the word in that sense . .’ I do not think that the Act intends to apply any different test.’
Lord Woolf said: ‘It is the repealing Act, not the Act of 1974, which is required to manifest the contrary intention so as to exclude the operation of section 16. Were the position otherwise the object of section 16, which is to make it unnecessary to include in the subsequent legislation the provisions contained in section 16, would be frustrated. The silence of the subsequent legislation is consistent and not inconsistent with section 16 applying.’

Judges:

Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Wilberforce, Lord Woolf

Citations:

[1980] AC 695, [1979] 2 WLR 830, [1979] 2 All ER 677

Statutes:

Finance Act 1965 45 Sch7 15(2), Interpretation Act 1889 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pharmaceutical Society v London and Provincial Supply Association Ltd 11-Jan-1880
Lord Blackburn spoke of the presumption at common law that the word ‘person’ in an Act of Parliament includes ‘corporations’: ‘Circumstances, and indeed circumstances of a slight nature in the context, might show in which way the word is to be . .
Appeal from – Floor v Davis (Inspector of Taxes) CA 1979
The court considered the taxation of a sale of shares in one company called IDM to a company (FNW) and a further sale by that company to a yat another company (KDI). Held(Majority) It was right to look at each of the sales separately. The court . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Justice v Slee EAT 19-Jul-2007
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Constructive dismissal
Maternity Rights and Parental Leave – Sex discrimination
The Claimant was employed as a Magistrates’ Clerk and she brought successful claims to the . .
Cited – Crown Prosecution Service v Inegbu Admn 26-Nov-2008
The CPS appealed aganst a decision on a charge under the railway byelaws, that the charge be dismissed, the prosecution not having formally proved in accordance with any applicable statutory provision. The byelaws had in fact been properly . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Corporation Tax

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.449978

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd (No. 2): QBD 18 Nov 2010

Explanation of reasons for anonymity order.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2979 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 5-Nov-2010
The court was asked as to the circumstances under which the identity of a claimant should be protected in an action where he sought to restrain the publication of private information about him.
Held: Tugendhat J accepted the proposition . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 31-Jan-2011
Principles on Request for Anonymity Order
The defendant appealed against an order granting the anonymisation of the proceeedings.
Held: The critical question is whether there is sufficient general public interest in publishing a report of proceedings which identifies a party by name, . .
Cited – Goldsmith and Another v BCD QBD 22-Mar-2011
The claimants sought damages, alleging that the defendants had hacked into their e-mail accounts. The defendant now sought protection of her identity through anonymisation of the case.
Held: Granted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.426533

Mireskandari v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 4 May 2010

The claimant sued in defamation, but had failed to make disclosure of documents as ordered. He asked for the ‘unless’ order to be set aside, and the action re-instated saying that he had not had notice of the application for it. He also argued that the Sharp J was biased.
Held: The fact that a judge had acted as counsel for a party many years ago was not a reason to be recused (Locabail). The actual documents so far as they were identified, sought by the claimant did not relate to the matters pleaded. The claimant’s application was dismissed. The application failed.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 967 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 31.12

Citing:

Cited – Locabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd CA 17-Nov-1999
Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias
In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The mere . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.409225

The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of The University of Oxford and Others v Broughton and Others: CA 10 Feb 2005

The plaintiffs intended to construct a laboratory. The defendants were an organised group of animal rights activists who objected saying that it was intended to conduct experiments on animals. Objection was made that an injunction should not properly be given in favour of a large group of unnamed persons.

Judges:

Ward LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 144

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408804

D Morgan Plc v Mace and Jones (A Firm) and Another: TCC 23 Mar 2010

‘In this action, the claimants are pursuing a claim for in excess of andpound;60 million by way of damages, arising out of what they say was negligent advice given by the defendants on various planning issues concerning Bold Heath Quarry in St. Helens. The claimants have failed to comply with an order made by Ramsey J requiring them to serve a forensic accountants’ report by 26th February 2010. They seek retrospectively to extend time for the service of such a report until 8th May 2010. The defendants seek an unless order that the report be provided within 14 days.’

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 697 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Professional Negligence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406653

Salford City Council v Mullen: CA 30 Mar 2010

The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that such decisions, being decisions affecting their Article 8 rights must be subject to challenge.
The court considered the situation at Human Rights law, where local authorities brought possession proceedings where the occupiers have no statutory security of tenure.

Judges:

Waller LJ VP, Arden LJ, Patten LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 336, [2010] NPC 43, [2011] 1 All ER 119, [2010] 15 EG 95 (CS), [2010] BLGR 559, [2010] HLR 35

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8(1), County Courts Act 1984 38, Housing Act 1985 79, Demoted Tenancies (Review of Decisions) (England) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1679)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock CA 31-Jul-2009
The court considered the status in law of ‘demoted tenants’, those who had been secure social housing tenants, but who had only limited security after being found to have behaved anti-socially. The tenant had been refused an opportunity by the . .
Cited – McLellan v Bracknell Forest Borough Council; Reigate Borough Council v Benfield and Another CA 16-Oct-2001
The tenant was issued with a notice to quit for unpaid rent, within the first year, during an ‘introductory tenancy.’ She sought judicial review on the basis that the reduced security of tenure infringed her human rights.
Held: Review was . .
Cited – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
Cited – Smart v Sheffield City Council: Central Sunderland Housing Company Limited v Wilson CA 25-Jan-2002
Each tenant had become unintentionally homeless, and was granted a non-secure tenancy of accommodation under section 193. Complaints of nuisance were received from neighbours. Possession orders were obtained and now challenged under the Human Rights . .
Cited – Doran v Liverpool City Council CA 3-Mar-2009
The claimant sought to set aside an order requiring him to give up possession of a caravan pitch held under the 1968 Act.
Held: The decision to serve a notice to quit which was reasonable on the facts known to the local authority at the time . .

Cited by:

Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Appeal from – London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc SC 23-Feb-2011
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406570

Hussain and Another v Sarkar and Another: CA 29 Jan 2010

The claimant sought damages saying that in a traffic accident, the first defendant driver had driven into the rear of their car. The second defendant asked for permission to amend its peading to allege fraud, that the accident had been staged, but permission was refused. It now appealed.
Held: Sufficient questions had been raised about the circumstances surrounding the accident to justify the defendant being allowed to proceed with its allegations at trial. The appeal succeeded. A retrial should be ordered.

Judges:

Mummery, Toulson, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 301

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Medcalf v Mardell, Weatherill and Another HL 27-Jun-2002
The appellants were barristers against whom wasted costs orders had been made. They appealed. They had made allegations of fraud in pleadings, but without being able to provide evidence to support the allegation. This was itself a breach of the Bar . .
Cited – Cobbold v London Borough of Greenwich CA 9-Aug-1999
The tenant had sought an order against the council landlord for failure to repair her dwelling. The defendant appealed refusal of leave to amend the pleadings in anticipation of the trial, now due to start on the following day.
Held: Leave was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406406

Pocket Kings Ltd v Safenames Ltd and Another: ChD 16 Oct 2009

Claimant’s application for summary judgment in default of acknowledgment of service – forfeiture of internet domain names

Judges:

Michael Furness QC

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2529 (Ch), [2010] 2 WLR 1110, [2010] Ch 438

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

State Immunity Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property, Licensing

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.377218

Holroyd v Marshall: 22 Dec 1860

EngR Where equitable assignees of chattels to be subsequently acquired had neglected to perfect their titIe to the chattels by any act tantamount to taking possession before the chattels were taken under an execution : Held, that the title of the execution creditor was to be preferred.

Citations:

[1860] EngR 1305, (1860) 2 De G F and J 596, (1860) 45 ER 752

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.286144

Collins v Godefroy: KBD 1831

An attorney, who has attended on subpoena as a witness in a civil suit, cannot maintain an action against the party who subpoenaed him, for compensation for loss of time.

Judges:

Lord Tenterden CJ

Citations:

[1831] EWHC KB J18, [1831] 109 ER 1040, (1831) 1 B and Ad 950

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.264572

Stretton v Stubbs Ltd: CA 28 Feb 1905

(1905) The plaintiff, an artist had a judgment against him by a picture frame maker. It had been entered by consent under an agreement with the plaintiff’s solicitor that no publicity should be given to the result of the action. Nevertheless, the defendants published the judgment in Stubbs’ Weekly Gazette and the plaintiff said that their canvaser had gone round to tradesmen pointing out the importance of subscribing to the Gazette, directing their attention to the plaintiff’s name and saying that he could not be worthy of credit. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff of andpound;25. As part of his case the plaintiff had relied upon the contract between himself and the solicitor for the plaintiff in the City of London Court action that the judgment should not be made public. This contract was contained in two without prejudice letters. The offer was contained in a letter from the plaintiff and the acceptance in a letter from the solicitor. The judge permitted the second letter to be put in evidence and read but refused to admit the first letter which had contained admissions by the plaintiff that he was absolutely insolvent.
Held: The first letter was to be read. Matthew LJ said that in his opinion ‘a letter written with regard to an action and marked ‘without prejudice’ was only privileged for the purpose of that particular action.’

Judges:

Sir Richard Henn Collins MR, Matthew LJ

Citations:

Times 28-Feb-1905

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Rush and Tompkins Ltd v Greater London Council and Another HL 1988
Use of ‘Without Prejudice Save as to Costs”
A sub-contractor sought payment from the appellants under a construction contract for additional expenses incurred through disruption and delay. The appellants said they were liable to pay the costs, and were entitled to re-imbursement from the . .
Cited – Rush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council HL 3-Nov-1988
The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.253694

Filmlab Systems International Ltd and Another v Pennington and Others: ChD 9 Jul 1993

In civil litigation an application for a wasted costs order should only save in exceptional circumstances, be made after the trial. The court mentioned several dangers if applications were made at an interlocutory stage, among them the risk that a party’s advisers might feel they could no longer act, so that the party could in effect be deprived of the advisers of his choice.

Judges:

Aldous J

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-1993, [1994] 4 All ER Ch D 673

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – White v White (Deceased) CA 20-Jan-2003
An appeal was made against an order refusing an award of costs against solicitors for the opposing party.
Held: The judge’s order saying that an aplication should have been forewarned earlier was made within his discretion, and was . .
Cited – Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd CA 26-Jan-1994
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders
Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.80522

Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: ChD 19 Feb 2015

The claimant said that interest rate manipulation by the defendant bank had caused it losses in interest rate derivatives and SWAP agreements. In the course of that the claimants sought disclosure of internal documents. The defendants resisted saying that disclosure might leave them open to further charges by banking regulators.
Held: Inspection was ordered.

Judges:

Birss J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 321 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and Another v Total UK Ltd and others Comc 22-Jul-2008
The court was asked whether it could go behind an affidavit sworn by a person claiming litigation privilege, and, if so, in what circumstances and by what means.
Held: The burden of proof is on the party claiming privilege to establish it; An . .
Cited – Science Research Council v Nasse; BL Cars Ltd (formerly Leyland Cars) v Voias HL 1-Nov-1979
Recent statutes had given redress to anyone suffering unlawful discrimination on account of race sex or trade union activities. An employee sought discovery of documents from his employer which might reveal such discrimination.
Held: The court . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Health and Others v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others CA 22-Oct-2013
The French company defendants had been ordered to disclose documents which they said might expose them to criminal prosecution in France. They now appealed.
Held: The court was not obliged to make use of the Council Regulation. Orders for . .
Cited – Morris v Banque Arab et Internationale d’Investissement ChD 2000
The parties had exchanged lists of documents but one side objected to inspection of a number of them on the ground that it would put them in breach of French law.
Held: There was discretion to be exercised. Neuberger J ordered inspection . .
Cited – Graiseley Properties Ltd and Others v Barclays Bank Plc and Others ComC 24-Jan-2013
The claimants sought damages alleging that the defendant bank had manipulated the LIBOR bank rate whch was used to set interest rates on its loan. The defendant sought guidance as to the form to be taken by its electronic disclosures, and an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Banking

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.543058

Deg-Deutsche Investitions – Undentwicklungs Gesellschaft Gmbh v Thomas Koshy: ChD 13 Dec 2004

The parties had been involved in protracted litigation where a freezing order had been made to support a claim which was eventually dismissed. The claimant sought to have set aside an earlier order made ordering him to pay costs on failing to have the order discharged.
Held: The order had been made under the former Supreme Court Rules. The power under the new rules to revoke an order made under the rules did not operate retrospectively to allow revocation of an order made under the earlier rules.

Judges:

Hart J

Citations:

Times 07-Jan-2005, [2004] EWHC 2896 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 3.1(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Per incuriam – Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly the National Home Loans Corporation Plc) v Pender and Pender ChD 25-Nov-2003
Section 114 of the 1925 Act has no application to Registered Land. It provides for a transfer ‘unless a contrary intention is expressed’ in the mortgage. Thus if section 114 applies, all depends upon the true construction of the mortgage. The power . .
See Also – Koshy v Deg-Deutsche Investitions – Undentwicklungs Gesellschaft Gmbh CA 24-Nov-2003
One party had been ordered to pay the costs of an unsuccessful attempt to discharge injunctions and strike out the action. The applications failed (badly) and the costs were ordered to be taxed and paid forthwith. Later there was a trial, and the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Koshy v Deg-Deutsche Investitions-Und Entwicklungsgesellschaft Mbh ChD 20-Jan-2006
. .
See Also – Koshy v Deg-Deutsche Investitions-Und Entwicklungsgesellschaft Mbh and Another CA 5-Feb-2008
Application to set aside earlier order saying that it had been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentation or false evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Civil Procedure Rules, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.222532

Morris v Banque Arab et Internationale d’Investissement: ChD 2000

The parties had exchanged lists of documents but one side objected to inspection of a number of them on the ground that it would put them in breach of French law.
Held: There was discretion to be exercised. Neuberger J ordered inspection bearing in mind the relevance of the documents and very small risk of prosecution.

Judges:

Neuberger J

Citations:

[2000] CP Rep 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Morris v Banque Arab et Internationale D’Investissment SA (No 2) ChD 26-Oct-2000
For an order to be made under the section, and a contribution to the shortfall on insolvency made, it was necessary to show that the person against whom the order was sought had in some way participated in the fraudulent activity. It was not . .
Cited – Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ChD 19-Feb-2015
The claimant said that interest rate manipulation by the defendant bank had caused it losses in interest rate derivatives and SWAP agreements. In the course of that the claimants sought disclosure of internal documents. The defendants resisted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.543479

Companies Court (Skeleton Arguments: Time Limits): ChD 25 Jun 1999

Parties to matters before the Companies Court of the Chancery Division are consistently failing to lodge skeleton arguments within the time limits set down. The judge hearing the case is prescribe what sanction is to be applied to the parties in the case as to costs adjournment or otherwise.

Citations:

Times 25-Jun-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.79431

Smith v Kvaerner Cementation Foundations Ltd and Another: CA 21 Mar 2006

The claimant appealed a decision on his personal injuries claim saying that the recorder who hear the case was head of the chambers in which counsel for both sides were members, and that the recorder had himself acted in the past for the defendant. He said this created an apparent risk of bias.
Held: Sufficient doubt was created and the trial must be set aside. It was not for counsel to seek to influence his client as to his personal knowledge of the recorder when the client complained of a possible bias in the court. Once the issue was raised the trial should have proceeded only on the client’s waiver. That waiver should have been given without counsel’s influence.

Judges:

Lord Justice May Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales Sir Anthony Clarke MR

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 242, Times 11-Apr-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Legal professions

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.239221

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov and Another: ComC 8 Jun 2018

Application by the claimant for an order that the second defendant provide full and proper disclosure regarding the way in which his legal expenses in these proceedings are being funded.

Judges:

Patricia Robertson QC

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1368 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.642034

Nuttal and Another v Kerr and Another: QBD 25 Jul 2019

The defendant sought to appeal from a judgment given only after a long delay.
Held: Permission to appeal was necessary, and given, but the appeal itself failed: ‘(1) There is no evidence of fault of the Judge at any or any material point other than the delay itself;
(2) The Applicant has been unable to pinpoint any particular findings of fact which may be open to question whether by reason of the delay or at all;
(3) There is no reason to believe that the Judge did not reach the right conclusion on all of the findings and in the decision that the Claimants were entitled to rescind the Agreement and the relief which he ordered.pounds

Judges:

Freedman J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1977 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Goose v Wilson Sandford and Co and Mainon CA 13-Feb-1998
A judge was properly criticised for failing to write up a judgment when the witness’ evidence was still fresh in his mind. A two year delay required a re-trial.
Peter Gibson LJ explained the potential effect of delay on the formulation and . .
Cited – Bond v Dunster Properties Ltd and Others CA 21-Apr-2011
The defendant appealed against the judge’s findings as to fact delivered some 22 months after the hearing.
Held: The appeal failed. Though such a delay must require the court carefully to investigate the judgment, it did not of itself . .
Cited – Onassis and Calogeropoulos v Vergottis HL 1968
Lord Pearce (dissenting) discussed the assessment of a witness’ oral evidence: ‘Credibility involves wider problems than mere demeanour which is mostly concerned with whether the witness appears to be telling the truth as he now believes it to be. . .
Cited – Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (‘The Ocean Frost’) CA 1985
Proof of corruption not needed for bribe
In establishing that money was paid as an improper inducement or bribe, proof of corruptness or a corrupt motive was unnecessary.
When a court looks at a decision of a judge at first instance, the court stressed the need to look at the . .
Cited – Dadourian Group International Inc and others v Simms and others CA 13-Mar-2009
Arden LJ summarised the approach to be taken by a court faced with an allegation of fraud: ‘Their Lordships affirmed the decision in Re H and provided an explanation of what Lord Nicholls’ judgment meant. Baroness Hale (with whom the other Law Lords . .
Cited – Tex Services Ltd v Shibani Knitting Co Ltd PC 10-Nov-2016
(Mauritius) Lord Mance approved, a submission by Counsel for Shibani, as follows, namely ‘the advantage which a trial judge enjoys in relation to matters of fact may be weakened by such a delay and that such delay calls for special care when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.641723

Iraqi Ministry of Defence and Others v Arcepey Shipping Co SA, The Angel Bell: 1980

The court considered whether a defendant should be allowed to pay his debts as they fell due despite an asset freezing order.
Held: The Mareva jurisdiction should not ‘improve the position of claimants’. Rather, it should prevent the injustice of a defendant removing his assets from the jurisdiction which may have otherwise been available to satisfy a judgment.
Robert Goff J said: ‘the point of the Mareva jurisdiction is to proceed by stealth, to pre-empt any action by the defendant to remove his assets from the jurisdiction. To achieve that result the injunction must be in a wide form because, for example, a transfer by the defendant to a collaborator in the jurisdiction could lead to the transfer of the assets abroad by that collaborator. But it does not follow that, having established the injunction, the court should not thereafter permit a qualification to it to allow a transfer of assets by the defendant if the defendant satisfies the court that he requires the money for a purpose which does not conflict with the policy underlying the Mareva jurisdiction . . It does not make commercial sense that a party claiming unliquidated damages should, without himself proceeding to judgment, prevent the defendant from using his assets to satisfy his debts as they fall due and so put him in the position of having to allow his creditors to proceed to judgment with consequent loss of credit and of commercial standing . . All the interveners [the defendant’s creditors who had lent money to the defendant for the purpose of purchasing ships, including the ship in the case at hand] are asking [in their application to vary the injunction so that they could, as equitable mortgagees of the defendant’s ship as well as assignees of the insurance policies of the said ship, be paid the proceeds of these policies as repayment of the debt due under the loan] is that the defendants should be free to repay such a loan if they think fit to do so, not that the loan transaction should be enforced. For a defendant to be free to repay a loan in such circumstances is not inconsistent with the policy underlying the Mareva jurisdiction. He is not in such circumstances seeking to avoid his responsibilities to the plaintiff if the latter should ultimately obtain a judgment; on the contrary, he is seeking in good faith to make payments which he considers he should make in the ordinary course of business. I cannot see that the Mareva jurisdiction should be allowed to prevent such a payment. To allow it to do so would be to stretch it beyond its original purpose so that instead of preventing abuse it would rather prevent businessmen conducting their businesses as they are entitled to do .

Judges:

Robert Goff J

Citations:

[1981] 1 QB 65, [1980] 2 WLR 488, [1980] 1 All ER 480

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Raja v Van Hoogstraten and others ChD 5-Apr-2006
Application to discharge asset freezing order.
Held: The defendant had displayed a readiness to do what was necessary to avoid compliance with court orders. The application (and others) were dismissed. . .
Cited – Halifax Plc v Chandler CA 13-Nov-2001
The claimant had sought payment of a substantial shortfall debt from the defendant after repossessing and selling the defendant’s home. It compromised that debt, and was paid, but now sought to re-open the compromise on the basis of an alleged . .
Cited – A J Bekhor and Co Ltd v Bilton CA 6-Feb-1981
The plaintiff had applied for disclosure of assets under the Rules of the Supreme Court in support of a Mareva freezing order. The rules were held not to provide any such power: disclosure of assets could not be obtained as part of discovery as the . .
Cited – Lenkor Energy Trading Dmcc v Puri ComC 9-Aug-2022
‘Angel Bell’ exception to world wide freezing order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.241551

Owens v Noble: CA 18 Mar 2010

In its principal judgment the court referred the case back to the judge to assess whether one or more of the parties had committed a fraud on the court. The court now explained its answer to submissions made on the draft judgment.
Held: It was not wrong to remit the case to the same judge: ‘the judge will decide the issue of fraud on the evidence which is put before him. He will of course have to compare that with the evidence given at the original hearing. He will be in a far better position to make that comparison than any other judge as his memory will be refreshed by re-reading the reports and reading the transcripts; no other judge has any memory to rely on. Moreover, the judge was conspicuously fair at the first hearing; neither party sought to criticise his judgment in any way.’

Judges:

Sedley, Smith, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 284, [2010] WLR (D) 73

Links:

Bailii, Times, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Judgment – Owens v Noble CA 10-Mar-2010
The respondent had been awarded substantial damages after an accident for which the appellant was responsible. The appellant now said that the claimant had exaggerated his injuries and misled the judge. The defendant argued that the correct approach . .

Cited by:

Cited – Dickinson and Others v Tesco Plc and Others CA 4-Feb-2013
The court considered the practice on claims for hire of a replacement car on credit terms after a road traffic accident. The defendant resisted paying for the credit where the claimant could have hired without a credit arrangement. The defendants . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.403356

Red River UK Ltd and Another v Sheikh and Another: ChD 24 Nov 2009

First defendant’s application for judge to recuse himself on the grounds of alleged race discrimination.
Held: Refused: ‘I have done my best to consider and give proper attention to the matters upon which she addressed me yesterday, but I have concluded that there is nothing which should cause me to hold that the test for apparent bias is satisfied. Nor am I aware of any other reason why I should recuse myself. In those circumstances, it is my duty to dismiss the application.’

Judges:

Henderson J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3257 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.384130

Beale v MacGregor: 1886

The court has an inherent power to prevent the abuse of proceedings and to avoid oppression.

Citations:

[1886] 2 TLR 311

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Leicester City Council v Aldwinckle CA 1991
A tenant was evicted while absent from the premises for some months through illness and who, following her breach of the suspended possession order, received no notice whatever either of the council’s application for a warrant, or of the issue of . .
Cited – Jephson Homes Housing Association v Moisejevs and Another CA 1-Nov-2000
A possession warrant, properly issued and executed in ignorance of a payment into court by the tenant was not an abuse of process. The tenant had paid funds into court in the mistaken belief that this would be effective to set aside the warrant. She . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.187050

Arora v A R Erdozain and others (Trading As Solomon Hare and Co): CA 22 May 1997

Appeal against automatic strike out.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1756

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rastin v British Steel Plc, Todd v Evans, Adams v Geest Plc CA 18-Feb-1994
An action which had been automatically struck out, may be re-instated if there had been good cause for the delay. ‘The proper approach to the exercise of any judicial discretion must be governed by the legal context in which the discretion arises.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.142152

M v B and Others: FD 28 Jul 2005

A declaration was sought that a woman of 23 lacked the necessary capacity to marry.
Held: A declaration and injunction was granted to prevent the marriage. Even though there was a substantial disagreement of fact, a part 8 procedure was correct.

Judges:

Sumner J

Citations:

Times 10-Aug-2005, [2005] EWHC 1681 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Family, Health

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.408706

Malik v Kalyan: CA 4 Mar 2010

The appellant challenged the finding against her saying that the judge had not allowed her to complete her cross-examination of the defendant.
Held: In civil matters a judge should be quite clear first of the direction in which questioning was leading before halting a line of cross examination. The matter was remitted for reconsideration after completion of the cross examination.

Judges:

Sedley, Rimer, Etherton LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 113

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.402496

Binyan Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: CA 26 Feb 2010

The claimant had sought public disclosure of documents supplied to the defendant by US security services which might support his claim that he had been tortured by the US, and that the defendant knew of it. The draft judgment was to be handed down but counsel for the defendant had written requesting reconsideration of a paragraph in the judgment of the Master of the Rolls which was severely critical of the security services. A further draft was provided for comments, but the judgement was published before the other parties had been given opportunity to comment.
Held: It was proper to make such an approach, and that was one purpose of providing draft judgments. Draft judgments are necessarily circulated in confidence. It follows that all communications in response are covered by the same principle. In this case that confidentiality was broken when the letter from Mr Sumption to the court was circulated beyond the parties to the litigation, and published. The procedure now having been competed, Lord Neuberger attached the final form of the relevant paragraph of the judgment to this judgment.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 158, [2010] 3 WLR 554, [2010] 4 All ER 177, [2010] CP Rep 28

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Robinson v Fernsby, Scott-Kilvert CA 19-Dec-2003
The judge had drafted his judgment and sent the drafts to the parties for comment. He then received additional written representations from one party, from which he realised that he had made an error, and issued a corrected judgment which a . .
Cited – Edwards, Regina (on the application of) v Environment Agency HL 16-Apr-2008
The applicants sought to challenge the grant of a permit by the defendant to a company to operate a cement works, saying that the environmental impact assessment was inadequate.
Held: The Agency had been justified in allowing the application . .
See also – 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 . .
See also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) Admn 29-Aug-2008
The claimant sought release of documents so that he could defend himself in a tribunal in the US. He said the documents would support his assertion that he had been subject to extraordinary rendition and had ‘disappeared’ for two years. Redactions . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Admn 22-Oct-2008
The claimant was held by the US. He claimed he had been tortured by them, and sought release of dicuments which allow him to present his case. The respondent sought to prevent disclosure using Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificates.
Held: . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 5) Admn 16-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to assert that he had been tortured whilst held by the US Authorities. He sought publication of an unredacted report supplied by the US security services to the respondent. The respondent argued that the full publication was . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (60 Admn 19-Nov-2009
The respondent had over time refused to allow publication of parts of a document disclosed to him by US security services. The court had previously delivered redacted judgments, and now asked whether and to what extent the redacted parts should be . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 10-Feb-2010
The claimant had sought discovery and publication of materials supplied to the defendant by US security services which, he said, would support his allegations that he had been tortured by the US and that this had been known to the defendant.

Cited by:

Cited – McKeown v British Horseracing Authority Admn 12-Mar-2010
The judge had been asked to revise his draft judgment. The court set out the circumstances under which a draft judgment might be amended and why in this case he had rejected the request save as to clerical errors. . .
Cited – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 26-Jul-2011
The claimant alleged defamation and malicious falsehood in an article published and written by the defendants. She complained that she was said to have fabricated an interview with the second defendant for her book. An interview of sorts had now . .
Cited – Coward v Harraden QBD 2-Dec-2011
Parties had fought each other in wide ranging litigation. The claimant found covert surveillance devices in his home, and discovered evidence that the defendant may have information as to who had placed them. Earlier orders had been made for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Media

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.401841

Linsen International Ltd and Others v Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd and Another: ComC 19 Feb 2010

The net book value of a company’s assets is not the appropriate figure for the court to consider when considering whether or not there are assets sufficient to meet a potential claim.

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 303 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Shepherd Construction Ltd v Berners (BVI) Ltd and Another TCC 25-Mar-2010
The defendants sought a release from an asset freezing order, saying that there was no good reason to anticipate any dissipation of assets. An action between the parties had been settled on terms, but the defendant had not met payments. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.401906

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2010

The parties had settled their disagreement, but now disputed the interpretation of the settlement. The defendant sought to be allowed to give in evidence correspondence leading up to the settlement which had been conducted on a without prejudice basis.
Held: The evidence was not admissible. There was no additional class of situation where without prejudice evidence could be admitted namely the existence of an arguably relevant fact arising from the without prejudice discussions.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Longmore and Lord Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 79, [2010] CP Rep 24

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Admiral Management Services Ltd v Para-Protect Europe Ltd and Others ChD 4-Mar-2002
The claimants suspected the defendants of wrongfully using their confidential information. Their staff made an initial investigation. They obtained a search and seizure order; and the material seized was examined by the staff. A Tomlin Order was . .
Appeal from – Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd and Others ComC 29-Jul-2009
The parties disputed the admissibility in a dispute about the effect of a settlement agreement of evidence of without prejudice exchanges between the parties before it was signed. . .
Cited – Walker v Wilsher CA 1889
Letters or conversations which were written or declared to be ‘without prejudice’ may not be taken into consideration in determining whether there is good cause for depriving a successful litigant of his costs.
Lord Esher MR said: ‘The letters . .
Cited – Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others HL 1-Jul-2009
Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract
The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations.
Held: . .
Cited – Ofulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .
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 – Muller and Another v Linsley and Mortimer (A Firm) CA 8-Dec-1994
The plaintiff sued his former solicitors for professional negligence. The damages he sought to recover related to loss he suffered when dismissed as a director of a private company leading to a forced sale of his shares in the company. The plaintiff . .
Cited – Rush and Tompkins Ltd v Greater London Council and Another HL 1988
Use of ‘Without Prejudice Save as to Costs”
A sub-contractor sought payment from the appellants under a construction contract for additional expenses incurred through disruption and delay. The appellants said they were liable to pay the costs, and were entitled to re-imbursement from the . .
Cited – Tomlin v Standard Telephones and Cables Ltd CA 1969
Without prejudice material can be admitted if the issue is whether or not the negotiations resulted in an agreed settlement. Without considering the communications in question it would be impossible to decide whether there was a concluded settlement . .
Cited – Cutts v Head and Another CA 7-Dec-1983
There had been a trial of 35 days regarding rights of way over land, which had proved fruitless, and where some orders had been made without jurisdiction. The result had been inconclusive. The costs order was now appealed, the plaintiff complaining . .
Cited – Sport Internationaal Bussum BV v Inter-Footwear Ltd CA 1984
There had been a contractual licence to use names and trademarks for sports shoes. An earlier action between the parties had been stayed on the terms scheduled to a Tomlin order, which provided for Inter-Footwear to pay andpound;105,000 in three . .
Cited – Instance and Others v Denny Bros Printing Ltd and Others ChD 3-Feb-2000
The dispute arose between parties to without prejudice communications or who had obtained documents from such persons and were commercially connected with them.
Held: An implied agreement would bind them as parties or by reason of the source . .
Cited – Hodgkinson and Corby Ltd and Another v Wards Mobility Services Ltd ChD 6-Nov-1996
The claimants brought a claim in passing-off first obtaining an interim injunction but then failing at trial. The defendants then claimed under the undertaking in damages given. The claimants now sought to say that the injunction could have been . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd and Others SC 27-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether facts which (a) are communicated between the parties in the course of without prejudice negotiations and (b) would, but for the without prejudice rule, be admissible as part of the factual matrix or surrounding . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.396768

Swiss Army Knife: ChD 1996

Jacob J said: ‘six months is a very generous period for the filing of evidence’.

Judges:

Jacob J

Citations:

[1996] RPC 507

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Levy – Groenfeld (Extension Of Time) TMR 2-Jul-1998
Application No: 1343470 – Revocation. The claimant appealed refusal of an extension of time to file their evidence.
Held: The hearing was by way of appal against an order by which the appointed person had exercised his discretion. That . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.198317

Garnham v Millar and Others: ChD 11 Feb 2015

Application by defendant solicitors to have the claimaagainst them struck out and c=for a civil restraint order against the claimant.
Held: The claim was dismissed as totally without merit. The court was satisfied that four other claims by the claimant against the defendants were similarly devoid of merit. An order for an extended civil restraint order was made.

Judges:

Newey J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 274 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.542489

Midgulf International Ltd v Groupe Chimique Tunisien: CA 10 Feb 2010

The claimant, based in Cypress, appealed against refusal of an anti-suit injunction. It had contracted with the state-owned Tunisian company defendant under a contract applying English law, and providing for arbitration of disputes. The defendant had wanted to proceed for a declaration in the Tunisian courts that the arbitration clause was void or inapplicable.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The contract included an English law clause and an English arbitration clause. Where there was a valid English arbitration agreement, it was repudiatory conduct for one of the parties to ask a foreign court to declare that there was no such agreement.
In the course of the judgment, Mummery LJ deplored the huge excess of papers filed in the appeal. The case was as to the application of standard contract rules for which no more than 10 pages would have been adequate. Instead the court received 15 lever arch files of papers nearly all of which had not been referred to or used in any way.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Toulson and Lord Justice Patten

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 66

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Midgulf International Ltd v Groupe Chimiche Tunisien ComC 13-Jul-2009
The claimant, based in Cypress sought an anti-suit injunction. The defendant a state-owned Tunisian company intended to request a Tunisian court to determine that the contract had no valid arbitration clause. The contract provided that it was to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396714

Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: CA 10 Feb 2010

The claimant had sought discovery and publication of materials supplied to the defendant by US security services which, he said, would support his allegations that he had been tortured by the US and that this had been known to the defendant.
Held: The actual threat to the arrangements for disclosure of secret materials between the US and UK might be affected but would not be damaged substantially damaged by disclosure which has already been given made in proceedings in the US.
Lord Judge CJ said: ‘The public must be able to enter any court to see that justice is being done in that court, by a tribunal conscientiously doing its best to do justice according to law.’ and ‘In litigation, particularly litigation between the executive and any of its manifestations and the citizen, the principle of open justice represents an element of democratic accountability, and the vigorous manifestation of the principle of freedom of expression. Ultimately it supports the rule of law itself.’

Judges:

Lord Judge, LCJ, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, Master of the Rolls and Sir Anthony May, President of the Queens Bench Division

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 65, [2011] QB 218

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – 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 . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) Admn 29-Aug-2008
The claimant sought release of documents so that he could defend himself in a tribunal in the US. He said the documents would support his assertion that he had been subject to extraordinary rendition and had ‘disappeared’ for two years. Redactions . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Admn 22-Oct-2008
The claimant was held by the US. He claimed he had been tortured by them, and sought release of dicuments which allow him to present his case. The respondent sought to prevent disclosure using Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificates.
Held: . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 5) Admn 16-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to assert that he had been tortured whilst held by the US Authorities. He sought publication of an unredacted report supplied by the US security services to the respondent. The respondent argued that the full publication was . .
See Also – Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (60 Admn 19-Nov-2009
The respondent had over time refused to allow publication of parts of a document disclosed to him by US security services. The court had previously delivered redacted judgments, and now asked whether and to what extent the redacted parts should be . .

Cited by:

See Also – Binyan Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 26-Feb-2010
The claimant had sought public disclosure of documents supplied to the defendant by US security services which might support his claim that he had been tortured by the US, and that the defendant knew of it. The draft judgment was to be handed down . .
Cited – Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others CA 4-May-2010
Each claimant had been captured and mistreated by the US government, and claimed the involvement in and responsibility for that mistreatment by the respondents. The court was asked whether a court in England and Wales, in the absence of statutory . .
Cited – Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, International

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396715

Porton Capital Technology Funds and Another v 3M UK Holdings Ltd and Another: ComC 2 Feb 2010

The confidentiality obligation owed by a witness engaged by a party does not cease following disclosure in accordance with the CPR

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 114 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

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

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396525

Blue Sky One Ltd and Others v Blue Airways Llc and Others: ComC 1 Feb 2010

The court gave reasons for holding one defendant in contempt, and debarring them from taking part, having failed to comply with a grounding order for one of the aircraft at issue.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 128 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Contract, Contempt of Court

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396472

Lloyd v Google Llc: CA 2 Oct 2019

Claimants, on behalf of millions of Apple users, challenged the collection by the defendant of details of their internet activity. The claimant did not have instructions from other users, and Google objected that there was no evidence of distress in any claimant.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge ought to have held: (a) that a claimant can recover damages for loss of control of their data under section 13 of DPA, without proving pecuniary loss or distress, and (b) that the members of the class that Mr Lloyd seeks to represent did have the same interest under CPR Part 19.6(1) and were identifiable.

Judges:

Dame Victoria Sharp P QBD, Sir Geoffrey Vos Chancellor, David LJ

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1599

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information, Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.641797