Agents Mutual Ltd v Moginnie James Ltd: ChD 30 Dec 2016

Judges:

Master Matthews

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3384 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577837

[1837] EngR 298, (1837-1840) 9 Sim 253, (1837) 59 ER 355 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.313415

Abbotts v Kelly: 24 Jan 1837

A distringas cannot be issued after the expiration of the four months during which the writ of summons is returnable.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 425, (1837) 3 Bing NC 478, (1837) 132 ER 494 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.313542

England and Wales

Costs, Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.655186

Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd v Al Sanea: ComC 29 Oct 2021

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Bryan

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 2937 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.671023

Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd and Others v Mastercard Incorporated and Others: CA 13 Jan 2022

Whether service of an unsealed amended claim form is good service and, if it is not, whether the failure to serve a sealed claim form is an error of procedure capable of rectification under CPR 3.10.

Judges:

Sir Julian Flaux, Chancellor of the High Court
Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing
And
Lord Justice Birss

Citations:

[2022] EWCA Civ 14

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 3.10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.671054

Griffith’s Fine: 8 May 1835

Citations:

[1835] EngR 693, (1835) 1 Bing NC 720, (1835) 131 ER 1294

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.316201

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.602674

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.353344

Elliston v Berryman: 7 May 1850

Citations:

[1850] EngR 520, (1850) 15 QB 205, (1850) 117 ER 436

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.297867

Appeal from – Connelly v RTZ Corporation Plc CA 29-Sep-1995
Availability of legal aid to a party is not a relevant consideration to rules of forum non conveniens. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Malekout v Medical Sickness Annuity and Life Assurance Society Limited CA 21-May-1998
The plaintiff sought to appeal against a stay of his action so that it could be referred to arbitration. His claim was under insurance policies containing clauses providing for arbitration of disputes.
Held: The judge had failed to take . .
Cited – Pacific International Sports Clubs Ltd v Soccer Marketing International Ltd and Others ChD 24-Jul-2009
The parties disputed ownership of shares in the football club Dynamo Kiev. Claims were to be made under Ukrainian company law and in equity. The claimant (a company registered in Mauritius) sought to proceed here. The defendants (largely companies . .
Cited – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.158908

Swain v Hillman: CA 21 Oct 1999

Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed

The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear words. The judge need not and should not examine carefully at this stage issues which should properly be investigated only at trial. He should not conduct a ‘mini-trial’.
If a claimant has a case which is bound to fail, then it is in his interest to know that that is the position as soon as possible but Lord Woolf also stressed that the case had to be a plain case.
CS Lord Woolf discussed the power to dismiss a claim summarily: ‘It enables the court to dispose summarily of both claims or defences which have no real prospect of being successful. The words ‘no real prospect of succeeding’ do not need any amplification, they speak for themselves. The word ‘real’ distinguishes fanciful prospects of success . . they direct the court to the need to see whether there is a ‘realistic’ as opposed to a ‘fanciful’ prospect of success.’ and
‘It is important that a judge in appropriate cases should make use of the powers contained in Part 24. In doing so he or she gives effect to the overriding objectives contained in Part 1. It saves expense; it achieves expedition; it avoids the court’s resources being used up on cases where this serves no purpose, and I would add, generally, that it is in the interests of justice. If a claimant has a case which is bound to fail, then it is in the claimant’s interests to know as soon as possible that that is the position. Useful though the power is under Pt 24, it is important that it is kept to its proper role. It is not meant to dispense with the need for a trial where there are issues which should be investigated at the trial . . The proper disposal of an issue under Pt 24 does not involve the judge conducting a mini-trial, that is not the object of the provisions; it is to enable cases, where there is no real prospect of success either way, to be disposed of summarily.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR

Citations:

Times 04-Nov-1999, [2001] 1 All ER 91, [2001] CP Rep 16, [2000] PIQR 51, [1999] CPLR 779, [1999] EWCA Civ 3053

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 24.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Taylor and others v Midland Bank Trust Company Limited CA 21-Jul-1999
Stuart-Smith LJ rationalised the possible conflict between Part 24 and the practice direction to Part 24 in its original form by saying that the correct view of the effect of the practice direction is to be gleaned from the heading to the paragraph . .

Cited by:

Cited – Parsons Plastics (Research and Development) Ltd v Purac Ltd CA 12-Apr-2002
The claimants were main contractors on a construction project. The respondents were sub-contractors. After difficulties, the sub-contractor was ejected from the site. The issue was as to the jurisdiction of the adjudicator. Was the project, to . .
Cited – E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another CA 4-Apr-2003
The rules contained two occasions on which a court would consider dismissal of a claim as having ‘no real prospect’ of success.
Held: The only significant difference between CPR 24.2 and 13.3(1), is that under the first the overall burden of . .
Cited – William Browning, Maureen Browning v Messrs Brachers (A Firm) QBD 15-May-2003
The claimants sought damages for professional negligence, in having failed to pursue a claim for professional negligence against a previous firm of solicitors who had acted for the claimant. . .
Cited – Equitable Life Assurance Society v Ernst and Young CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages from its accountants, saying that had they been advised of the difficulties in their financial situation, they would have been able to avoid the loss of some 2.5 billion pounds, or to sell their assets at a time when . .
Cited – Downtex v Flatley CA 2-Oct-2003
The claimants sought damages for defamation and breach of contract. The claimants had purchased a business from the defendant, which contract included a clause requiring the defendant to say nothing damaging about the business. The defendant . .
Cited – Herbert George Snell and others v Robert Young and Co Limited and others CA 21-Nov-2002
The claimants had sought damages for poisoning from organophosphates used in sheep dipping. Evidence linking the injuries to the use of the chemicals had not been found, and the actions struck out as an abuse of process. The group litigation had . .
Cited – Parks v Clout CA 10-Jun-2003
The claimant said that the respondent had obtained a grant of letters of administration, and taken a share in the estate, by fraudulently destroying the deceased’s last will. He appealed against his claim being struck out as having no realistic . .
Cited – Celador Productions Ltd v Melville ChD 21-Oct-2004
The applicants each alleged breach of copyright and misuse of confidential information in the format of the television program ‘Who wants to be a Millionaire’. The defendant appealed a refusal to strike out the claim. It was not contended that no . .
Cited – Kane v New Forest District Council CA 13-Jun-2001
A pedestrian walked from a footpath into the road and was hit by a car. She sought damages from the highway authority, saying that they had allowed vegetation to grow to an extent to make it impossible to be seen. As a second tier appeal, the . .
Cited – Rachmaninoff and Others v Sotheby’s and Another QBD 1-Mar-2005
The defendant had offered for sale by auction recently discovered works of Rachmaninoff. The claimants, descendants of the composer asserted ownership through his estate. The defendants refused to identify the seller.
Held: The claim should . .
Cited – Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd CA 16-Nov-2005
The parties had disputed payments for subcontracting work on a major project. The matter had been referred to arbitration, and the claimants now appealed refusal of leave to appeal the adjudicator’s award.
Held: The dispute was complex and . .
Cited – Henshall v General Medical Council and others CA 13-Dec-2005
The claimant had lodged a complaint against a medical practitioner. The preliminary proceedings committee had accepted evidence from the doctor, but had not given the complainant opportunity to see it and comment upon it.
Held: the rules must . .
Cited – Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council HL 5-Jul-2006
Preliminary Report of Risk – No Duty of Care
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury after the creation of water supplies which were polluted with arsenic. He said that a report had identified the risks. The defendant said that the report was preliminary only and could not found a . .
Cited – Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others ChD 7-Mar-2007
The federal government sought to recover properties from the defendants which it said were the proceeds of corrupt behaviour by the principal defendant who had been State Governor of a province. The claimant sought summary judgment.
Held: . .
Cited – Bryce Ashworth v Newnote Ltd CA 27-Jul-2007
The appellant challenged a refusal to set aside a statutory demand, in respect of his director’s loan account with the respondent company, saying the court should have accepted other accounts to set off against that debt.
Held: A statutory . .
Cited – Pegasus Management Holdings Sca and Another v Ernst and Young (A Firm) and Another ChD 11-Nov-2008
The claimants alleged professional negligence in advice given by the defendant on a share purchase, saying that it should have been structured to reduce Capital Gains Tax. The defendants denied negligence and said the claim was statute barred.
Cited – Parker and Another v SJ Berwin and Co and Another QBD 17-Dec-2008
The claimants sought damages from their former solicitors. They set out to purchase a football club, expending substantial sums for the purpose, relying on the defendants’ promised provision of service in finding and arranging the funding. They said . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Nolan v Wright ChD 26-Feb-2009
The defendant sought to re-open the question of whether the charge under which he might otherwise be liable was an extortionate credit bargain. The creditor said that that plea was time barred. The defendant argued that a finding that the agreement . .
Cited – D Pride and Partners (A Firm) and Others v Institute for Animal Health and Others QBD 31-Mar-2009
The claimants sought damages after the loss of business when the defendants’ premises were the source of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The organism had escaped from their premises via a broken drain.
Held: Much of the damage claimed . .
Cited – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd CA 4-Feb-2010
Money laundering suspicion to be explained
The customer sought to sue his bank for failing to meet his cheque. The bank sought to rely on the 2002 Act, having reported suspicious activity on freezing the account. He now appealed against summary judgment given for the bank which had refused . .
Cited – Brown ( A Minor) v Emery QBD 4-Mar-2010
The court considered an application for an interim payment to fund the purchase of suitable accommodation in which the child claimant might spend periods of time with her parents and sibling and ultimately reside on discharge, at a cost of . .
Cited – Parties Named In Schedule A v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd and Another QBD 28-May-2010
The defendant merchant banks resisted two group claims for annual bonuses for 2008 made by the employee claimants. They now sought summary judgment against the claims. The employer had declared a guaranteed minimum bonus pool available to make the . .
Cited – Kaschke v Gray and Another QBD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed against the refusal of the Master to strike out the claim in defamation in respect of a post by a third party on his unmoderated blog. The claimant said that the article accused her of an historic association with a terrorist . .
Cited – Meakin v British Broadcasting Corporation and Others ChD 27-Jul-2010
The claimant alleged that the proposal for a game show submitted by him had been used by the various defendants. He alleged breaches of copyright and of confidence. Application was now made to strike out the claim. . .
Cited – Cook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 29-Mar-2011
The claimant, an MP, complained in defamation of the defendant’s description of his rejected expenses claim regarding an assistant’s charitable donation. The paper pleaded a Reynolds defence. The claimant said that when published the defendant knew . .
Cited – Smith and Others v Ministry of Defence QBD 30-Jun-2011
Claims were made after the deaths of British troops on active service in Iraq. In one case the deaths were from detonations of improvised explosive devices, and on others as a result of friendly fire. It was said that there had been a foreseeable . .
Cited – Wyatt v Vince SC 11-Mar-2015
Long delayed ancillary relief application proceeds
The parties had divorced some 22 years before, but no ancillary relief order had been made to satisfy the application outlined in the petition. The parties when together had lived in relative poverty, but H had subsequently become wealthy. W applied . .
Cited – Dellal v Dellal and Others FD 1-Apr-2015
The families disputed a claim under the 1975 Act. The defendants now sought summary dismissal of the claim. . .
Cited – Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd ChD 2-Mar-2009
Principles Applicable on Summary Judgment Request
The court considered an application for summary judgment.
Held: Lewison J set out the principles: ‘the court must be careful before giving summary judgment on a claim. The correct approach on applications by defendants is, in my judgment, as . .
Cited – Guthrie v Morel and Others ChD 5-Nov-2015
The will had failed clearly to identify a property in Spain the subject of a bequest.
Held: Summary judgment was given. ‘It seems to me to be clear that the deceased intended by his Will to deal with his entire estate and that he intended the . .
Cited – Ali v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 27-Jan-2010
The claimant sought damages in defamation, saying that a combination of publications identified him.
Held: Eady J briefly discussed the effect of hyperlinks in the context of a dispute about meaning or reference in a defamation case. . .
Cited – Bhayani and Another v Taylor Bracewell Llp IPEC 22-Dec-2016
Distinction between reputation and goodwill
The claimant had practised independently as an employment solicitor. For a period, she was a partner with the defendant firm practising under the name ‘Bhayani Bracewell’. Having departed the firm, she now objected to the continued use of her name, . .
Cited – CXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .
Cited – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Leading Case

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.89645

U and M Mining Zambia Ltd v Konkola Copper Mines Plc: ComC 10 Oct 2014

Application on notice to continue world wide freezing orders obtained ex parte. The defendant alleged that the Claimant had not established a risk of dissipation, that it was not just and convenient to grant a WFO, and that the Claimant had failed in its duty of full and frank disclosure.

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3250 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.537517

Lubbe (Suing As Administrator Of The Estate Of Rachel Jacoba Lubbe) and 4 Others v Cape plc and Related Appeals: HL 22 Jun 2000

South African asbestosis victims suing in England submitted that to stay their proceedings in favour of the South African forum would violate their article 6 rights. A stay was refused on the non-Convention ground that, because of the lack of funding and legal representation in South Africa, they would be denied a fair trial on terms of equality with the defendant.
Held: Public Interest issues arising from the prosecution of the case should not prevent the court deciding whether a stay against action should be granted. The claimants’ right to an action in South Africa would be ineffective, and the case would be allowed to proceed in England. Public interest issues not relating to any private law interests of the parties should not affect that question.

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Bingham of Cornhill

Citations:

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At TCC – Lungowe and Others v Vedanta Resources Plc and Another TCC 27-May-2016
‘The claimants are 1,826 Zambian citizens who are residents of four communities (Shimulala, Hellen, Kakosa and Hippo Pool) in the Chingola region of Zambia. On 31 July 2015, they commenced these proceedings alleging personal injury, damage to . .
Appeal from – A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) SC 9-Sep-2013
Acquisition of Habitual Residence
Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day.
Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member . .
See Also – Lungowe and Others v Vedanta Resources Plc and Another CA 13-Oct-2017
Appeal against jurisdiction order . .
See Also – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Cited – Elmes and others v Vedanta Lisheen Mining Ltd and others 21-Feb-2014
High Court of Ireland . .
Cited – U and M Mining Zambia Ltd v Konkola Copper Mines Plc ComC 10-Oct-2014
Application on notice to continue world wide freezing orders obtained ex parte. The defendant alleged that the Claimant had not established a risk of dissipation, that it was not just and convenient to grant a WFO, and that the Claimant had failed . .
Cited – Konkola Copper Mines PLC v Nyasulu and Other 1-Apr-2015
Supreme Court of Zambia – Without any agreement otherwise it will be necessary for each individual claimant to prove both causation and loss, and to value their loss. . .
Cited – Cartel Damage Claims (CDC) Hydrogen Peroxide SA v Akzo Nobel NV ECJ 21-May-2015
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Special jurisdiction – Article 6(1) . .
Cited – AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others SC 1-Mar-2017
AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought . .
Cited – Wenlock v Moloney CA 1965
The plaintiff alleged a conspiracy to deprive him of his shares and interest in a company. Each side filed affidavit evidence raising issues of fact. With no oral evidence or cross examination on the affidavits, the Master, after a four day hearing, . .
Cited – Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office HL 6-May-1970
A yacht was damaged by boys who had escaped from the supervision of prison officers in a nearby Borstal institution. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.
Held: Any duty of a borstal officer to use . .
Cited – Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada HL 1986
Forum Non Conveniens Restated
The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum.
Held: ‘In the . .
Cited – AAA and Others v Unilever Plc and Another CA 4-Jul-2018
Sales LJ said: ‘There is no special doctrine in the law of tort of legal responsibility on the part of a parent company in relation to the activities of its subsidiary, vis-a-vis persons affected by those activities. Parent and subsidiary are . .
Cited – Ogale Community and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Another CA 14-Feb-2018
The claimants sought damages after widescale historic damage to areas of Nigeria by subsidiaries of the defendant. The defendant said that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear such a claim.
Held: The claimants had not established the . .
Cited – Rome v Punjab National Bank 1989
. .
Cited – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Cited – OJSC VTB Bank v Parline Ltd and Others ComC 25-Oct-2013
Application by the second defendant to set aside service on her out of the jurisdiction in Russia. . .
Cited – Melzer v MF Global UK ECJ 16-May-2013
Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Special jurisdiction in matters of tort, delict and quasi-delict – Cross-border participation by several persons in the same unlawful act – Possibility of establishing territorial jurisdiction according to the . .
Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Connelly v RTZ Corporation Plc and others HL 24-Jul-1997
The availability of legal aid to a party is not part of criteria for choosing jurisdiction save in exceptional circumstances.
Lord Goff discussed the Spiliada case: ‘the burden of proof rests on the defendant to persuade the court to exercise . .
Cited – Swain v Hillman CA 21-Oct-1999
Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed
The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear . .
Cited – Vava and Others v Anglo American South Africa Ltd QBD 16-Jul-2012
. .
Cited – Lubbe (Suing As Administrator Of The Estate Of Rachel Jacoba Lubbe) and 4 Others v Cape plc and Related Appeals HL 22-Jun-2000
South African asbestosis victims suing in England submitted that to stay their proceedings in favour of the South African forum would violate their article 6 rights. A stay was refused on the non-Convention ground that, because of the lack of . .
Cited – Chandler v Cape Plc CA 25-Apr-2012
. .
Cited – AK Investment CJSC v Kyrgyz Mobil Tel Ltd and Others PC 10-Mar-2011
Developing Law – Summary Procedures Very Limited
(Isle of Man) (‘Altimo’) The parties were all based in Kyrgyzstan, but the claimant sought a remedy in the Isle of Man which would be unavailable in Kyrgyzstan.
Held: Lord Collins said: ‘The general rule is that it is not normally appropriate . .
Cited – Deripaska v Cherney CA 31-Jul-2009
The court considered where the trial of the action should take place.
Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. Even though the rights sought to be protected were of a proprietary nature, where the rights could properly be said to have arisen under . .
Cited – Freeport plc v Arnoldsson ECJ 11-Oct-2007
(Opinion) The claimant sought to use article 6.1 of the Judgments Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 as a means of invoking the jurisdiction of the Swedish courts over a claim against an English company, because a Swedish company was a co-defendant. One of . .

Cited by:

See Also – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice, European, Torts – Other

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.636997

Elmes and others v Vedanta Lisheen Mining Ltd and others: 21 Feb 2014

High Court of Ireland

Judges:

Justice Ryan

Citations:

2013 11947/6/8 P, [2014] IEHC 73

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Negligence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.671688

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.520893

Frances Nedby (Wife Of The Defendant William Nedby), By John Samuel Dovey, Her Next Friend v William Nedby, Thomas Anns, And Richard Keegan, And Elizabeth Stocks: 11 Jan 1839

Citations:

[1839] EngR 361, (1839) 4 My and Cr 367, (1839) 41 ER 143

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.310893

Shepherd v Wheeler: ChD 2000

An application was made without notice for the appointment of an alleged creditor under section 116 as administrator of the deceased’s intestate estate.
Held: The court applied the standard principles of an enhanced duty of disclosure in without notice applications in probate actions.

Lawrence Collins QC
[2000] WTLR 1175
Supreme Court Act 1981 116
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Re Leguia (No. 2) CA 1936
The court revoked a grant of letters of administration with will annexed which had been granted in favour of judgment creditors on the grounds of their non-disclosure.
Lord Wright MR: ‘But the President or probate judge has discretion either to . .

Cited by:
Cited – Ghafoor and others v Cliff and others ChD 11-Apr-2006
The applicant had obtained revocation of a grant of administration ad colligenda bona in the estate, and having succeeded, now sought costs. The question was whether there had been proper reasons for the application for the grant. The deceased’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.241553

Pinner v Everett: HL 1969

The House was asked whether or not a person was ‘driving or attempting to drive’ a motor vehicle when he had been stopped by the police in connection with the illumination of his rear number plate, and the driver got out of the car and started to talk to the police and they, smelling alcohol, required him to take a blood test which he refused to do.
Held: No specimen of breath could be required if the suspicion did not arise when the person was driving or attempting to drive even though an extended meaning was given to that expression.
Lord Morris said: ‘In my view, the words ‘person driving’ in . . at least cover and include someone who has been driving but who has temporarily interrupted his driving and is about to resume driving.’ and ‘Thus, if someone intended to park his car in the road outside his home he might drive to a place outside his house and there stop; just before and at that very instant he would be a ‘person driving’ and in general terms he could be described as ‘the driver’. But if, having finished his journey, he stopped his engine and locked his car and went inside his home, he would then have ceased to be a ‘person driving’ although in general terms someone might still describe him as ‘the driver’. Questions of fact and of degree may well arise.’
Lord Reid said:’ In determining the meaning of any word or phrase in a statute the first question to ask always is what is the natural or ordinary meaning of that word or phrase in its context in the statute? It is only when that meaning leads to some result which cannot reasonably be supposed to have been the intention of the legislature, that it is proper to look for some other possible meaning of the word or phrase. We have been warned again and again that it is wrong and dangerous to proceed by substituting some other words for the words of the statute.’
and ‘It asks me to choose between two phrases ‘actually driving’ and ‘the driver, neither of which is to be found in the Act. It is in effect substituting ‘the driver’ for the statutory words ‘person driving or attempting to drive’. The two are not the same. A person can often be properly called the driver although for quite a long time he has neither been driving nor attempting to drive.’

Lord Reid, Lord Morris
[1969] 1 WLR 1266, [1969] 3 All ER 257, (1969) 64 Cr App R 160
Road Traffic Act 1968
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Aitken v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Limited SCS 30-May-2003
. .
Cited – Molaudi v Ministry of Defence EAT 15-Apr-2011
molaudi_modEAT11
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
The Claimant sought to bring a claim for racial discrimination against the defendant relating to events which occurred while the Claimant was a serving soldier. He had previously . .
Cited – British Pregnancy Advisory Service, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 5-Jun-2019
Abortion Time Limit statement was correct.
The Court considered ‘ the correct interpretation of the words, ‘the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week’ in s.1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act 1967 ‘ The guidance was challenged as the calculations. The date of the beginning of the . .
Cited – Edkins v Knowles QBD 1973
The motorist was driving at an excessive and dangerous speed. He was seen by detectives from a police motor car. They followed him but thought that he was driving far too fast and dangerously for them to overtake him. They followed him to a holiday . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.184319

Chan U Seek v Alvis Vehicles Ltd: ChD 8 May 2003

The claimant appealed a striking out order.
Held: If a claim stood no chance of success, then it should not be allowed to proceed, but where the claim was merely weak it should not be struck out. That would be inconsistent with the needs of justice. Many weak claims later improved, and the summary court should not conduct a mini-trial.

Neuberger J
Times 16-May-2003
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Chan v Alvis Vehicles Ltd and Another ChD 8-Dec-2004
The parties had had a part trial, and settled. The Gardian Newspaper now applied for disclosure of various documents to support a proposed news story. The parties had disputed payment to the claimant of commissions on the sales of military vehicles . .
See Also – Chan U Seek v Alvis Vehicles Ltd ChD 8-Dec-2004
A newspaper, not party to the proceedings, sought access to the Court files, anticipating a significant journalistic story.
Held: Park J allowed the application for copies of certain pleadings and witness statements that had been placed before . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.182365

Clearway Drainage Systems Ltd v Miles Smith Ltd: CA 8 Nov 2016

Appeal from refusal to lift sanctions for failure to comply with order for production of witness statement.

Sir Terence Etherton MR, King LJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1258
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572732

Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd: TCC 13 Oct 2016

Whether or not there should be an adjournment of the ‘liability’ trial.

Jefford J
[2016] EWHC 3082 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572701

The court considered whether the application by the claimant for early specific disclosure was an abuse..

Coulson J
[2016] EWHC 3045 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572289

Wyko Group Plc and Others v Cooper Roller Bearings Co Ltd: ChD 4 Dec 1995

A court may not grant a declaratory relief anticipating facts which were not yet in being. There must be in existence of a real question in issue between the parties as to the legal consequences of existing facts. Declaratory relief could not be obtained against a person who had not asserted any right: a party should be allowed to choose his own proceedings at a time and manner of his own choosing and should not be brought into court by the opposing party to resist a claim for a declaration of non-liability.

Ferris J
Times 04-Dec-1995, [1996] FSR 126
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – L’Oreal (UK) Limited and Another v Johnson and Johnson and Another ChD 7-Mar-2000
The claimant appealed against an order striking out their threat action for trade mark infringement, in respect of the words ‘No Tears’ when used for children’s shampoo.
Held: The court had to consider both the letter and the surrounding . .
Cited – Point Solutions Ltd v Focus Business Solutions Ltd and Another ChD 16-Dec-2005
It was claimed that the defendant’s computer software infringed the copyright in software owned by the claimant. A declaration was sought beacause of allegations that assertions about infringement had been made to third parties.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.90637

Varian Medical Systems Ag v Elekta Ltd and Another: PatC 12 Oct 2016

Application for disclosure.

Birss J
[2016] EWHC 2679 (Pat)
Bailii
England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.572014

Adepoju v Akinola: ChD 7 Dec 2016

The claimant disputed whether the defendant had been lawfully married to the claimat’s deceased mother, and possible marriage having been polygaous, and without the defendant having divorced his first wife.
Held: Master Matthews set out the approach of the courts to matters of evidence and the burden of proof. Pointing out that: ‘the decision of the court is not necessarily the objective truth of the matters in issue. Instead it is the most likely view of what happened, based on the material that the parties have chosen to put before the court, taking into account to some extent also what the court considers that they should have been able to put before the court but chose not to’

[2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Wills and Probate

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571991

Sands (As Trustee In Bankruptcy) v Layne and Another: CA 29 Nov 2016

The court was asked whether section 375 allowed a court to review, rescind or vary an order which was previously made by that court in exercise of its jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a lower court.

Arden, Lewison, McCombe LJJ
[2016] WLR(D) 632, [2016] EWCA Civ 1159
Bailii, WLRD
Insolvency Act 1986 375(1)
England and Wales

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571941

Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University Foundation NHS Trust: QBD 25 Nov 2016

[2016] EWHC 3032 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales

Human Rights, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571913

Practice Guidance (Transparency In The Family Courts): FD 16 Jan 2014

The court gave guidance on the new practice in publishing judgments by default, and for arrangements for anonymisation of appropriate parties.

Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division
[2014] EWHC B3 (Fam), [2014] EMLR 22, [2014] 1 FLR 733, [2014] 1 WLR 230, [2014] 2 FCR 226
Bailii
Administration of Justice Act 1960 12
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Committal for Contempt of Court (Practice Guidance) COP 3-May-2013
The court gave guidance on the practice to be followed on applications for committal for contempt of court in the Court of Protection, particularly as to the requirements for decisions to be made in public. . .
See Also – Practice Guidance (Transparency In The Court of Protection) CoP 16-Jan-2014
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Family

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.520129

Taylor v Montague: 1837

[1837] EngR 299, (1837) 2 M and W 315, (1837) 150 ER 776
Commonlii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Insolvency

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.313416

JSC VTB Bank v Skurikhin and Others: CA 21 Oct 2020

The Court was asked whether, and subject to what qualifications, it is an abuse of process for a party to apply to set aside an interlocutory order on the grounds that there has been a material change of circumstances when the party brought about the change itself.

Lord Justice Phillips
[2020] EWCA Civ 1337
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.655050