Click the case name for better results:

Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 23 May 2001

A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence of prisoners. Particularly when examining documents subject to legal professional privilege, the rules did not allow … Continue reading Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 23 May 2001

Unison, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor: SC 26 Jul 2017

The union appellant challenged the validity of the imposition of fees on those seeking to lay complaints in the Employment Tribunal system. Held: The appeal succeeded. The fees were discriminatory and restricted access to justice. The consequence of the order had been very substantially to reduce the number of cases coming before the tribunal, and: … Continue reading Unison, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor: SC 26 Jul 2017

Klausecker v Germany (Dec): ECHR 6 Jan 2015

ECHR Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Access to court Limitations on access to domestic courts to review recruitment procedure before European Patent Office when reasonable alternative procedure (arbitration) available: inadmissible Facts – The applicant, who is disabled, applied for a post as a patent examiner at the European Patent Office (EPO) in Munich. Although … Continue reading Klausecker v Germany (Dec): ECHR 6 Jan 2015

Hoon v The United Kingdom (Dec): ECHR 13 Nov 2014

ECHR Article 8-1 Respect for private life Publication of parliamentary investigation into conduct of former Minister: inadmissible Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations Complaints relating to parliamentary investigation into conduct of former Minister: inadmissible Facts – The case concerned the investigation by parliamentary authorities into the applicant, a former government minister, … Continue reading Hoon v The United Kingdom (Dec): ECHR 13 Nov 2014

Tchenguiz v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others: CA 13 Oct 2014

Application made pursuant to paragraph 32 of Practice Direction 52C to rely on a supplementary skeleton argument for the purposes of the present appeal. The context in which this application is made is an appeal by the claimant against an order of Mr Justice Eder in the exercise of his discretion under Civil Procedure Rules, … Continue reading Tchenguiz v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others: CA 13 Oct 2014

Home Office v Lownds (Practice Note): CA 21 Mar 2002

The respondent had been ordered to pay costs of over pounds 16,000 in an action for clinical negligence where the final award was only pounds 4,000. The Secretary of State appealed claiming that the costs were disproportionate. Held: In such cases the court must undertake a two stage examination. First it should look at the … Continue reading Home Office v Lownds (Practice Note): CA 21 Mar 2002

Hughes Jarvis Ltd v Searle and Another: CA 15 Jan 2019

The claimant and director appealed from orders associated with a finding of contempt of court. The Director, the case having been adjourned overnight during the course of his evidence, and despite warnings to the contrary had sought to communicate with his solicitors and counsel. He had then been remanded in custody overnight despite that that … Continue reading Hughes Jarvis Ltd v Searle and Another: CA 15 Jan 2019

VIS Trading Co Ltd v Nazarov and Others: QBD 18 Nov 2015

Application for the first defendant to be committed for alleged contempt of court for having failed to make disclosure of documents as required by a court order.Whipple J said: ‘In this case, the extent to which the Defendants are in continuing breach is in issue. In resolving that factual issue, Mr Milner suggests that it … Continue reading VIS Trading Co Ltd v Nazarov and Others: QBD 18 Nov 2015

Malgar Ltd v R E Leach Engineering Ltd: ChD 1 Nov 1999

The Civil Procedure Rules could not change the substantive law. It therefore remained necessary for it to be shown that in addition to knowing that what was said was false, the party had to have known that what was being said was likely to interfere with the course of justice. No new category of contempt … Continue reading Malgar Ltd v R E Leach Engineering Ltd: ChD 1 Nov 1999

Chellaram and Another v Chellaram and others (No 2): ChD 16 Apr 2002

One of the defendants had not been properly served by posting the proceedings to an address at which he stayed on his very occasional visits to London. The proceedings had not been issued for the purposes of service abroad, because at the time of deemed service under CPR 6 he was not physically within the … Continue reading Chellaram and Another v Chellaram and others (No 2): ChD 16 Apr 2002

O’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police: CA 23 Jul 2003

The claimant sought damages for malicious prosecution, and sought to adduce similar fact evidence. The defendant appealed an order admitting the evidence. Held: Comparisons between admission of similar fact evidence in civil and criminal proceedings were made. In general, the greater the putative force of the evidence the less ready a court should be to … Continue reading O’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police: CA 23 Jul 2003

Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd and Others: CA 2 Feb 2021

‘These appeals raise questions as to the jurisdiction and the discretion of the court in relation to disclosure provided under CPR Part 31,[1] where senior officers, employees and ex-employees of companies have or may have used their personal electronic devices to send and receive work-related messages and emails.’ Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Asplin, Green LJJ … Continue reading Phones 4U Ltd v EE Ltd and Others: CA 2 Feb 2021

Wyche v Careforce Group Plc: ComC 25 Jul 2013

The defendant had failed to comply in all respects with an ‘unless’ order. Held: The court gave relief under CPR 3.9 for two failures which the court described as ‘material in the sense that they were more than trivial’. They were ‘unintentional and minor failings in the course of diligently seeking to comply with the … Continue reading Wyche v Careforce Group Plc: ComC 25 Jul 2013

Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James: CA 25 May 2006

The defendant company appealed against an order re-instating the claimants’ claims for damages for race discrimination and victimisation after they had been struck out for wilful disobedience of the tribunal’s orders. Held: When making a strike-out order, there were two cardinal conditions at least one of which must be met. Either the unreasonable conduct has … Continue reading Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James: CA 25 May 2006

XXX v Camden London Borough Council: CA 11 Nov 2020

Anonymity in Court Proceedings – No two stage test XXX appealed against the refusal to make orders anonymising her name and redacting certain details from published judgments. The appeal raised a point about the proper approach to applications for anonymisation under CPR 39.2. She brought proceedings for judicial review of the Council’s housing allocation policy, … Continue reading XXX v Camden London Borough Council: CA 11 Nov 2020

Clarke v Cognita Schools Ltd (T/A Hydesville Tower School): ChD 1 Apr 2015

The claimants sought to have set aside statutory demands served to enforce judgmens, they said under a discrepancy. The order refusing their application should they said, have notified them of their right to appeal. Held: None of the applicable rules expressly required otification that an appeal was available. Newey J [2015] EWHC 932 (Ch), [2015] … Continue reading Clarke v Cognita Schools Ltd (T/A Hydesville Tower School): ChD 1 Apr 2015

Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000

The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right to a fair trial. The right not to give evidence … Continue reading Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000

ZXC v Bloomberg Lp: QBD 23 Feb 2017

Investigation of claimant was properly disclosed The claimant requested the removal of material naming him from the defendant’s website. Criminal investigations into a company with which he was associated were begun, but then concluded. In the interim, the article was published. The hearing had been in private and the claimant anonymised. Held: The weight to … Continue reading ZXC v Bloomberg Lp: QBD 23 Feb 2017

Daltel Europe Ltd and others v Makki and others: ChD 3 May 2005

Application was made for leave to bring proceedings for contempt of court. David Richards J said that: ‘Allegations that statements of case and witness statements contain deliberately false statements are by no means uncommon and, in a fair number of cases, the allegations are well-founded. If parties thought that they could gain an advantage by … Continue reading Daltel Europe Ltd and others v Makki and others: ChD 3 May 2005

Sugar v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another (2): SC 15 Feb 2012

The claimant sought release of a report prepared by the respondent as to its coverage of the Arab/Israel conflict partly for journalistic purposes, and partly for compliance. Held: The appeal failed. Where the report was prepared even if only in part for jurnalistic purposes, it was exempt from disclosure under the 2000 Act. Lord Wilson … Continue reading Sugar v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another (2): SC 15 Feb 2012

Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3): HL 22 Mar 2001

Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI. Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also where he acted with knowledge of, or … Continue reading Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3): HL 22 Mar 2001

KJM Superbikes Ltd v Hinton: CA 20 Nov 2008

The claimant had been sued for the misuse of trademarks by selling motorcycles imported via a parallel market. It claimed that the defendant had filed false evidence in that action, and now appealed a refusal by the judge to bring contempt proceedings. The defendant argued that proceedings could only be brought with the consent of … Continue reading KJM Superbikes Ltd v Hinton: CA 20 Nov 2008

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

Bank Mellat v HM Treasury: QBD 11 Jun 2010

The respondent had made an order under the Regulations restricting all persons from dealing with the the claimant bank. The bank applied to have the order set aside. Though the defendant originally believed that the Iranian government owned 80% of the shares, the figure was 20% and soon to be reduced to 15%. It said … Continue reading Bank Mellat v HM Treasury: QBD 11 Jun 2010

Wragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd: CA 1 May 2002

A claim was made against directors of a company involved in a takeover, for failure to make proper disclosure. The case involved also other issues. The defendants appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim. Held: The rules made specific reference to cases in areas of law involving developing jurisprudence. This was one such, … Continue reading Wragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd: CA 1 May 2002

A and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Feb 2009

(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the restrictions in place. Assurances had been given by the home nations that on return they would not … Continue reading A and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Feb 2009

Grace, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 9 Jun 2014

What is ‘totally without merit’? The claimant had sought judicial review. Her case had been certified as being ‘totally without merit’, thus denying to her any opportunity to renew her application for leave at an oral hearing, leaving only recourse to a judge of the Court of Appeal to consider the papers and decide whether … Continue reading Grace, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 9 Jun 2014

Gibbon v Manchester City Council, L G Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd, Reeves and another: CA 25 Jun 2010

A payment in had been made, and a counter offer made by the claimant. The original offer was increased but rejected. The counter-offer was not withdrawn, and was then accepted by the defendant. On receipt of the acceptance, the claimant purported to withdraw the counter offer. The judge had held that since the offer had … Continue reading Gibbon v Manchester City Council, L G Blower Specialist Bricklayer Ltd, Reeves and another: CA 25 Jun 2010

Kennedy v The Information Commissioner and Another: CA 12 May 2011

The claimant, a journalist, sought further information from the Charity Commission after the release of three investigations into the ‘Mariam Appeal’ and questions about the source and use of its funds. The Commission replied that it was exempt under section 32. The claimant appealed against the finding of a blanket exemption, and continued after completion … Continue reading Kennedy v The Information Commissioner and Another: CA 12 May 2011

King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: CA 27 Mar 2012

In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, acknowledged that serving prisoners have a right to … Continue reading King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: CA 27 Mar 2012

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

Johnson v The Medical Defence Union Ltd: ChD 3 Mar 2006

The claimant sought disclosure under the 1998 Act by the defendant of records held by them. The respondent said that the information they held did not amount to data under the Act. Held: The information was contained in different formats, on paper, electronically and on CD, but was then brought together in a risk assessment. … Continue reading Johnson v The Medical Defence Union Ltd: ChD 3 Mar 2006

Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010

The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be transferred only if the claimant’s brother paid all the Inheritance Tax. It was transferred … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010

Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers: SC 27 Jun 2012

The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against refusal of a strike out of the claim. The Court of Appeal said that it was … Continue reading Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers: SC 27 Jun 2012

Media Cat Ltd v Adams and Others: PCC 18 Apr 2011

The claimants had begun copyright infringement cases. Having been refused a request to be allowed to withdraw the cases as an abuse, their solicitors now faced an application for a wasted costs order. Held: The court only has jurisdiction to make a wasted costs order when the impugned conduct has caused a waste of costs … Continue reading Media Cat Ltd v Adams and Others: PCC 18 Apr 2011

Eastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: SC 11 Jun 2014

Alcoholic drinks had been seized by the respondents pending further enquiries with a view to a possible forfeiture, then held and returned but only under court order. The company had complained that the detention of the goods was unlawful. The Revenue appealed against an order upholding that complaint. Held: The appeal succeeded. Section 139 allowed … Continue reading Eastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: SC 11 Jun 2014

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 bank requested that the claims be struck out. The claimants sought permission to amend their claims. Held: … Continue reading Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd: QBD 26 Jan 2009

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. The claimant asserted that their claim was an intellectual property claim, allowing section 72 … Continue reading Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

Steinfeld and Keidan, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for International Development (In Substitution for The Home Secretary and The Education Secretary): SC 27 Jun 2018

The applicants, an heterosexual couple wished to enter into a civil partnership under the 2004 Act, rather than a marriage. They complained that had they been a same sex couple they would have had that choice under the 2013 Act.
Held: The . .

National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’): 1993

References: [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 68 Coram: Cresswell J Ratio:Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following: 1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the independent product of the … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’): 1993

Sisu Capital Fund Ltd and others v Tucker and others; 28 Oct 2005

References: Times 04-Nov-2005, [2005] EWHC 2321 (Ch) Links: Bailii The Defendants were accountants who had been sued through their partnership in KPMG. They had been granted a order for their costs. They sought payment for the time they had spent prersonally in preparing their defences. Held: As professionals there was no reason to distinguish the … Continue reading Sisu Capital Fund Ltd and others v Tucker and others; 28 Oct 2005

National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer”): 1993″

References: [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 68 Coram: Cresswell J Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following: 1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the independent product of the … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer”): 1993″

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

law index

Our law-index is a substantial selection from our database. Cases here are restricted in number by date and lack the additional facilities formerly available within lawindexpro. Please do enjoy this free version of the lawindex. Case law does not ‘belong’ to lawyers. Judgments are made up of words which can be read and understood (if … Continue reading law index