Click the case name for better results:

C Inc Plc v L and Another: QBD 4 May 2001

The plaintiff had obtained judgment against L, only then to find that she claimed that all only apparent assets were held by her on trust for or as agent for her husband who was overseas. The plaintiff therefore now set out to add him, and to claim an asset freezing injunction against him. Held: The … Continue reading C Inc Plc v L and Another: QBD 4 May 2001

CIL International Ltd v Vitrashop Ltd: ChD 2002

Pumfrey J held that an Earth Closet order was not incompatible with the CPR. His reason was that such an order was not incompatible with the overriding objective: ‘That being the existing state of the law prior to the Civil Procedure Rules it may be seen immediately that it is consistent with the overriding objective … Continue reading CIL International Ltd v Vitrashop Ltd: ChD 2002

Hildebrand v Hildebrand: 1992

The parties in ancillary relief proceedings sought orders for discovery. H had been to the wife’s flat surreptitiously on five occasions, and taken photocopies of so many documents obtained by him in the course of those visits (but returned after photocopying) that the photocopies themselves would now ‘fill a crate’, as the judge was told. … Continue reading Hildebrand v Hildebrand: 1992

Maclennan v Morgan Sindall (Infrastructure) Plc: QBD 17 Dec 2013

The defendant had applied for an order limiting the number of witnesses sought to be called by the claimant (43). Held: The power to prohibit the calling of witnesses under CPR r 32.2(3) sat towards the more extreme end of the court’s powers and was a power to be considered after less intrusive measures had … Continue reading Maclennan v Morgan Sindall (Infrastructure) Plc: QBD 17 Dec 2013

A (a Patient) v A Health Authority and Others; In re J (a Child); Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 24 Jan 2002

The case asked how cases involving disputes as to the care of children, and of the treatment of adults claimed to be mentally incompetent. Where the issues were solely ones of public law, then they should be heard by way of judicial review in the QBD. Where any private law issues arose, they should be … Continue reading A (a Patient) v A Health Authority and Others; In re J (a Child); Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 24 Jan 2002

In re T (Children): SC 25 Jul 2012

The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house for legal costs. Despite being exonerated, the judge followed the normal practice of not awarding costs … Continue reading In re T (Children): SC 25 Jul 2012

Hamilton v Al Fayed (No 4): CA 2001

The court considered the applicability of cases before the introduction of the new rules on the exercise of a judge’s discretion. Held: The old cases ‘remain powerful persuasive authority’. Judges: Lord Phillips MR Citations: [2001] EMLR 15 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Al-Koronky and Another v Time-Life Entertainment Group Ltd and Another … Continue reading Hamilton v Al Fayed (No 4): CA 2001

Dollfus Mieg et Cie v CWD International Ltd; LBJ Regents Ltd and another v Dolifus Mieg et Cie: QBD 17 Mar 2003

The applicant was a Part 20 defendant in a cross action brought between two other parties. It sought to have its own claim against the original claimant heard as a counterclaim. Held: Article 6 should not be construed so widely as to allow a cross claim by someone other than the original defendant to the … Continue reading Dollfus Mieg et Cie v CWD International Ltd; LBJ Regents Ltd and another v Dolifus Mieg et Cie: QBD 17 Mar 2003

Anglo Group Plc, Winther Brown and Co Ltd v Winter Brown and Co Ltd, BML (Office Computers) Ltd, Anglo Group Plc, BML (Office Computers) Ltd: TCC 8 Mar 2000

Contract – Contract for provision of computer services – purchaser contract with finance company – duty of co-operation to be implied in computer contracts – practice – responsibilities of expert witnesses generally – whether computer company liable to purchaser – whether purchaser liable to finance company.The parties disputed the delivery and quality of a computer … Continue reading Anglo Group Plc, Winther Brown and Co Ltd v Winter Brown and Co Ltd, BML (Office Computers) Ltd, Anglo Group Plc, BML (Office Computers) Ltd: TCC 8 Mar 2000

Turner v Grovit and others: CA 28 May 1999

A court has an inherent power to injunct a party not to institute or continue proceedings abroad, where they appear intended purely to harass another party in proceedings here. The two actions here were based upon the ‘same contractual relationship’ and concerned the ‘same subject matter’. This is not limited to cases of exclusive jurisdiction … Continue reading Turner v Grovit and others: CA 28 May 1999

Riva Bella SA v Tamsen Yachts Gmbh: ComC 12 Sep 2011

Application by the claimant pursuant to CPR 40.12(1) to correct the order made following the trial in this action Judges: Mr Justice Eder Citations: [2011] EWHC 2338 (Comm) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 40.12(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.449894

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

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. Held: The appeals failed save that the UK was not the proper jurisdiction to bring the case. The claim … Continue reading Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others: SC 10 Apr 2019

Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca Ab: ChD 8 Nov 2016

The parties had agreed to work tgether in the development of new drugs, but came to dispute whether certain projects were subject to the agreement. The claimant sought details of the defendant’s internal documents justifying that conclusion. The defendant then refused access to certain documents asserting legal professional privlege. The claimants now sought an order … Continue reading Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca Ab: ChD 8 Nov 2016

Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset: HL 11 Mar 2004

The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury. Held: The jury should indeed have been given opportunity to explain their verdict: ‘By … Continue reading Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset: HL 11 Mar 2004

Knight v Axa Assurances: QBD 24 Jul 2009

The claimant was injured in a car accident in France. The defendant insurer said that the quantification of damages was to be according to French law and the calculation of interest also. The claimant said that English law applied. Held: The assessment of damages is a procedural matter, and is governed by the law of … Continue reading Knight v Axa Assurances: QBD 24 Jul 2009

Winkler and Another v Shamoon and Others: ChD 15 Feb 2016

The claimants sought a declaration as against the residuary beneficiaries (wife and daughter) under the will, saying that the claimants had a beneficial interest in company shares within the estate. The defendants fild acknowledgments of service but asserting expressly that they did not submit to the jurisdiction of the court. The claimants said that the … Continue reading Winkler and Another v Shamoon and Others: ChD 15 Feb 2016

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 family members. The county court had been unwilling to allow any challenge … Continue reading Manchester City Council v Pinnock: SC 3 Nov 2010

Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013

The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013

Dalton and Others v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 13 Mar 2015

The court considered the success fee payable by a defendant employer in the (very common) situation where a claim for damages for noise-induced hearing loss is settled before a trial has commenced. The issue is whether, in that context, noise-induced hearing loss is to be regarded as a disease. Phillips J [2015] EWHC 616 (QB) … Continue reading Dalton and Others v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 13 Mar 2015

Pannone Llp v Aardvark Digital Ltd: CA 12 Jul 2011

Claimant a few minutes late filing and then serving documents under an unless order although the process of filing by fax and serving by email was initiated in each case before the deadline. Arden, Lloyd, Tomlinson LJJ [2011] EWCA Civ 803, [2011] 1 WLR 2275, [2011] NPC 74 Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 3.1(2)(a) England and … Continue reading Pannone Llp v Aardvark Digital Ltd: CA 12 Jul 2011

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

Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1): CA 19 Dec 2002

Capacity for Litigation The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the time to accept the offer. Held: There is no definition … Continue reading Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1): CA 19 Dec 2002

Ullah and Others, Ahmed v Pagel, Scallan, Kennedy: CA 12 Dec 2002

The claimants sought to issue election petitions to challenge the results of local elections. The petitioners had complied with all the rules save that they had failed to serve the notice of presentation within the five day period. The claimants argued that the Civil Procedure Rules took sway over the Election Rules, and that the … Continue reading Ullah and Others, Ahmed v Pagel, Scallan, Kennedy: CA 12 Dec 2002

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 that the judge had failed to take into account an offer of settlement made … Continue reading Cutts v Head and Another: CA 7 Dec 1983

Harb v HRH Prince Abdul Aziz: ChD 9 Jun 2014

The Defendant applies under CPR 11.1 for an order declaring that the court has no jurisdiction to try this claim against him on the grounds that the claim is barred by the defence of state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978. Rose J [2014] EWHC 1807 (Ch), [2014] 1 WLR 4437, [2015] 1 All … Continue reading Harb v HRH Prince Abdul Aziz: ChD 9 Jun 2014

Baker Tilly (A Firm) v Makar: QBD 27 Mar 2013

The claimant accountants had represented the defendant in a dispute with former employees. They sought payment of their costs, but the claim was stayed until the defendant had the opportunity to to seek representation by a MacKenzie friend after the taxing master became concerned for her health and as to her ability to conduct proceedings. … Continue reading Baker Tilly (A Firm) v Makar: QBD 27 Mar 2013

Eastenders Cash And Carry Plc And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Nov 2013

Statement of Facts – The company’s goods had been detained by Customs and Excise. A court later ordered their return, but found the detention to have been with reasonable cause. The Revenue had successfully argued that costs could not be awarded against them under a statutory immunity. 16788/13 – Communicated Case, [2013] ECHR 1284, [2014] … Continue reading Eastenders Cash And Carry Plc And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Nov 2013

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

Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 21 Mar 2007

Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own request refused but that of his family had … Continue reading Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 21 Mar 2007

Rolls-Royce plc v Unite the Union: CA 14 May 2009

The parties disputed whether the inclusion of length of service within a selection matrix for redundancy purposes would amount to unlawful age discrimination. The court was asked whether it was correct to make a declaratory judgment when the case had otherwise been effectively settled. Held: With considerable misgivings, the court agreed to hear the appeal. … Continue reading Rolls-Royce plc v Unite the Union: CA 14 May 2009

British Airways Plc v Williams and Others: SC 17 Oct 2012

The claimants, airline pilots, and the company disputed the application of the 1998 Regulations to their employment. They sought pay for their annual leave made up of three elements: a proportionate part of the fixed annual sum paid for their services, a supplementary payment which varied according to the time spent flying, and thirdly an … Continue reading British Airways Plc v Williams and Others: SC 17 Oct 2012

Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc: CA 11 May 2004

The court considered the effect on costs orders of a refusal to take part in alternate dispute resolution procedures. The defendant Trust had refused to take the dispute to a mediation. In neither case had the court ordered or recommended ADR. Held: If the parties (or at least one of them) remain intransigently opposed to … Continue reading Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc: CA 11 May 2004

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

Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd and Others: TCC 22 May 2013

The claimant sought an extension of time to serve the Particulars of Claim. The solicitors said that they had misread the relevant Rules. Held: The solicitors had acted on the basis of the former practice, but the rules had been substantially changed, and the court is now to consider: ‘all the circumstances of the case, … Continue reading Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd and Others: TCC 22 May 2013

Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor: CA 2002

New CPR govern Indemnity Costs awards The defendant had successfully defended the main claim and now appealed against the refusal of an order for costs on an indemnity basis even though judge thought that the claimants had behaved unreasonably. He had said that some conduct deserving of moral condemnation was required. The defendant had made … Continue reading Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor: CA 2002

Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

The claimant sought unredacted disclosure of documents by the second defendant so that he could pursue an action against the first, who, he said, were thought to have intercepted his mobile phone messages, and where the second defendant had documents which he said would support his claim. The second defendant sought to argue public interest … Continue reading Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

Google Inc v Vidal-Hall and Others: CA 27 Mar 2015

Damages for breach of Data Protection The claimants sought damages alleging that Google had, without their consent, collected personal data about them, which was resold to advertisers. They used the Safari Internet browser on Apple products. The tracking and collation of the claimants’ browser generated information was contrary to the defendant’s publicly stated position that … Continue reading Google Inc v Vidal-Hall and Others: CA 27 Mar 2015

Bushell v Secretary of State for the Environment: HL 7 Feb 1980

Practical Realities of Planning Decisions The House considered planning procedures adopted on the construction of two new stretches of motorway, and in particular as to whether the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully in refusing to allow objectors to the scheme to cross-examine the Department’s witnesses. Held: He had not acted unlawfully (Lord Edmud-Davies dissenting). … Continue reading Bushell v Secretary of State for the Environment: HL 7 Feb 1980

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

Roult v North West Strategic Health Authority: CA 20 May 2009

The parties had settled a personal injury claim, on the basis as expected that the claimant would be provided with accommodation by the local authority. It later turned out that accommodation would not be provided, and he returned to court to request that the order be amended. He now appealed refusal of an order. Held: … Continue reading Roult v North West Strategic Health Authority: CA 20 May 2009

Austin and Others v Miller Argent (South Wales) Ltd: CA 29 Jul 2011

The claimants appealed against refusal of a Group Litigation Order (GLO). Over 500 parties wished to claim in nuisance caused by open cast mining operations conducted by the defendants. Held: The appeals failed. The making of a GLO is a matter of discretion. At the hearing it was not clear that any claimant would be … Continue reading Austin and Others v Miller Argent (South Wales) Ltd: CA 29 Jul 2011

Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson: CA 27 Apr 1994

The deceased prisoner had hanged himself. He had been a known suicide risk, and his brother said that the authorities being so aware, the death resulted from their lack of care. The inquest heard in full the circumstannces leading up to the death, but the Coroner directed the jury not to return a verdict which … Continue reading Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson: CA 27 Apr 1994

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

NML Capital Ltd v Argentina: SC 6 Jul 2011

The respondent had issued bonds but in 2001 had declared a moratorium on paying them. The appellant hedge fund later bought the bonds, heavily discounted. Judgment was obtained in New York, which the appellants now sought to enforce against assets in the UK. They argued that the terms of issue waived state immunity. Held: The … Continue reading NML Capital Ltd v Argentina: SC 6 Jul 2011

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

Stobart Group Ltd and Others v Elliott: QBD 11 Apr 2013

The defendant applied to the court for various officers of the cliamant companies to be subject to contempt proceedings. The claimants asked the court to strike of the defendant’s counterclaim and to make a civil restraint order against him. There had been long standing disputes between them. Held: The court found that the initial threshold … Continue reading Stobart Group Ltd and Others v Elliott: QBD 11 Apr 2013

Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Non-derogating control orders – HR Compliant MB and AF challenged non-derogating control orders made under the 2005 Act, saying that they were incompatible with their human rights. AF was subject to a curfew of 14 hours a day, wore an electronic tag at all times, could not leave a nine square mile area, and had … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Smithkline Beecham Plc and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others: CA 16 Dec 2004

Following its earlier main judgment in the case, the court made use of the CPR to award costs on an appeal. The overall result had been that the patent was found to be valid but not infringed. There had been huge costs. Smithkline sought costs on an indemnity basis, saying the court had certified the … Continue reading Smithkline Beecham Plc and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others: CA 16 Dec 2004

Outasight VB Ltd v Brown: EAT 21 Nov 2014

outasightEAT201411 EAT Practice and Procedure: Review – Reconsideration – Rule 70 Schedule 1 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 – fresh evidence – interests of justice Having lost his claim for wrongful dismissal/breach of contract before the Employment Tribunal, the Claimant applied for a reconsideration of that Judgment on the basis that … Continue reading Outasight VB Ltd v Brown: EAT 21 Nov 2014

Myers v Elman: HL 1939

The solicitor had successfully appealed against an order for a contribution to the other party’s legal costs, after his clerk had filed statements in court which he knew to be misleading. The solicitor’s appeal had been successful. Held: The Court of Appeal’s decision was reversed. The plaintiff was not asking the court to exercise its … Continue reading Myers v Elman: HL 1939

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

Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

The claimant alleged infringement of his registered trade marks ‘Money Saving Expert’ and associated terms. The defendant operated a service trading as ‘Money Claiming Expert’. Both services included advising those who might wish to claim refunds from banks. The claimant sought summary judgment. Held: The defence as filed proposed no real defence,merely putting the claimant … Continue reading Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

Ho v Adelekun: SC 6 Oct 2021

The Court was asked whether there is jurisdiction in a personal injury claim that attracts the application of Part 44 Section II of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’), which relates to Qualified One-way Costs Shifting (‘QOCS’), to allow the set-off . .

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

RWE Npower Plc and others v Carrol (acting for and on behalf of the unincorporated association identified as ‘The Sandles House Group’ etc): QBD 27 Apr 2007

References: [2007] EWHC 947 (QB) Links: Bailii Coram: Teare J The claimant sought relief against protesters challenging its proposal for disposal of ash from its coal fired power station in gravel pits local to the defendants. Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 19.6 This case is cited by: Cited – Boyle, Regina (On the Application of) -v- … Continue reading RWE Npower Plc and others v Carrol (acting for and on behalf of the unincorporated association identified as ‘The Sandles House Group’ etc): QBD 27 Apr 2007

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