Click the case name for better results:

Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit her enjoyment of her land. Held: The interference with TV reception by an … Continue reading Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: SC 25 Apr 2018

Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact delivered … Continue reading Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: SC 25 Apr 2018

Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

Appropriation was not in sufficient form The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed. Held: The appeal failed. The use of the … Continue reading Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

William Sindall Plc v Cambridgeshire County Council: CA 21 May 1993

Land was bought for development, but the purchaser later discovered a sewage pipe which very substantially limited its development potential. The existence of the pipe had not been disclosed on the sale, being unknown to the seller. Held: Under the National Conditions of Sale, it is the purchaser who takes the risk of there being … Continue reading William Sindall Plc v Cambridgeshire County Council: CA 21 May 1993

Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority: CA 23 Oct 2009

The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was not limited in the way suggested. Held: Though privately operated, … Continue reading Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority: CA 23 Oct 2009

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body and Others: HL 16 Jul 1992

The parties signed a memorandum of agreement to let a strip of land from 1930 until determined as provided, but the only provision was that the lease would continue until the land was needed for road widening and two months’ notice was given. The land was never used for road widening and notice to terminate … Continue reading Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body and Others: HL 16 Jul 1992

Hardy and Another v Haselden and Others: CA 29 Nov 2011

The claimants had taken up occupation of a farm under an informal arrangement which they now said amounted to a tenancy for ther lives. The freeholder’s, personal representatives of the original grantors, appealed against a declaration accordingly. The respondents said that they had spent over andpound;30,000 in repairs because of the agreement. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Hardy and Another v Haselden and Others: CA 29 Nov 2011

First Penthouse Limited/Channel Hotels and Properties (UK) Limited v Channel Hotels and Properties (UK) Limited/Fahad Al Tamimi First Penthouse Limited Varlet International Limited Ruth Gary Orbach Quallvile Limited Norval Holdings Limited: ChD 14 Nov 2003

Several transactions had taken place with regard to a lease of a roof void, which was to be developed for penthouses. The lease had been charged to secure funding. The development did not proceed to schedule, and a s146 notice was served. It was . .

Bedson v Bedson: CA 1965

The parties, a married couple disputed the shares in which the matrimonial home, formerly held by them as joint tenants would be held after severance o that joint tenancy.
Held: The wife was entitled to a half share in the property.

Birch v Birch: SC 26 Jul 2017

The parties, on divorcing had a greed, under court order that W should obtain the release of H from his covenants under the mortgage of the family home. She had been unable to do so, and sought that order to be varied to allow postponement of her . .

Philips v Ward: CA 1956

The Plaintiff had relied on a negligent survey to purchase a substantial Elizabethan property and land. The report did not mention that the timbers of the house were badly affected by death watch beetle and worm so that the only course left to him . .

Birmingham v Renfrew; 11 Jun 1937

References: (1937) 57 CLR 666, [1937] HCA 52 Links: Austlii Coram: Dixon J, Latham CJ Ratio: (High Court of Australia) Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Latham CJ described a … Continue reading Birmingham v Renfrew; 11 Jun 1937