Click the case name for better results:

Ingenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: SC 19 Oct 2016

The tax payer complained that the Permanent Secretary for Tax had, in an off the record briefing disclosed tax details regarding a film investment scheme. Despite the off the record basis, details were published in a newspaper. His claims had been rejected at first instance and at the court of appeal. Held: The taxpayer’s appeal … Continue reading Ingenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: SC 19 Oct 2016

Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6): CA 3 Jan 1990

The court considered its power to order transfer of assets from one jurisdiction (in this case Switzerland) to another in aid of a Mareva injunction. Held: An order that assets be delivered or transferred to a receiver was a usual one.The appointment of a receiver over foreign assets is an in personam remedy. Dillon LJ … Continue reading Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6): CA 3 Jan 1990

Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and Others (No 8): ChD 17 Jun 1993

Leave to amend was given to the defendant to add a claim for a contribution. It was not an issue of fact. The statute did not imply any assumption that the defendant would would not maintain a defence. Matters of foreign law were not part of the facts of a case. Judges: Chadwick J Citations: … Continue reading Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and Others (No 8): ChD 17 Jun 1993

Her Majestys Courts Service (Decision Notice): ICO 25 Mar 2009

ICO The complainant was the subject of a civil proceedings order issued under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. The complainant asked the public authority for a letter about him which was sent by the judges to the Attorney General’s Office after his court case that initiated this order. The public authority did … Continue reading Her Majestys Courts Service (Decision Notice): ICO 25 Mar 2009

Rahman (Prince Abdul) bin Turki al Sudairy v AbuTaha: CA 1 Jun 1980

Lord Denning, MR said: ‘So I would hold that a Mareva injunction can be granted against a man even though he is based in this country if the circumstances are such that there is a danger of his absconding, or a danger of the assets being removed out of the jurisdiction or disposed of within … Continue reading Rahman (Prince Abdul) bin Turki al Sudairy v AbuTaha: CA 1 Jun 1980

Z Ltd v A-Z and AA-LL: CA 1982

The court gave directions on how banks and other third parties were to respond to Mareva injunctions. The plaintiff had obtained orders against companies with bank accounts in England. The action was settled, but the banks sougfht clarification. Held: The application was dismissed. The injunction had been properly granted. An innocent third party had to … Continue reading Z Ltd v A-Z and AA-LL: CA 1982

Lockley v National Blood Transfusion Service: CA 1992

There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the defendants’, ‘not to be enforced without leave of the court save by way of … Continue reading Lockley v National Blood Transfusion Service: CA 1992

Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation): CA 1987

The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under Order 62 of the Rules of the Supreme Court included the power to make a pre-emptive order for costs.Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘In these circumstances the judge decided to make a wholly novel order. In its detail it is of … Continue reading Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation): CA 1987

H v Ministry of Defence: CA 1991

The plaintiff in a personal injury claim sought assessment of his damages by a jury. The judge held at first instance that this was a matter for his discretion under the Act, and exercised it in favour of the plaintiff. Held: The defendant’s appeal suceeded. The Act in section 69(3) introduced a bias against jury … Continue reading H v Ministry of Defence: CA 1991

Wilson v Ministry of Defence: 1991

The court was asked to look at three events envisaged, and to consider whether, if they did occur, they should be described as constituting serious deterioration. Held: ‘First of all the development of arthritis to the extent that surgery is required. Osteoarthritis is a progressive condition. It is very common in cases where damage is … Continue reading Wilson v Ministry of Defence: 1991

Regina v H M Attorney-General and Price: Admn 19 Mar 1997

Citations: [1997] EWHC Admin 296 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.137241

Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St George’s Health Care NHS Trust ex parte ‘S’: Admn 17 Mar 1997

The applicant sought to challenge a decision that she should be sterilised, and detained as a mental patient for this purpose. Judges: Popplewell J Citations: [1997] EWHC Admin 281 Statutes: Mental Health Act 1983 2, Supreme Court Act 1981 31(6) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services … Continue reading Regina v Collins; Pathfinder Mental Health Services NHS Trust and St George’s Health Care NHS Trust ex parte ‘S’: Admn 17 Mar 1997

Turner Page Music v Torres Design Associates Ltd: CA 3 Aug 1998

A wasted costs order was intended to be a summary procedure and it was not appropriate to make one where the order would require detailed and lengthy investigations. Breach of solicitor’s professional duty to client might also take the issue outside the wasted costs procedure. Citations: Times 03-Aug-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51(6),(7) Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Turner Page Music v Torres Design Associates Ltd: CA 3 Aug 1998

Jones v Dumbrell: 21 Feb 1968

(Supreme Court of Victoria) Dumbrell had induced shareholders in companies running a business to sell their shares to him. He represented that he would run the business himself. The shareholders had a strong preference to have Dumbrell, rather than an unknown third party, run the business and for that reason sold their shares at an … Continue reading Jones v Dumbrell: 21 Feb 1968

Blair v Haycock Cattle Co: 1917

Judges: Lord Finlay LC Citations: (1917) 34 TLR 39 Cited by: Cited – A J Bekhor and Co Ltd v Bilton CA 6-Feb-1981 The plaintiff had applied for disclosure of assets under the Rules of the Supreme Court in support of a Mareva freezing order. The rules were held not to provide any such power: … Continue reading Blair v Haycock Cattle Co: 1917

Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An: CA 8 Jun 1999

The power to order costs against a non-party was not dependant upon the court having first made an order for costs in the proceedings against one or other of the parties. The financial interest of a third party in the proceedings had to be carefully considered, but might be wider than champerty. Citations: Times 08-Jun-1999 … Continue reading Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An: CA 8 Jun 1999

Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An: CA 9 Jun 1999

The power to order costs against a non-party was not dependant upon the court having first made an order for costs in the proceedings against one or other of the parties. The financial interest of a third party in the proceedings had to be carefully considered, but might be wider than champerty. Citations: Gazette 09-Jun-1999 … Continue reading Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An: CA 9 Jun 1999

National Justice Compania Naviera Sa v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (No 2): CA 15 Oct 1999

An English court does have power to order a non-resident non-party to contribute to the costs of a case, where that party was domiciled in a convention country. Here the third party was alleged to be the alter ego of the actual party. There was no requirement to have sued that third party first under … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera Sa v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (No 2): CA 15 Oct 1999

Johnson v Valks: CA 23 Nov 1999

A person requiring leave to issue proceedings as a vexatious litigant, had also to obtain leave again before entering an appeal to the Court of Appeal. The entering of an appeal is either the institution of new proceedings, or an application requiring leave as an application in any civil proceedings instituted in any court.Sir Richard … Continue reading Johnson v Valks: CA 23 Nov 1999

In Re M (A Minor) (Official Solicitor: Role): CA 8 Jul 1998

A judge had no power to extend or restrict powers and duties of the official solicitor and or local authorities exercising statutory functions. The Official Solicitor did not act as an agent of the court. A judge ordering the appointment of a guardian ad litem should not restrict the ability of the guardian to complete … Continue reading In Re M (A Minor) (Official Solicitor: Role): CA 8 Jul 1998

Darragh and Others v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police: CA 20 Oct 1998

Judge was correct to direct trial by judge only where the assessment of damages would involve assessment of medical evidence. Such evidence required ‘scientific investigation’ displacing need for trial by jury in false imprisonment and like cases. Citations: Times 20-Oct-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 69(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 10 May … Continue reading Darragh and Others v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police: CA 20 Oct 1998

Wright, Regina (on The Application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Another: SC 20 Nov 2019

W challenged the grant of planning permission for the change of use of agricultural land to allow erection of a wind turbine, saying that the authority had taken into account a promise by the land owner to run the scheme as a community development contributing funds locally, and that such was not capable of being … Continue reading Wright, Regina (on The Application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Another: SC 20 Nov 2019

Regina (Ben-Abdelaziz) v Haringey London Borough Council and Another: CA 19 Jun 2001

The claimant asserted that judicial proceedings, since they were conducted in the name of the Crown, were brought ‘by or at the instigation’ of a public authority, and that acts so challenged were therefore subject to the Act, even though they had taken place before the Act came into effect. The assertion was unsustainable. The … Continue reading Regina (Ben-Abdelaziz) v Haringey London Borough Council and Another: CA 19 Jun 2001

Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre: CA 1980

The plaintiff film companies accused the defendants of pirating their films. They obtained Anton Piller orders which required the defendants to permit the plaintiffs to enter their premises to inspect and remove any unauthorised films, and three defendants were to disclose: (a) cassette supplier and customer details; (b) invoices; and (c) the whereabouts of pirate … Continue reading Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre: CA 1980

Barclay-Johnson v Yuill: 1980

The jurisdiction to make an asset freezing injunction applies though the defendant is not a foreigner or foreign based. Its essence is to reduce the risk of the defendant removing his assets from the jurisdiction and so stultifying any judgment given by the courts in the action. Citations: [1980] 1 WLR 1259 Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Barclay-Johnson v Yuill: 1980

Kelly v South Manchester Health Authority: 1997

A costs order was sought against the Legal Aid Board. Thomas J. said: ‘In my judgment, the courts do have power in an appropriate and exceptional case to make an order in respect of costs against the board under section 51(1); the role of the board in litigation in which it is assisting one of … Continue reading Kelly v South Manchester Health Authority: 1997

Nickerson v Barraclough (1): ChD 1980

The court considered an assertion that a right of necessity was implied into a deed. Held: ‘In the present case the land conveyed was plainly intended to be used for building purposes, and of course it plainly needed access for building materials and for the occupants of the houses when constructed: yet there was the … Continue reading Nickerson v Barraclough (1): ChD 1980

Nickerson v Barraclough (2): ChD 2 Jan 1980

The Vice-Chancellor said: ‘if land is conveyed in circumstances which otherwise would create a way of necessity, or a way implied from the common intention of the parties based on a necessity apparent from the deeds, does public policy prevent the creation of such a way from, being negatived by an express term in the … Continue reading Nickerson v Barraclough (2): ChD 2 Jan 1980

Owners of Cargo lately laden on Board the ship Nazym Khikmet and Others: AdCt 30 Nov 1995

ComC Shipping – ship – ‘beneficial ownership’ – Supreme Court Act 1981 – section 21(4)(ii) – demise charterers Shipping – ship – charterer under charter by demise – Supreme Court Act 1981 section 21(4)(ii) – section 3(4) Administration of Justice Act 1956 – amendment Judges: Clarke J Citations: Unreported, 30 November 1995 Statutes: Supreme Court … Continue reading Owners of Cargo lately laden on Board the ship Nazym Khikmet and Others: AdCt 30 Nov 1995

Owners of Cargo lately laden on Board the ship Nazym Khikmet and Ors: CA 1996

Citations: [1996] CLC 1044, [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 362 Statutes: Administration of Justice Act 1956 3(4), Supreme Court Act 1981 21(4)(ii) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Owners of Cargo lately laden on Board the ship Nazym Khikmet and Others AdCt 30-Nov-1995 ComC Shipping – ship – ‘beneficial ownership’ – Supreme Court Act … Continue reading Owners of Cargo lately laden on Board the ship Nazym Khikmet and Ors: CA 1996

In re Smalley: HL 1985

Challenge by a surety to an estreatment of his recognizance was not a matter relating to a trial on indictment for the purpose of section 29(3) because it did not affect the conduct of the trial. A sensible legislative purpose can be seen for excluding appeal or judicial review of any decision affecting the conduct … Continue reading In re Smalley: HL 1985

Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others: CA 5 Mar 1999

The defendant’s solicitors appealed an order making them liable for costs in defending an action brought by the landlord. Judges: Butler-Sloss LJ, Morritt LJ, Sedley LJ Citations: [1999] EWCA Civ 3023, [1999] BLR 232, [2000] CPLR 233 Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51(1) 51(3) 51(6) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others: CA 5 Mar 1999

Symphony Group Plc v Hodgson: CA 4 May 1993

A section 51 non-party costs application should not be used as a substitute for the pursuit of a related cause of action against the non-party in ordinary proceedings. Nine rules were set out for allowing a costs order against someone who is not a party to the action. Such orders should be exceptional. The normal … Continue reading Symphony Group Plc v Hodgson: CA 4 May 1993

Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The “Vimeira”): HL 1986

Wide Application of Costs Against Third Party A claim had been made against charterers by the ship owners, and in turn by the charterers against their sub-charterers. Notice of motion were issued after arbitration awards were not accepted. When heard, costs awards were made, which were now appealed. Held: The appeals were allowed. The court’s … Continue reading Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The “Vimeira”): HL 1986

Resolution to amend the Constitution: 28 Sep 1981

Supreme Court of Canada The References in question were prompted by the opposition of eight provinces to a proposed Resolution, published on October 2, 1980. The proposed Resolution contained an address to be presented to Her Majesty The Queen in right of the United Kingdom and a statute, to which was appended another statute providing … Continue reading Resolution to amend the Constitution: 28 Sep 1981

Perez v Brownell: 31 Mar 1958

(United States Supreme Court)Warren CJ (dissenting) described a right to nationality as ‘man’s basic right for it is nothing less than the right to have rights’. Judges: Frankfurter J, Warren CJ Citations: [1958] USSC 56, 356 US 44, 78 SCt 568, 2 LEd2d 603 Links: Worldlii Cited by: Cited – Secretary of State for The … Continue reading Perez v Brownell: 31 Mar 1958

Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others and Other Actions: CA 5 Mar 1999

A court which was considering ordering a third party, who was not party to the action, to pay costs in an action, should first be satisfied that it is just to do so in all the circumstances. There is no need to establish any exceptional circumstances. There must be a connection between the incurring of … Continue reading Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others and Other Actions: CA 5 Mar 1999

Murphy, and Murphy v Young and Co’s Brewery Plc, Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 20 Nov 1996

When an unsuccessful party has had its legal costs funded under legal expenses insurance, should the insurer be held liable to pay the successful party’s costs? The insurer had not instigated the litigation, nor controlled it, and could not be accused of ‘wanton and officious intermeddling’. The insurance was general and did not relate to … Continue reading Murphy, and Murphy v Young and Co’s Brewery Plc, Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 20 Nov 1996

Citibank NA v Excess Insurance Co Ltd: 1999

A section 51 application was prompted by the reporting of the Chapman case, and decided by Thomas J specifically upon the basis that the continued defence of the quantum of the claim after judgment on liability had been conducted by the insurers solely in their own interests, after the insured’s interest in protecting its reputation … Continue reading Citibank NA v Excess Insurance Co Ltd: 1999

Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ: SC 30 Oct 2019

Challenge to the making of a non-party costs order under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 against the product liability insurer of one of the defendants in litigation being managed under a Group Litigation Order (‘GLO’). Many of the claimants in the successful action were not insured, and Travelers, the defendant’s insurers resisted … Continue reading Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ: SC 30 Oct 2019

TGA Chapman Limited; Benson Turner Limited v Christopher and Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 8 Jul 1997

A section 51 application was made because the cover was limited under the defendant’s liability policy and insufficient to pay all the damages, let alone any part of the costs, and the defendant was not worth powder and shot. Nonetheless the claim fell squarely within the cover provided by the policy. It was an insured … Continue reading TGA Chapman Limited; Benson Turner Limited v Christopher and Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc: CA 8 Jul 1997

Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper: SC 29 Jul 2020

Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was obtained, but the court ordered the remaining … Continue reading Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper: SC 29 Jul 2020

Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd: 25 Jun 1992

(High Court of Australia) Two orders for the payment of costs had been made against the receivers and managers of the claimant in the action, Forest Pty Ltd, and the defendant to a counterclaim brought by the defendants to the action, Howe Corporation Pty Ltd. An order for security for costs had been made against … Continue reading Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd: 25 Jun 1992

The Span Terza: CA 1982

The term ‘charterer’ in section 21(4) includes ‘time charterer’. Citations: [1982] 1 Lloyds Rep 225 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 21(4) Cited by: Appeal from – The Span Terza HL 10-Jan-1984 The parties, suppliers of goods and charterers, disputed the ownership of bunkers at the point of sale. Held: Lord Diplock said: ‘My Lords I … Continue reading The Span Terza: CA 1982

Viscount de L’Isle v Times Newspapers Ltd: CA 1988

May LJ said that the three questions which a Judge has to decide under section 69 so as to conclude whether a defamation trial should by by jury or judge alone, ‘requires a value judgment, based on what he is told by counsel, and his experience at the Bar and on the Bench.’ Judges: May … Continue reading Viscount de L’Isle v Times Newspapers Ltd: CA 1988

Rasu Maritima SA v Perusahaan (the Pertamina): CA 1978

Section 45 of the 1925 Act gives the court a very wide discretion to grant an injunction. Judges: Lord Denning MR Citations: [1978] 1 QB 644 Statutes: Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 45 Citing: Applied – Beddow v Beddow CA 1878 The power in the section embraced the grant of an injunction ‘in … Continue reading Rasu Maritima SA v Perusahaan (the Pertamina): CA 1978

Regina v Blandford Magistrates Court ex parte Pamment: CA 1990

The Applicant was charged and remanded into custody by the Justices, having refused conditional bail. Bail was later granted, but he sought judicial review of the original remand decision, just before his trial, which then intervened. After the trial, the Divisional Court quashed the remand decision adjourning the claim for damages. It was said that … Continue reading Regina v Blandford Magistrates Court ex parte Pamment: CA 1990

Re Gosscott (Groundworks) Ltd: 1988

The court had jurisdiction under section 51 to order that the costs of administration proceedings overtaken by a compulsory liquidation could be ordered to be treated as costs in the winding-up. Judges: Mervyn Davies J Citations: [1988] BCLC 363 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Approved – Unadkat and … Continue reading Re Gosscott (Groundworks) Ltd: 1988

Regina v Pan: 29 Jun 2001

(Supreme Court of Canada) The court considered the reason behind the common law rule against a court examining the activities of a jury: ‘the rule seeks to preserve the secrecy of the jury’s deliberations, while ensuring that those deliberations remain untainted by contact with information or individuals from outside the jury. As a result, where … Continue reading Regina v Pan: 29 Jun 2001

Barton v Armstrong: 1969

(Supreme Court of New South Wales) The claimant sought damages alleging assault by the making of telephone calls. Held: Threats made over the telephone were capable of amounting to an assault. Taylor J: ‘Mr. Staff’s first and second propositions can, I think, be best dealt with together. They are the ones upon which he most … Continue reading Barton v Armstrong: 1969

Third Chandris Shipping Corporation v Unimarine SA: CA 1979

The court gave guidelines for the granting of Mareva injunctions as follows: ‘(i) The plaintiff should make full and frank disclosure of all matters in his knowledge which are material for the judge to know. . (ii) The plaintiff should give particulars of his claim against the defendant, stating the ground of his claim and … Continue reading Third Chandris Shipping Corporation v Unimarine SA: CA 1979

Nippon Yusen Kaisha v Karageorgis: CA 1975

The plaintiff company had chartered a ship to the defendants. A large sum was now claimed for hire, and a string prima facie case made out. The charterers could not be found but there was evidence of funds at a bank in London. An ex parte application to grant an injunction restraining the charterers from … Continue reading Nippon Yusen Kaisha v Karageorgis: CA 1975

Bradley v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd: HL 1989

Mrs Bradley was employed by Dart Mill several times from 1933 and 1970 and acquired byssinosis from inhaling cotton dust. The company was wound up in 1975 and dissolved in 1976. In 1984 she applied to the court for pre-action disclosure under section 33(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 and RSC Ord. 24 rule … Continue reading Bradley v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd: HL 1989

Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 20 Jan 1993

MEP’s are susceptible to prosecution. The National courts do have jurisdiction. Citations: Gazette 20-Jan-1993 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Manchester Crown Court and Ashton and Others, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions HL 7-May-1993 A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for … Continue reading Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 20 Jan 1993

SC Rolinay Sea Star SRL v Compania de Navigatie Maritimie Petromin SA (The Bumbesti): QBD 12 Jul 1999

An award made by the Constanza Court of Arbitration of Romania could not be enforced in rem in the English courts against a ship here, since the award was not an agreement relating to the use of the hire of a ship within the section. Citations: Times 12-Jul-1999 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 20(2)(h) Jurisdiction: … Continue reading SC Rolinay Sea Star SRL v Compania de Navigatie Maritimie Petromin SA (The Bumbesti): QBD 12 Jul 1999

Simon and Others v Lyder and Another: PC 29 Jul 2019

(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board was asked as to the well-known conundrum in the common law of defamation, namely the extent to which (if at all) two or more different statements made upon different occasions by the same defendant may be aggregated for the purpose of giving rise to a cause of action in defamation, … Continue reading Simon and Others v Lyder and Another: PC 29 Jul 2019

In re PS (an Adult), Re; City of Sunderland v PS by her litigation friend the Offcial Solcicitor and CA; Re PS (Incapacitated or Vulnerable Adult): FD 9 Mar 2007

The patient an elderly lady with limited mental capacity was to be returned from hospital, but her daughter said she was to come home. The local authority sought to prevent this, wanting to return her to a residential unit where she had lived for some months. The court had held that the patient lacked capacity … Continue reading In re PS (an Adult), Re; City of Sunderland v PS by her litigation friend the Offcial Solcicitor and CA; Re PS (Incapacitated or Vulnerable Adult): FD 9 Mar 2007

S v M (Wasted Costs Order): ChD 26 Mar 1998

An application to order a legal representative to pay under a wasted costs order must specify the improper or negligent behaviour complained of. Citations: Times 26-Mar-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Legal Professions Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.88947

Foden, Re Section 42, Supreme Court Act 1941: Admn 26 Oct 2006

Application for leave by person subject to vexatious litigant order to commence proceedings against her former husband. Citations: [2006] EWHC 2727 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 42(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.246355

Wilkinson and Anor v Kenny and Anor: CA 5 Apr 1993

Costs order against a solicitor are not appealable where by law they are left with discretion of the judge. Citations: Ind Summary 05-Apr-1993 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 18(1)(f) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.90507

Regina v Lambeth Borough Council, Ex Parte Wilson: QBD 21 Mar 1996

Individual local government officers can be made subject to wasted costs orders in appropriate circumstances. Citations: Times 21-Mar-1996 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51 Costs, Legal Professions, Local Government Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87099

Regina v Harrow Crown Court Ex Perkins; Regina v Cardiff Crown Court Ex Parte M (A Minor): QBD 28 Apr 1998

Decision in Crown Court regarding costs or other element of a matter which was formulated in the indictment is a matter relating to the trial and was not subject to judicial review. Citations: Times 28-Apr-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Judicial Review Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86816

Regina v Chester Crown Court Ex Parte Cheshire County Council and Others: QBD 16 Oct 1995

A Divisional Court has no jurisdiction to challenge a Crown Court’s order for disclosure. Citations: Times 23-Oct-1995, Ind Summary 16-Oct-1995 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3) Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86345

Regina v Chelmsford Crown Court, Ex Parte Chief Constable of Essex Police: QBD 5 Jul 1993

Crown Court decision to give complaints statements to defendant not reviewable. The Supreme Court Act 1981 limits judicial review power. Citations: Ind Summary 05-Jul-1993, Times 27-Jul-1993 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 28 29 31 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Judicial Review, Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86334

Regina v St Helen’s Justices Ex Parte Jones; Regina v Ealing Justices Ex Parte Saleem; etc: QBD 15 Dec 1998

Where orders for committal for non-payment of fines were defective because the Magistrates had failed for example to have considered alternatives, a divisional court did not have power to re-sentence but only to remit the case back to the magistrates. Citations: Times 15-Dec-1998 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 43(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing … Continue reading Regina v St Helen’s Justices Ex Parte Jones; Regina v Ealing Justices Ex Parte Saleem; etc: QBD 15 Dec 1998

Mir v Mir: FD 29 Jan 1992

Court has the power to order the sale of family home on order to pay sequestrator’s costs. The father had removed a child from the jurisdiction, and the mother required funds to conduct litigation in Pakistan. The father having failed to comply with a court order, the sequestrator had power to sign a conveyance to … Continue reading Mir v Mir: FD 29 Jan 1992

A T and T Istel Ltd v Tully: HL 9 Sep 1992

The second plaintff had agreed to supply computer systems to a health authority. New owners of the company discovered allegations that the contract had been operated fraudulently. An order had been obtained for production of documents, but the order restricted the use which could be made of the information disclosed. The Court of Appeal held … Continue reading A T and T Istel Ltd v Tully: HL 9 Sep 1992

Schenkers Limited v Overland Shoes Limited and Schenkers International Deutschland Gmbh v Overland Shoes Limited: CA 12 Feb 1998

A clause in a shipping freight contract using the standard British International Freight Association terms disallowing a set-off was not unreasonable. The clause read ‘The customer shall pay to the company in cash or as otherwise agreed all sums immediately when due, without reduction or deferment on account of any claim, counterclaim or set off’. … Continue reading Schenkers Limited v Overland Shoes Limited and Schenkers International Deutschland Gmbh v Overland Shoes Limited: CA 12 Feb 1998

Airey v Ireland: ECHR 9 Oct 1979

Family law proceedings such as judicial separation do give rise to civil rights. In complex cases article 6 might require some provision for legal assistance, the precise form being a matter for the member state. The Court reiterated the importance of the right of access to a court, having regard to the prominent place held … Continue reading Airey v Ireland: ECHR 9 Oct 1979

Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of The Antonis P Lemos: HL 2 Jan 1985

The House was asked as to the effect of the section. Held: Since the provisions of the statute under consideration were designed to give domestic effect to an international convention, a broad and liberal construction should be given to them Judges: Lord Brandon of Oakbrook Citations: [1985] AC 711 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 20(2)(h) … Continue reading Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of The Antonis P Lemos: HL 2 Jan 1985

Scherer v Counting Instruments Ltd (Note): 1986

Section 18(1)(f) which provides that no appeal shall lie to the Court of Appeal without the leave of the lower court ‘relating only to costs which by law are left to the discretion’ of the lower court, has no application if the appeal court is able to say that the judge in the lower court … Continue reading Scherer v Counting Instruments Ltd (Note): 1986

Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: SC 20 Mar 2019

The claimant appellant alleged that properties she owned were transferred to the first defendant under undue influence or other unconscionable conduct by the second and third defendants. The claim was dismissed. Three years later she claimed to set that judgment aside having been obtained by fraud. To support the allegation she brought evidence not available … Continue reading Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: SC 20 Mar 2019

Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of The Antonis P Lemos: CA 1984

Parker LJ said: ‘a domestic statute designed to give effect to an international convention should, in general, be given a broad and liberal construction’ Judges: Parker LJ Citations: [1985] AC 711, [1984] 2 All ER 353, [1984] 2 WLR 825, [1985] 1 Lloyds Rep 283, (1985) 82 LSG 1715 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 20 … Continue reading Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of The Antonis P Lemos: CA 1984

Holden and Co v Crown Prosecution Service (No 2); Similar Cases: CA 8 Jan 1992

The Civil Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to award Costs from central funds and they should be made in favour of successful applicants against wasted costs orders in criminal proceedings. Citations: Gazette 08-Jan-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 407, [1992] 2 All ER 642 Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 51(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal … Continue reading Holden and Co v Crown Prosecution Service (No 2); Similar Cases: CA 8 Jan 1992

Hancock and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 22 May 2019

The taxpayers sold their shares in return for loan notes in the form of mixed qualifying (QCB) and non qualifying corporate bonds (Non-QCB) within section 115 of the 1992 Act. Gains on the disposal of QCB would be exempt from CGT. These were then converted to QCBs. The court was asked as to their chargeability … Continue reading Hancock and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 22 May 2019

The Bumbesti: QBD 14 Jul 1999

An award made by the Constanza Court of Arbitration of Romania could not be enforced in rem in the English courts against a ship here, since the award was not an agreement relating to the use of the hire of a ship within the section. Gazette 14-Jul-1999 Supreme Court Act 1981 20(2)(h) England and Wales … Continue reading The Bumbesti: QBD 14 Jul 1999

Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001

Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001

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

Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Barrett: Admn 21 Oct 1998

‘Mr Barrett is obsessed with the loss of his house and has been making wild allegations of fraud against anyone who decides anything against him in the context of that loss. He is totally unable to appreciate that his activities before the court are vexatious and are completely lacking in any merit whatever. ‘ His … Continue reading Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Barrett: Admn 21 Oct 1998

Regina v Bedwellty Justices Ex Parte Williams: HL 18 Sep 1996

A decision at committal to return an accused for trial is susceptible to judicial review where committal was based solely on inadmissible evidence or was based on evidence not reasonably capable of supporting it. The committal was quashed.The ‘Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court has normally in judicial review proceedings jurisdiction to quash a … Continue reading Regina v Bedwellty Justices Ex Parte Williams: HL 18 Sep 1996

Woolway v Mazars: SC 29 Jul 2015

The Court was asked how different storeys under common occupation in the same block are to be entered in the rating list for the purpose of non-domestic rating. In this case the firm’s two offices were in the same building, but the connection between them was only by way of a communal lift. Held: The … Continue reading Woolway v Mazars: SC 29 Jul 2015

John Mander Pension Trustees Ltd v Revenue and Customs: SC 29 Jul 2015

The pension scheme had been approved, but that approval later withdraw. HMRC issued assessment for the years in which it had been approved. The taxpayer argued that such assessments applied to the date with effect from which the approval is withdraw, HMRC contended that it was in the year in which withdrawal was notified. The … Continue reading John Mander Pension Trustees Ltd v Revenue and Customs: SC 29 Jul 2015

Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was established in three prison officers. In one case the officer opened the letter in front … Continue reading Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005

The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005

Nykredit Mortgage Bank Plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2): HL 27 Nov 1997

A surveyor’s negligent valuation had led to the plaintiff obtaining what turned out to be inadequate security for his loan. A cause of action against a valuer for his negligent valuation arises when a relevant and measurable loss is first recorded. Earlier decisions of the house had settled the liability for damages and the amount … Continue reading Nykredit Mortgage Bank Plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2): HL 27 Nov 1997

Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979

A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. Held: Article 5(1)(a) is concerned with the question whether the detention is permissible. Its object and … Continue reading Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979

In re Brownlee for Judicial Review: SC 29 Jan 2014

The appellant challenged the course taken in his criminal trial after his legal team had withdrawn citing professional embarassment. No replacement team could be found willing to act in a complicated sentencing matter because of the reduced fixed fee legal aid scheme. He had succeeded at first instance, but the Court of Appeal had held … Continue reading In re Brownlee for Judicial Review: SC 29 Jan 2014

Secretary of State for The Home Department v Al-Jedda: SC 9 Oct 2013

The claimant had obtained British citizenship, but had had it removed by the appellant by an order under the 1981 Act after he came to be suspected of terrorist involvement. He had appealed against the order, eventually succeeding on the basis that he had, by virtue of the order, been made stateless. The Secretary of … Continue reading Secretary of State for The Home Department v Al-Jedda: SC 9 Oct 2013

Regina v Howe etc: HL 19 Feb 1986

The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder, saying that their defences of duress had been wrongly disallowed. Held: Duress is not a defence available on a charge of murder. When a defence of duress is raised, the test is whether the threat was so serious as would cause a reasonable man in the same … Continue reading Regina v Howe etc: HL 19 Feb 1986

Maclaine Watson and Co Ltd v International Tin Council: HL 2 Jan 1989

The International Tin Council was a body constituted by an international treaty not incorporated into law in the United Kingdom. The ITC was also created a legal person in the United Kingdom by article 5 1972 Order. Held: As a legal person in the United Kingdom – rather than the states who were its members … Continue reading Maclaine Watson and Co Ltd v International Tin Council: HL 2 Jan 1989

Cadbury-Schweppes Pty Ltd And Others v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd: PC 13 Oct 1980

(New South Wales) The plaintiff had launched and advertised a soft drink. A year later, the defendant launched a similar product using similar names, styles and advertising, but then registered trade marks. The plaintiff sought damages, and for the trade mark to be deregistered. The judge held that there was enough of a difference to … Continue reading Cadbury-Schweppes Pty Ltd And Others v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd: PC 13 Oct 1980

Horncastle and Others, Regina v: SC 9 Dec 2009

Each defendant said they had not received a fair trial in that the court had admitted written evidence of a witness he had not been allowed to challenge. The witnesses had been victims, two of whom had died before trial. It was suggested that the court must implement the ECHR decision in Al-Khawaja. Held: The … Continue reading Horncastle and Others, Regina v: SC 9 Dec 2009

Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board Ex Parte A: HL 11 Mar 1999

A police doctor’s statement in a contemporary medical report that her findings were consistent with the claimant’s allegation had not been included in the evidence before the CICB when it rejected her claim for compensation. Held: The decision was quashed. What happened was held to be a breach of the rules of natural justice and … Continue reading Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board Ex Parte A: HL 11 Mar 1999

Cherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General: SCS 11 Sep 2019

(First Division, Inner House) The reclaimer challenged dismissal of her claim for review of the recent decision for the prorogation of the Parliament at Westminster. Held: Reclaim was granted. The absence of reasons allowed the court to infer that the reason for the prorogation was unlawful.‘It was the role of the courts to protect Parliament. … Continue reading Cherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General: SCS 11 Sep 2019

Steele Ford and Newton v Crown Prosecution Service (No.2): HL 1993

The House considered the court’s jurisdiction to award costs out of central funds. Held: In this case there was no such power, but: ‘still more important, in the present context, is the special constitutional convention which jealously safeguards the exclusive control exercised by Parliament over both the levying and expenditure of the public revenue. It … Continue reading Steele Ford and Newton v Crown Prosecution Service (No.2): HL 1993

Amand v Home Secretary and Minister of Defence of Royal Netherlands Government: HL 1943

A Dutch serviceman who had been arrested for desertion and brought before a magistrate who ordered him to be handed over to the Dutch military authorities under the Allied Forces Act 1940. An application for habeas corpus was rejected by a Divisional Court. The Court of Appeal held that they had no jurisdiction to entertain … Continue reading Amand v Home Secretary and Minister of Defence of Royal Netherlands Government: HL 1943

Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation: HL 1 Apr 1981

A ship belonging to the appellants had been blacked by the defendant union. Negotiations to clear the threat resulted in payment by the appellants to a welfare fund of the defendant. The company sought its refund saying that it had been paid under duress. The Court of Appeal had found it to be a payment … Continue reading Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation: HL 1 Apr 1981

Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ex Parte the World Development Movement Ltd: Admn 10 Nov 1994

The Movement sought to challenge decisions of the Secretary of state to give economic aid to the Pergau Dam, saying that it was not required ‘for the purpose of promoting the development’ of Malaysia. It was said to be uneconomic and damaging. It was said by the defendant’s advisers to be an abuse of the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ex Parte the World Development Movement Ltd: Admn 10 Nov 1994

Regina v Dairy Produce Quota Tribunal for England and Wales, Ex parte Caswell: HL 17 May 1990

The House sought to reconcile section 31 of the 1981 Act, with RSC Order 53 r4 as to the time within which judicial review proceedings must be brought. Held: Whenever there was a failure to act promptly or within three months there was ‘undue delay’ within the meaning of section 31(6). Lord Goff said: ‘as … Continue reading Regina v Dairy Produce Quota Tribunal for England and Wales, Ex parte Caswell: HL 17 May 1990