Search Results for: Civil Procedure Rules 24

Click the case name for better results:

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Broomco (1984) Ltd (Formerly Anchor Foods Ltd): CA 17 Aug 2000

When an appeal is lodged in a VAT dispute, the discretion as to whether to require the appellant to lodge security for costs in the appeal, was a decision exclusively to be decided by the tribunal itself. A decision as to such security could not be challenged within enforcement proceedings. Citations: Times 17-Aug-2000 Statutes: Finance … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Broomco (1984) Ltd (Formerly Anchor Foods Ltd): CA 17 Aug 2000

1-800 Flowers Inc v Phonenames Ltd: CA 17 May 2001

When making a summary assessment of costs, the court should look primarily to the facts of the particular case before it. It would be proper to bear in mind its own experience of comparable cases. Having made that assessment, it was also proper to look at the total claimed to judge whether it was reasonable … Continue reading 1-800 Flowers Inc v Phonenames Ltd: CA 17 May 2001

Banks and Another v Cox and Another: CA 17 Jul 2000

The court considered the principles of admitting new evidence on appeal after the introduction of the new rules. Moritt LJ: ‘In my view the principles reflecting in the rules in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 remain relevant to any application for permission to rely on further evidence, not as rules, but as matters … Continue reading Banks and Another v Cox and Another: CA 17 Jul 2000

Black v Sumitomo Corporation: CA 3 Dec 2001

The claimants proposed pre-action discovery which was resisted. Held: A purpose of pre-action disclosure is to assist those who need disclosure as a vital step in deciding whether to litigate at all or to provide a vital ingredient in the pleading of their case. The rules required first that disclosure would be desirable in the … Continue reading Black v Sumitomo Corporation: CA 3 Dec 2001

Law Society v Southall: CA 14 Dec 2001

In making a strike out decision under Part 24, the court of first instance was exercising a discretion which an appellate court should be reluctant to disturb. The court should only interfere in the case of a manifest error. The Law Society had intervened in the legal practice of the respondent’s late husband. The court … Continue reading Law Society v Southall: CA 14 Dec 2001

Grobbelaar v Sun Newspapers Ltd: CA 9 Jul 1999

With the new Civil Procedure Rules, it was no longer correct that a court could not exclude evidence which was relevant, on the grounds that its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. The court now has full power and discretion to make such orders. ‘The just resolution of this case depends on the … Continue reading Grobbelaar v Sun Newspapers Ltd: CA 9 Jul 1999

KU (A Child) v Liverpool City Council: CA 27 Apr 2005

(Practice Note) The solicitor appealed an order which made the success fee payable different at different stages of the court action. Held: The court had no power to make such an order. To the extent that the CPR might suggest otherwise they were wrong. ‘a practice direction has no legislative force. Practice directions provide invaluable … Continue reading KU (A Child) v Liverpool City Council: CA 27 Apr 2005

In re NY (A Child) (Reunite International and others intervening): SC 30 Oct 2019

The father had applied for a summary order requiring the return of the daughter to Israel. The Court was asked to consider whether the Court of Appeal, having determined that such an order could not be granted under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 (‘the Convention’), was nonetheless entitled … Continue reading In re NY (A Child) (Reunite International and others intervening): SC 30 Oct 2019

Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham: CA 27 Feb 2004

The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent. Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position should not generally be expected to pay the costs of an appeal against an order … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham: CA 27 Feb 2004

Dyson Appliances Limited v Hoover Limited (No 4): PatC 18 Feb 2003

The court refused to make an order for a payment of interim costs when the substantive claim for costs remained to be heard. The claimant had accepted a payment in entitling it to its costs, but now sought an interim award before the full costs could be assessed. Any rule allowing a judge to make … Continue reading Dyson Appliances Limited v Hoover Limited (No 4): PatC 18 Feb 2003

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

Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co: HL 1983

A claimant must show good reason why service on a foreign defendant should be permitted. This head of jurisdiction was an exorbitant jurisdiction, one which, under general English conflict rules, an English court would not recognise as possessed by any foreign court in the absence of some treaty providing for such recognition. Comity dictated that … Continue reading Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co: HL 1983

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005

Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: CA 1 Aug 2018

The case had been decide on the basis of the papers after the employer had failed to submit a response. It now appealed against a refusal to allow them to be heard as to the assessment of damages. Held: The appeal succeeded. The tribunal should apply the practice which apply in standard civil claims. Judges: … Continue reading Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: CA 1 Aug 2018

Taylor and others v Midland Bank Trust Company Limited: CA 21 Jul 1999

Stuart-Smith LJ rationalised the possible conflict between Part 24 and the practice direction to Part 24 in its original form by saying that the correct view of the effect of the practice direction is to be gleaned from the heading to the paragraph which reads ‘the court’s approach’. It indicates no more than examples of … Continue reading Taylor and others v Midland Bank Trust Company Limited: CA 21 Jul 1999

The Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens Of The City Of London v Reeve and Company Ltd, G Lawrence Wholesale Meat Company Ltd, Citigen (London) Ltd: TCC 25 Feb 2000

CS CPR 24.2(a)(i) – Summary judgment against Part 20 Claimant – Whether no real prospect of success Indemnity – Indemnity against loss etc suffered by reason of indemnifier’s breach of contract – Date of accrual of cause of action – Breaches giving rise to claims by third parties – Whether cause of action accrues when … Continue reading The Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens Of The City Of London v Reeve and Company Ltd, G Lawrence Wholesale Meat Company Ltd, Citigen (London) Ltd: TCC 25 Feb 2000

Marsh v Frenchay NHS Trust: QBD 13 Mar 2001

The circumstances required to allow a person to withdraw money paid into court. The new rules created a flexibility unavailable under the old rules, and the case law associated with the old pre-Woolfe rules should not now determine how such applications are dealt with. Citations: Times 13-Mar-2001 Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules Part 36 Cited by: … Continue reading Marsh v Frenchay NHS Trust: QBD 13 Mar 2001

International Distillers and Vintners Ltd v J F Hillebrand (UK) Ltd and Others: QBD 25 Jan 2000

An application was made to substitute one defendant in an action for an existing one. Under the old rules, the applicant would have to have shown both that the substitution arose from a genuine mistake and also that the new defendant had not been prejudiced. The new rules stated no such requirements, but the court … Continue reading International Distillers and Vintners Ltd v J F Hillebrand (UK) Ltd and Others: QBD 25 Jan 2000

Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (A Firm) v Armes: CA 2 May 2017

‘The issue in this appeal is whether a defendant joined to proceedings by way of amendment outside the limitation period, and sued in the alternative to the existing defendant, has been added to the claim as a new party or has been substituted for the existing defendant, for the purposes of the Civil Procedure Rules … Continue reading Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (A Firm) v Armes: CA 2 May 2017

Siskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA: HL 1979

An injunction was sought against a Panamanian ship-owning company to restrain it from disposing of a fund, consisting of insurance proceeds, in England. The claimant for the injunction was suing the company in a Cyprus court for damages and believed the company to have no other assets from which to meet the hoped-for damages award … Continue reading Siskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA: HL 1979

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006

The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. The bank owed a duty … Continue reading HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006

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

M v M (Breaches of orders: Committal): CA 28 Jul 2005

The mother sought to appeal refusal of a judge to commit the father for contempt in not complying many times with court orders related to residence and contact. Held: Leave was required for such an appeal. The rules distinguished between an appeal against a committal where leave was not required, and against any other order … Continue reading M v M (Breaches of orders: Committal): CA 28 Jul 2005

Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017

The claimant anti-asbestos campaigners complained that the defendant investigators had infringed their various rights of privacy. They now sought discovery to support the claim. Held: the contents of the witness statements do show that it is more than speculative that these Claimants could, if their recollection was prompted by seeing documents, formulate a claim with … Continue reading Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017

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

Teva UK Ltd v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma Gmbh and Co Kg: CA 16 Dec 2016

The Court considered the rights or otherwise of appealing to the Court of Appeal in Patents cases. Kitchin, Floyd LJJ [2016] EWCA Civ 1296 Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 52.3(6) England and Wales Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572422

Wall v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: ComC 7 Oct 2016

Claimant may be ordered to disclose funder The claimant alleged the misselling of interest rate sawp agreements by the defendant to his companies, leading to losses of andpound;700 million. The defendant now applied for disclosure of the identity of any third party funding the claimant’s litigation, and if appropriate the associated costs order. Held: RBS … Continue reading Wall v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: ComC 7 Oct 2016

Cardiff County Council v Lee (Flowers): CA 19 Oct 2016

The court was asked: ‘can the court proceed to validate a warrant of possession where a landlord who seeks to enforce his right to possession because of an alleged breach of the terms of a suspended possession order has not complied with CPR 83.2? ‘ Held: CPR r 83.2 were intended to provide real protection … Continue reading Cardiff County Council v Lee (Flowers): CA 19 Oct 2016

Bessant and others v South Cone Incorporated; in re REEF Trade Mark: CA 28 May 2002

The Reef pop group applied to register ‘REEF’ for Classes 25 and 26 – e.g. T-shirts, badges, etc. South Cone opposed them as registered proprietors of ‘Reef Brazil’ for the footwear which also was included in Class 25. South’s reputation was primarily amongst surfers. The Hearing Officer conducted a ‘multi-factorial’ comparison, and rejected the opposition … Continue reading Bessant and others v South Cone Incorporated; in re REEF Trade Mark: CA 28 May 2002

Vilnius City, the District Court of v Barcys: Admn 22 Mar 2007

The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to apply the Rules to extend time to appeal against discharge of an extradition request. The notice of appeal was not filed (or served) within seven days. Held: Latham LJ said: ‘I acknowledge the force of this argument. But it begs the question as to what power the … Continue reading Vilnius City, the District Court of v Barcys: Admn 22 Mar 2007

Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981

No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981

Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd: TCC 8 Feb 2007

Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction in a manner which is obviously consonant with the intentions of those who drafted … Continue reading Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd: TCC 8 Feb 2007

Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Woodhouse v Consignia Plc; Steliou v Compton: CA 7 Mar 2002

The claimant continued an action brought in her late husband’s name. The action had begun under the former rules. After the new rules came into effect, the action was automatically stayed, since no progress had been made for over a year. Her application to lift the stay was refused, and she appealed. Held: The automatic … Continue reading Woodhouse v Consignia Plc; Steliou v Compton: CA 7 Mar 2002

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

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

Beasley v Alexander: QBD 9 Oct 2012

The parties had disputed liability for personal injuries in a road traffic accident. The court had held the defendant liable, but held over the assessment of damages. The defendant sought to refer to the fact of his offer of settlement when assessing the costs of the liability trial. Held: CPR r 36.13(2) did not permit … Continue reading Beasley v Alexander: QBD 9 Oct 2012

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

Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others: CA 23 Jul 2015

Richards, Christopher Clarke LJJ [2015] EWCA Civ 774, [2015] 4 Costs LR 707, [2015] CP Rep 45 Bailii England and Wales Citing: See Also – Emmott v Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd CA 12-Mar-2008 The court considered the implication of the obligation of confidentiality in banking contracts or in arbitration agreements. It is ‘really a … Continue reading Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others: CA 23 Jul 2015

TSN Kunststoffrecycling Gmbh v Jurgens: CA 25 Jan 2002

The claimant sought to register and enforce here, a judgment obtained by default in Germany. It was argued that he had not had, under section 27(2) sufficient opportunity to make a proper reply to the proceedings, and that the Brussels Convention created a right of appeal outside the range of appeals under the Civil Procedure … Continue reading TSN Kunststoffrecycling Gmbh v Jurgens: CA 25 Jan 2002

Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

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

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

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

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

XYZ v Various (Including Transform Medical Group (CS) Ltd and Spire Healthcare Limited) and Others: QBD 3 Dec 2014

The court considered further direction in a personal injury claim involving over 1,000 women complaining of the breast implants supplied by the defendants. The claimants wanted the defendant’s insurers to be joined so as to ascertain the viability of the action. Held: A claimant must take the defendant as he finds him. Application refused. Thirlwall … Continue reading XYZ v Various (Including Transform Medical Group (CS) Ltd and Spire Healthcare Limited) and Others: QBD 3 Dec 2014

Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No.4): ChD 18 Oct 1999

Mr Justice Neuberger [1999] EWHC 835 (Ch) Bailii England and Wales Citing: See also – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No 2) ChD 24-Mar-1999 The claimant intended to seek recovery of a very substantial sum from the defendant. On learning of the defendant’s intention to sell its assets, it sought an … Continue reading Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No.4): ChD 18 Oct 1999

Long v Value Properties Ltd and Another: ChD 30 Sep 2014

This appeal raises the following questions (i) whether a breach of the CPR has occurred here, (ii) if so, what is the applicable sanction, if any, for that breach, and (iii) whether relief from any such sanction should be granted. Barling J [2014] EWHC 2981 (Ch) Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 3.9 England and Wales Costs, … Continue reading Long v Value Properties Ltd and Another: ChD 30 Sep 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

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

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

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

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 15 Apr 2013

The defendant objected to the introduction of certain evidence by the claimant under a Civil Evidence Act notice. Claimants seeking to adduce academic journals as expert evidence Arnold J [2013] EWHC 936 (Ch), [2013] WLR(D) 183 Bailii, WLRD Civil Procedure Rules 35 England and Wales Citing: See Also – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 15 Apr 2013

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

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

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

Tchenguiz and Another v Director of The Serious Fraud Office: ComC 29 Apr 2014

In an associated action, documents had been disclosed by the current respondent. The claimant sought an order allowing the documents to be released to a lawyer in support of consideration of taking action against third parties. The third party involved, having been given notice had no objection to the proposed release. Eder J [2014] EWHC … Continue reading Tchenguiz and Another v Director of The Serious Fraud Office: ComC 29 Apr 2014

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

Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others: CA 22 Jun 2000

A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or falsified documentation in discovery. The forgery was admitted. Held: If a party to litigation behaved … Continue reading Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others: CA 22 Jun 2000

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

Kaneria v Kaneria and Others: ChD 15 Apr 2014

The parties were embroiled in a company dispute with allegations of conduct prejudicial to minority shareholders. An application was now made for sanctions for a failure to comply with court directions. Held: Unless and until a higher Court has said that the approach in Robert is no longer to be followed, it was binding and … Continue reading Kaneria v Kaneria and Others: ChD 15 Apr 2014

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

St Albans Girls School and Another v Neary: CA 12 Nov 2009

The claimant’s case had been struck out after non-compliance with an order to file further particulars. His appeal was allowed by the EAT, and the School now itself appealed, saying that the employment judge had wrongly had felt obliged to have regard to the Civil Procedure Rules on striking cases out. Held: The school’s appeal … Continue reading St Albans Girls School and Another v Neary: CA 12 Nov 2009

Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and proportionate. Held: The present procedure does not involve the criminal courts and the absence of any criminal … Continue reading Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

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

Sugar v The British Broadcasting Commission and Another (No 2): CA 23 Jun 2010

The respondent had had prepared a report as to the balance of its reporting of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Earlier proceedings had established that the purposes of the holding of the reporting included jurnalism. The claimant now appealed against an order by the Information Tribunal saying that if the purposes included journalism, then other purposes for … Continue reading Sugar v The British Broadcasting Commission and Another (No 2): CA 23 Jun 2010

Kier Regional Ltd (T/A Wallis) v City and General (Holborn) Ltd and others: TCC 17 Oct 2008

kier_cityTCC2008 The claimant sought to make final an interim third party debt order. The defendants sought a stay of the enforcement. Coulson J [2008] EWHC 2454 (TCC) Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 72 Citing: Cited – Roberts Petroleum Ltd v Bernard Kenny Ltd HL 2-Jan-1983 The plaintiff supplied petrol to the defendant but had not been … Continue reading Kier Regional Ltd (T/A Wallis) v City and General (Holborn) Ltd and others: TCC 17 Oct 2008

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

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

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

Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another: HL 23 May 2002

The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission for a development which would affect her. The authority objected that the application was made after three months after their decision, and so leave should not be granted, and also that her application for leave having been refused, there was no jurisdiction in … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another: HL 23 May 2002

Woodland v Stopford and Others: CA 16 Mar 2011

The claimant appealed against a decision allowing a defendant to withdraw an admission of liability. As a child she had got into difficulties during a class swimming lesson, and had ceased to breathe leaving her with catastrophic hypoxic brain injury. There had been confusion about the involvement of the Swimming Teachers’ Association. The claimant said … Continue reading Woodland v Stopford and Others: CA 16 Mar 2011

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

Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others: ChD 7 Mar 2007

The federal government sought to recover properties from the defendants which it said were the proceeds of corrupt behaviour by the principal defendant who had been State Governor of a province. The claimant sought summary judgment. Held: Summary judgment was refused. The witness statements were admitted to contain contradictory and unreliable evidence, and the allegations … Continue reading Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others: ChD 7 Mar 2007

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

Pressdram Ltd v Whyte: ChD 30 May 2012

The respondent had been involved in company director disqualification proceedings some 12 years earlier. The claimant, publisher of Private Eye sought disclosure of the associated court papers. Held: The applicant had provided appropriate details of the papers required. The basic principle of open justice applied, and the papers were required for a proper jurnalistic purpose.The … Continue reading Pressdram Ltd v Whyte: ChD 30 May 2012

Amwell View School v Dogherty: EAT 15 Sep 2006

amwell_dogherty The claimant had secretly recorded the disciplinary hearings and also the deliberations of the disciplinary panel after their retirement. The tribunal had at a case management hearing admitted the recordings as evidence, and the defendant appealed, saying also that it had been disclosed too late. Held: The evidence contained in the recordings was relevant … Continue reading Amwell View School v Dogherty: EAT 15 Sep 2006

Mucelli v Government of Albania (Criminal Appeal From Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice): HL 21 Jan 2009

The House was asked whether someone who wished to appeal against an extradition order had an obligation also to serve his appellant’s notice on the respondent within the seven days limit, and whether the period was capable of extension by the court. Held: The appeal failed (Lord Rodger dissenting). Giving notice, for the purposes of … Continue reading Mucelli v Government of Albania (Criminal Appeal From Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice): HL 21 Jan 2009

Nussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4): CA 19 May 2006

A claim was issued in London in December 2004, and then served in part in Switzerland in January 2005. One copy was removed from the bundle by a Swiss official, seeing that it had been marked ‘Nor for service out of the jurisdiction.’ That marking had been in error. After proceedings were then issued in … Continue reading Nussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4): CA 19 May 2006

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

SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Nov 2008

Immigration detention proper after prison release The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that he had unlawfully detained the applicant. The applicant had been detained on release from prison pending his return to Zimbabwe as recommended by the sentencing judge under section 6 of the 1971 Act. The court had found that the detention had … Continue reading SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Nov 2008

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

United Film Distribution Limited; United Pictures (India) Exports Private Limited v Chhabria; Chhabria; Spark Entertainments Limited; Spark Media Limited; Fairdeal Exports Private Limited and Mathilda International SA: CA 28 Mar 2001

The court rules, which dealt with the grant of permission to serve documents out of the jurisdiction under rule 6.20(2), were no less wide than the power in the court with regard to the substitution, or addition, of parties under Rule 19.1(2). The change from the old court rules had not either narrowed the power. … Continue reading United Film Distribution Limited; United Pictures (India) Exports Private Limited v Chhabria; Chhabria; Spark Entertainments Limited; Spark Media Limited; Fairdeal Exports Private Limited and Mathilda International SA: CA 28 Mar 2001