Click the case name for better results:

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

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

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

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

Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd: ChD 2 Mar 2009

Principles Applicable on Summary Judgment Request The court considered an application for summary judgment. Held: Lewison J set out the principles: ‘the court must be careful before giving summary judgment on a claim. The correct approach on applications by defendants is, in my judgment, as follows: i) The court must consider whether the claimant has … Continue reading Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd: ChD 2 Mar 2009

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

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

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

London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and home. Held: Article 8 does not, in terms, give a right to … Continue reading London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another: CA 4 Apr 2003

The rules contained two occasions on which a court would consider dismissal of a claim as having ‘no real prospect’ of success. Held: The only significant difference between CPR 24.2 and 13.3(1), is that under the first the overall burden of proof rests upon the claimant to establish that there are grounds for his belief … Continue reading E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another: CA 4 Apr 2003

Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the claimant? Held: A finding that a Convention right has been infringed, including a … Continue reading Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor: CA 2002

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

MGN Limited v United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Jan 2011

The applicant publisher said that the finding against it of breach of confidence and the system of success fees infringed it Article 10 rights to freedom of speech. It had published an article about a model’s attendance at Narcotics anonymous meetings. Held: The finding of a breach of confidence against the applicant amounted to an … Continue reading MGN Limited v United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Jan 2011

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

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

Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland: SC 23 May 2012

Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal from prison. The legal services department of the Prison service relayed the notices to … Continue reading Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland: SC 23 May 2012

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

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

Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Dec 2008

(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database. Held: (Unanimous) The retention was unlawful. Though other member states retained some DNA samples in certain conditions, the UK was … Continue reading Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Dec 2008

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

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

Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd: CA 26 Jan 1994

Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an advocate has to make decisions quickly and under … Continue reading Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd: CA 26 Jan 1994

Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council and MK Windfarm Ltd: CA 10 Oct 2008

Judicial Review must be timely The appellant challenged the grant of permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. His application for judicial review had been rejected for delay and on the merits. Held: The court repeated the requirement that an application must be both timely and in any event made within three months. Both … Continue reading Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council and MK Windfarm Ltd: CA 10 Oct 2008

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

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

G v G (Minors: Custody Appeal): HL 25 Apr 1985

The House asked when a decision, on the facts, of a first instance court is so wrong as to allow it to be overturned on appeal. Held: The epithet ‘wrong’ is to be applied to the substance of the decision made by the lower court. ‘Certainly it would not be useful to inquire whether different … Continue reading G v G (Minors: Custody Appeal): HL 25 Apr 1985

Vaughan v Vaughan: CA 2 Nov 2007

H appealed an ancillary relief order giving certain extra rights in the family property on its sale. Held: ‘the case demonstrates that, in an ancillary relief appeal, even the most conscientious appellate judge can fall into error if, having perceived error and/or received fresh evidence, he purports to make the requisite adjustments without having first … Continue reading Vaughan v Vaughan: CA 2 Nov 2007

Eckerle and Others v Wickeder Westfalenstahl Gmbh and Another: ChD 23 Jan 2013

By acting together, two shareholders had first refused the proposed dividend, and replaced the board. They then acquired fiurther shares and achieved a majority of more than 75%, sufficient to pass a special resolution, and proposed the cancellation of the company’s listing on the German Stock exchange, affecting the value of the remaining minority shares. … Continue reading Eckerle and Others v Wickeder Westfalenstahl Gmbh and Another: ChD 23 Jan 2013

Clarkson v Gilbert and others: CA 14 Jun 2000

The court considered the restrictions on lay representatives appearing in court as the related to relatives of the party. Held: The same objections to granting rights of audience did not apply to a husband who merely wished to assist his wife by representing her in court. Where a close relative was seeking to represent a … Continue reading Clarkson v Gilbert and others: CA 14 Jun 2000

Locabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd: CA 17 Nov 1999

Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The … Continue reading Locabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd: CA 17 Nov 1999

NML Capital Ltd v Argentina: SC 6 Jul 2011

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

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

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

Laporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire: HL 13 Dec 2006

The claimants had been in coaches being driven to take part in a demonstration at an air base. The defendant police officers stopped the coaches en route, and, without allowing any number of the claimants to get off, returned the coaches to London. The officer acted saying that he feared a breach of the peace … Continue reading Laporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire: HL 13 Dec 2006

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

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

Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc: ChD 4 Oct 2017

EC has sole jurisdiction over old cartels Several claimants alleged that the defendant airway had been part of a cartel which had overcharged for freight services. The court now heard arguments about whether it had jurisdition to deal with claims which preceded the measures which had brought into force the EU competition rules. The cartel … Continue reading Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc: ChD 4 Oct 2017

Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School: HL 22 Mar 2006

The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion. Held: The school’s appeal succeeded. The school had acted responsibly and carefully seeking to balance and respect several interests when … Continue reading Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School: HL 22 Mar 2006

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

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

Chase v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd: CA 3 Dec 2002

The defendant appealed against a striking out of part of its defence to the claim of defamation, pleading justification. Held: The Human Rights Convention had not itself changed the conditions for a plea of justification based upon reasonable belief that the claimant had acted criminally. The three conditions were: the inability to rely upon hearsay, … Continue reading Chase v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd: CA 3 Dec 2002

Mubarak v Mubarak: CA 2001

A judgment summons, issued was issued by the wife to enforce a lump sum order made against her husband in their divorce proceedings. The judge had performed his statutory duty which included having to satisfy himself under s. 25 of the 1973 Act of the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources of the … Continue reading Mubarak v Mubarak: CA 2001

Totalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2): CA 19 Dec 2001

The respondent operated a web site which contained a chat room. Defamatory remarks were made by a third party through the chat room, and the claimant sought details of the identity of the poster. The respondent refused to do so without a court order. One was applied for, and the claimant was given the information … Continue reading Totalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2): CA 19 Dec 2001

Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd: CA 27 Nov 2013

(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very substantially the costs which might be made in his favour. Held: The appeal was refused. It was inherent … Continue reading Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd: CA 27 Nov 2013

Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. The claimant asserted that their claim was an intellectual property claim, allowing section 72 … Continue reading Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

Brown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others: ComC 19 Jun 2009

The claimants served proceedings by fax. The defendants denied that it was effective saying that they had not confirmed that they were instructed to accept service or that as required by the rules they had confirmed that they would accept service by fax. Held: The service had not been valid. The claimant effectively argued for … Continue reading Brown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others: ComC 19 Jun 2009

Raymond v Honey: HL 4 Mar 1981

The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court. Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject to any legislation altering the situation, a prisoner retains all his rights that are not taken … Continue reading Raymond v Honey: HL 4 Mar 1981

Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

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

Vince v Wyatt: CA 8 May 2013

The parties had divorced some twenty years previously, but apparently without ancillary relief orders, the parties at the time being relatively poor. H was now wealthy and W applied for lump sum provision. H replied that there was no no evidence . .

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

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

More Recent Cases

This is a continuation of the list of significant recent cases on our front page. As a most recent case pushes its way to the top, the last on teh front page falls into here. Newest significant cases.

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

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

Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009

References: [2009] EWHC 2500 (Mercantile), [2009] WLR (D) 309 Links: Times, Bailii, WLRD Coram: Judge Simon Brown, QC The claimant had lost his claim against the bank, but resisted the amount of costs claimed. Held: The trial had been of a simple factual dispute, and the bank had failed adequately to disclose electronically held material … Continue reading Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009

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

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

Acts

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

law index

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