Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Loss of two-thirds of old-age pension as a result of introduction of legislation effectively deciding outcome of pending litigation against the State: violation Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Fair hearing Introduction of legislation effectively deciding outcome … Continue reading Stefanetti And Others v Italy: ECHR 15 Apr 2014
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURERight to be heardAbsence of partyA preliminary hearing was summoned to determine whether claims that the Claimant had been discriminated against by being subject to a blacklist should be struck out against one or all of the five Respondents. On that basis, the Fourth Respondent did not attend. It did not anticipate … Continue reading Maunders v Wellwise Group (Wellwise Oilfield Services Ltd) and Others: EAT 22 Jun 2012
Sir Mark Potter gave guidance on the acceptance of McKenzie Friends as advocates: ‘A court may grant an unqualified person a right of audience in exceptional circumstances only and only after careful consideration (D v S (Rights of Audience) [1997] 1 FLR 724, Milne v Kennedy and Others [1999] TLR 106, Paragon Finance PLC v … Continue reading Guidance (McKenzie Friends): 2005
The claimants sought damages for professional negligence, in having failed to pursue a claim for professional negligence against a previous firm of solicitors who had acted for the claimant. Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Eady Citations: [2003] EWHC 1091 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Swain v Hillman CA 21-Oct-1999 Strike … Continue reading William Browning, Maureen Browning v Messrs Brachers (A Firm): QBD 15 May 2003
Citations: [1996] EWCA Civ 1132, [1997] 2 All ER 395 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd HL 1979 The plaintiff tried to bring a second action in respect of an industrial injury claim outside the limitation period so as to overcome the likelihood that his first action, although timeous, … Continue reading Forward v Hendricks: CA 6 Dec 1996
A solicitor appealed against an order requiring him to contribute to the costs of Mareva injunction applied for on behalf of his bankrupt client. Held: Solicitors were not liable in costs personally for starting proceedings on behalf of a bankrupt. A bankrupt has power to instruct solicitor to commence proceedings. Waller LJGibson LJ said: ‘s.306 … Continue reading Nelson v Nelson: CA 6 Dec 1996
The plaintiff had had his claim re-instated after being struck out. The defendant appealed. Held: There was material on which the learned Circuit Judge was entitled to reach the conclusion which she did. Although this was a borderline case, it was a proper case to hold that the two threshold tests had been satisfied. Citations: … Continue reading Dowse v Kappell: CA 12 Dec 1996
The pharmacist had been removed from register the for a year after findings of domestic abuse. The court now considered what inquiry was required on an application for a continuation of that suspension. Held: The different appeals of both the GPC and the practitioner were allowed. The review committee’s powers were set out within the … Continue reading Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council: SC 14 Dec 2016
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – ReviewOn 27 June 2011 the Tribunal prepared a letter informing the Claimant that Employment Judge Hill was considering striking out the claim because he had not complied with the order dated 16 May. The letter said that if he wished to object to the proposal he should give his reasons … Continue reading Patel v Babcock Airports Ltd: EAT 11 Jun 2012
UTLC VALUE ADDED TAX – application to First-tier Tribunal for extension of time to appeal under section 83G(1) and (6) of Value Added Tax Act 1994 – legal test to be applied to application for extension of time – First-tier Tribunal applied correct legal test – decision not perverse – no error of law – … Continue reading Data Select v HM Revenue and Customs: UTTC 1 Jun 2012
The claimant union leader sought damages in defamation against the mayor of London with regard to election leaflets. The defendant denied any defamatory meaning. Held: The words in the leaflet that Mr Crow complained of were within the latitude permitted by the law in the context of the election in the course of which they … Continue reading Crow v Johnson: QBD 16 Jul 2012
The applicants sought damages after they had had placed with them for adoption a child who proved to be destructively hyperactive. Held: The authority might be liable where they failed to disclose to adoptive parents known characteristics of a child. A person exercising a particular skill might owe a duty of care where its negligent … Continue reading A, B v Essex County Council: QBD 18 Dec 2002
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALConstructive dismissalCompensationRespondent’s ET3 struck out for failure to comply with an unless order. No judgment entered against the Respondent. Employment Tribunal refused to permit Respondent to have order reviewed but applied rule 34 of ET Rules of Procedure. Also, applying rule 9 Employment Tribunal refused to permit Respondent to participate in remedy hearing; … Continue reading Epem Ltd v Huggins: EAT 21 May 2012
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissalAfter several attempts to agree upon a medical expert to report upon the day to day effects of Claimant’s alleged disability, C failed to attend an appointment he had agreed to go to. He claimed he was not well enough. When ordered to produce evidence of this (eventually by means … Continue reading Croce v Centrewest London (Buses) Ltd and Others: EAT 29 May 2012
Appeal, pursuant to section 49 of the Solicitors Act 1974 against the order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal that they be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, and required to pay costs in the sum of pounds 98,000. Judges: Mrs Justice Lang DBE Citations: [2022] EWHC 2722 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Solicitors Act 1974 49 … Continue reading Hetherington and Another v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd: Admn 31 Oct 2022
The official receiver began director disqualification proceedings, but before the proceedings commenced, the company was wound up. Where, on an application for the disqualification of a director, the official receiver and the Secretary of State became aware that the company had in fact already been dissolved, the normal course would be to transfer the proceedings … Continue reading Re NP Engineering and Security Products Ltd; Official Receiver and Another v Pafundo and Another: CA 22 Oct 1996
A trial judge’s decisions should not normally be set aside unless they constituted a denial of justice to one or other of the parties. Citations: Times 22-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 755 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – McDonald’s Corporation v Steel and Another CA 14-Apr-1994 Defence paragraphs alleging justification were to be struck … Continue reading McDonald’s Corporation and Another v Steel and Morris: CA 17 Oct 1996
The claimants had sought damages for poisoning from organophosphates used in sheep dipping. Evidence linking the injuries to the use of the chemicals had not been found, and the actions struck out as an abuse of process. The group litigation had been struck out but it was not agreed what had happened to the individual … Continue reading Herbert George Snell and others v Robert Young and Co Limited and others: CA 21 Nov 2002
The claimant sought damages for the consequences of having been suspended from work as a teacher. He later recovered damages for unfair dismissal, and the court had struck out his claim for damages over and above those already awarded. Held: There is no absolute bar against a claim for damages not covered by the Employment … Continue reading McCabe v Cornwall County Council, The Governing Body of Mounts Bay School: CA 23 Dec 2002
The court considered the possible affront to jurors in a defamation action when asked to decide some elements of an action, but not others. Judges: Gray J Citations: [2002] EWHC 2726 (QB), [2002] QB 321 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others CA 23-Jan-2001 The … Continue reading Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 12 Dec 2002
Claims were made after the deaths of British troops on active service in Iraq. In one case the deaths were from detonations of improvised explosive devices, and on others as a result of friendly fire. It was said that there had been a foreseeable risk of the deaths. The defendant sought the strike out of … Continue reading Smith and Others v Ministry of Defence: QBD 30 Jun 2011
The parties had had a part trial, and settled. The Gardian Newspaper now applied for disclosure of various documents to support a proposed news story. The parties had disputed payment to the claimant of commissions on the sales of military vehicles by the defendant to an overseas government. The disclosure was opposed by the defendants. … Continue reading Chan v Alvis Vehicles Ltd and Another: ChD 8 Dec 2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries incurred when, in Pristina, Kosovo and during a riot, British soldiers on a UN peacekeeping expedition fired on a car. Held: The incidents occurred in the course of peace-keeping duties. It was not argued that they occurred in combat, and it was established that in cases of riot, soldiers … Continue reading Bici and Bici v Ministry of Defence: QBD 7 Apr 2004
Re-instatement of an action after an automatic strike out could be proper if due diligence and a reasonable excuse could be shown. ‘The principles which emerge from those three decisions can be stated in summary form: (a) there are two threshold tests: see Rastin; Hoskins; (b) in relation to both these tests the onus of … Continue reading Reville v Wright: CA 18 Jan 1996
A soldier in the Artillery Regiment was serving in Saudi Arabia in the course of the Gulf war. He was injured when he was part of a team managing a Howitzer, which was firing live rounds into Iraq, and he was standing in front of the gun when it was negligently fired by the gun … Continue reading Mulcahy v Ministry of Defence: CA 21 Feb 1996
A quia timet action in a defamation case must specify the precise words which are expected to be used. Citations: Times 28-Feb-1996, [1996] 3 All ER 707 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Affirmed – Best v Charter Medical of England Ltd and Another CA 26-Oct-2001 The Civil Procedure Rules did not alter the previous … Continue reading British Data Management Plc v Boxer Commercial Removals Plc and Another: CA 28 Feb 1996
Where automatic directions had not been followed, a later hearing application was not an not abuse of process. Citations: Times 16-Nov-1995, [1996] 1 WLR 542 Statutes: County Court Rules 1981 Order 7 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Hawkins v Keppe Shaw, Solicitors (a Firm) CA 20-Jul-2001 The solicitors represented the applicant in … Continue reading Ashworth v McKay Foods Ltd: CA 16 Nov 1995
The plaintiff company had sued the defendants in defamation with regard to a leaflet publishd and distributed by them. The defendants argued justification. The defendants appealed against an order striking out parts of their defence, saying that the plea of justification was inufficiently pleaded and supported by evidence. The defendants said that the issue should … Continue reading McDonalds Corp and Another v Steel and Another: CA 25 Mar 1994
The court had been asked to intervene in an internal dispute as to the role of an Imam in a mosque community. Held: The request was denied. The case was not one of public law: ‘ the particular function which the Imam was performing affected the applicant’s rights in a way which was peculiar to … Continue reading Regina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Sualiman Ali: CA 12 May 1993
A young man was injured in a motor-cycle accident and was taken to the defendant’s hospital. His father attended to him at his bedside for fourteen days, watching him deteriorate in health, fall into a coma and die. The father alleged that the staff of the hospital was negligent and that he suffered psychiatric illness. … Continue reading Sion v Hampstead Heath Authority: CA 1994
In an action the Plaintiff became liable to be struck out for delay. The defendant’s solicitors indicated informally a readiness to extend the time for the plaintiff, and this created an estoppel against the defendant which he could not side step. He could be compensated for the delay in costs, and the defendant could not … Continue reading Roche v Church: CA 15 Feb 1993
The right to dismiss for want of prosecution once lost, will only rarely be regained by a defendant. Citations: Ind Summary 26-Apr-1993 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – Roebuck v Mungovin HL 4-Feb-1994 A defendant may ask for the Plaintiff’s claim to be struck out despite having cause the Plaintiff to incur costs. … Continue reading Roebuck v Mungovin: CA 26 Apr 1993
Arbitration appeal may be struck out for delay without the need to show evidence of prejudice from that delay. Nevertheless relief against an order striking out an appeal should given where some substantial part of the fault for the delay was the court’s fault. Citations: Times 06-Jul-1994, Independent 10-Aug-1994, Gazette 03-Aug-1994 Statutes: Arbitration Act 1979 … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Environment v Euston Centre Investments Ltd: CA 6 Jul 1994
The High Court can transfer proceedings wrongly started in High Court to the County Court as an alternative to its jurisdiction to strike out the claim. Stuart-Smith LJ said: ‘. . provided proceedings are started within the time permitted by the statute of limitations, are not frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the process of … Continue reading Restick v Crickmore: CA 3 Dec 1993
The appellants were convicted of failing to conduct their undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their health and safety. One of their buildings contained two cooling towers which, when inspected, were found to contain the bacteria … Continue reading Regina v Board of Trustees of the Science Museum: CA 26 May 1993
An action which had been automatically struck out, may be re-instated if there had been good cause for the delay. ‘The proper approach to the exercise of any judicial discretion must be governed by the legal context in which the discretion arises.’ and ‘A retrospective application to extend time should not succeed unless the plaintiff … Continue reading Rastin v British Steel Plc, Todd v Evans, Adams v Geest Plc: CA 18 Feb 1994
The families disputed a claim under the 1975 Act. The defendants now sought summary dismissal of the claim. Judges: Mostyn J Citations: [2015] EWHC 907 (Fam) Links: Bailii Statutes: Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Kemmis v Kemmis (Welland and Others Intervening) CA 1988 H had … Continue reading Dellal v Dellal and Others: FD 1 Apr 2015
The claimant sought damages in defamation, saying that a combination of publications identified him. Held: Eady J briefly discussed the effect of hyperlinks in the context of a dispute about meaning or reference in a defamation case. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2010] EWHC 100 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Swain … Continue reading Ali v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 27 Jan 2010
The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claim for defamation in a reort prepared by the defendants criticising his actions as chairman of a CAB. The action had been struck out on the basis of qualified privilege, and the claimant’s allegation of malice discounted. Held: The appeal failed. The claimant made assertions about … Continue reading Seray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales: CA 3 Feb 2009
The applicants each alleged breach of copyright and misuse of confidential information in the format of the television program ‘Who wants to be a Millionaire’. The defendant appealed a refusal to strike out the claim. It was not contended that no copyright or confidentiality existed, but only that there was no evidence that they had … Continue reading Celador Productions Ltd v Melville: ChD 21 Oct 2004
The claimant sought damages after publication by the first defendant of articles which it was claimed implied that he had taken drugs. The paper claimed qualified privilege, and claimed Reynolds immunity. Held: The defence of qualified privilege should be restored, and be decided at trial, and not summarily. Judges: Brooke LJ, Tuckey LJ, Arden LJ … Continue reading Armstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and David Walsh, Alan English: CA 29 Jul 2005
The claimant had been a partner in a firm of solicitors. They came to be suspected by the respondent of overclaiming legal aid payments and sums were withheld. For this and other reasons the practice folded, and the claimant became insolvent. He claimed that officers of the respondent had acted improperly, and claimed misfeasance in … Continue reading Iqbal v Legal Services Commission: CA 10 May 2005
The claimant sought damages from its accountants, saying that had they been advised of the difficulties in their financial situation, they would have been able to avoid the loss of some 2.5 billion pounds, or to sell their assets at a time when their losses could be minimalised. They appealed a judgment limiting the claim … Continue reading Equitable Life Assurance Society v Ernst and Young: CA 25 Jul 2003
The claimant sought damages against its former directors for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty. The defendants asked that the claims be struck out. Held: It was no longer good law that directors might leave the conduct of the company’s business to competent management. Though section 727 might give relief to directors who had been … Continue reading Equitable Life Assurance Society v Bowley and others: ComC 17 Oct 2003
PC Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC. The applicant had been suspended from practice. He had been struck off in Australia, and moved to the UK to practice. The GMC sought to suspend him because of the findings in Australia. After his initial suspension new procedures came in, and an interim order was made imposing … Continue reading Dr Marinovich v The General Medical Council: PC 24 Jun 2002
The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence. Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may discover which may assist the defendant. ‘Non-disclosure is a potent source of injustice and even with the … Continue reading Regina v Ward (Judith): CACD 15 Jul 1992
EXCISE DUTY – hand rolling tobacco – s.12(1A) Finance Act 1994 and Schedule 41 to Finance Act 2008 – strike out application – illiteracy – appellant unable to read – Jones and Race considered – deeming of commercial use – the temporal effect of the deeming rule – no reasonable excuse – no special circumstances … Continue reading Clark v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Excise Duty – Hand Rolling Tobacco): FTTTx 25 Jul 2019
The deceased had begun an action on becoming ill after exposure to asbestos by the defendant. He withdrew his action after receiving expert evidence that his illness was unrelated. A post-mortem examination showed this evidence to be mistaken. His widow sought to pursue an action, but it was claimed that this was out of time. … Continue reading Barry Young (Deceased) v Western Power Distribution (South West) Plc: CA 18 Jul 2003
The copyright tribunal was given a wide discretion for the awarding of costs on applications made to it for licenses. The nature of the applications and the different basis makes it dangerous to import rules for awards from the general rules on costs. The Copyright Tribunal was wrong to award costs on an award to … Continue reading AEI Rediffusion Music Ltd v Phonographic Performance Ltd: CA 1 Feb 1999
The claimants alleged unlawful interception of their voicemail messages by the defendant. The defendant now applied for the strike out of the claims, saying that they were an abuse of process, earlier claims by the same claimants having been settled. The claimants said that the terms of the settlement did not cover additional occasions of … Continue reading Brazier v News Group Newspapers Ltd: ChD 27 Jan 2015
The court had struck out the defendant’s plea of justification. The parties now disputed the costs to be paid for that element of the action, the defendant arguing that the claimant had failed to comply with the requirements to comply with costs budgets. Held: The court now gave its reasons for allowing the costs in … Continue reading Simpson v MGN Ltd and Another: QBD 27 Jan 2015
IPO Entitlement, Striking out – This is a reference under section 8 in respect of an unpublished patent application. The claimant does not know the precise contents of the application. Its claim is based on the title of the application and its employment of the two named co-inventors and co-applicants. The co-applicants requested that the … Continue reading Fireworks Fire Protection Limited v Cooke and Musk (Patent): IPO 10 Jun 2011
The several claimants had invested in a technology based investment scheme, which they now said was fraudulent. The defendants said that the original, large number of claimants had been reduced, but the lawyers acting for the claimants had issued proceedings without the authority all claimants, and that therefore the claim was an abuse of process … Continue reading Adams and Others v Ford and Others: CA 26 Apr 2012
VALUE ADDED TAX – Application by the Appellant for an extension of time to appeal against decisions by HMRC – Balancing exercise undertaken setting off the loss to the Appellant if the extension was not granted against (a) the public interest in the need for good administration, legal certainty and respect for the general time … Continue reading Jem Leisure Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Dec 2011
The applicant had been subject to company director disqualification proceedings. Eventually he gave an undertaking not to act as a company director, but then succeeded at the ECHR in a complaint of delay. He now sought release from his undertaking in the light of the ECHR judgment. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The decision of … Continue reading Eastaway v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: CA 10 May 2007
EAT Deposit ordered. Order lost in post due to the Claimant putting wrong post-code on ET1. Review. Distinguishing Judgments from Orders. Strike-out. Extending time. Judges: His Honour Peter Clark Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0318 – 05 – 2907, UKEAT/0319/05/TM, UKEAT/0318/05/TM, [2005] ICR 1647, UKEAT/0320/05/TM, [2005] IRLR 836 Links: Bailii, EATn Statutes: Employment Tribunal Rules 2004 20(1) … Continue reading Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons: EAT 14 Jul 2005
The claimant applied for leave to bring an action for race discrimination nine years after the acts complained of. Leave was granted. The respondent said the tribunal should have heard the complaint first before deciding to extend time. Held: The discretion given was to act as the tribunal thought just and equitable. There was no … Continue reading Afolabi v Southwark London Borough Council: CA 24 Jan 2003
The applicant had been born and registered as a female, but later came to receive treatment and to live as a male. He complained that the respondent had failed to amend his birth certificate. Held: The court accepted that, by failing to confer on a transsexual a right to an amended birth certificate, the state … Continue reading Rees v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Oct 1986
W appealed against the striking out as an abuse of its request for a declaration that the tenants of the flats at Dolphin Square were entitled to acquire its freehold from the respondents. They had previously served and withdrawn a notice claiming the right. Held: The tenants’ appeal was allowed. CPR 38.7 did not operate … Continue reading Westbrook Dolphin Square Ltd v Friends Life Ltd: CA 18 May 2012
Judges: Lord Justice Latham Citations: [2005] EWHC (Admin) 938 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Simms v Law Society Admn 17-Mar-2005 The appellant challenged being struck of the solicitors roll. Held: ‘The most serious finding of the Tribunal was, of course, that [Mr Simms] was dishonest. We agree with the Tribunal … Continue reading Simms v Law Society: Admn 17 May 2005
IPO The defendant in an action for a declaration of non infringement requested that the action be struck out for want of prosecution as the claimant had not provided any credible reason why it had not filed its evidence within the agreed timetable nor had it explained how it intended to take the case forward. … Continue reading Power Stow A/S and Rasn A/S (Patent): IPO 7 Jul 2009
The claimant challenged dismissal of his claim of having suffered an unfair detriment having made a disclosure with regard to his employers. The employers had said that as a constable, his employment was outside the scope of the Act, and the decision of the Police disciplinary Board could not found his claim. Held: the paragraph … Continue reading Lake v British Transport Police: CA 5 May 2007
EXCISE DUTY – HMRC strike out application on grounds of want of jurisdiction – deeming effect of para 5 Sch 3 Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 – appeal against assessment struck out – excise penalty upheld Citations: [2019] UKFTT 201 (TC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Customs and Excise Updated: 21 October 2022; … Continue reading Ainsworth v Revenue and Customs (Excise Duty Tobacco : Hand Rolling): FTTTx 19 Mar 2019
The claimant sought disclosure of identities of posters to the defendant’s web-site. Held: ‘In my view, the postings are clearly one or two-liners, in effect posted anonymously by random members of the public who do not purport, either by their identity or in what they say, to have any actual knowledge of the matters in … Continue reading Clift v Clarke: QBD 18 Feb 2011
IPO The opponent opposed the patentee’s request under section 27 of the Patents Act 1977 for amendment of the patent, arguing, inter alia, that the patentee had delayed excessively before bringing the request to amend. The patentee sought the striking out of this ground following the amendment to the Patents Act which required the Comptroller … Continue reading Strix Ltd and Otter Controls Ltd (Patent): IPO 2 Jan 2009
Practice and Procedure – Striking-Out/Dismissal The Appellant brought two sets of proceedings in the ET alleging numerous forms of discrimination in long, repetitive pleadings which were very difficult to follow. The EJ struck out any claims of sex discrimination or sexual harassment on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success. Other types … Continue reading Parkin v Leeds City Council: EAT 11 Nov 2019
The complainant made a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to the Student Loans Company. The request was for a number of documents listed (a) to (l). The Company has now provided all of the documents to the complainant in electronic format apart from document (d). A number of redactions were made under … Continue reading Student Loans Company Ltd (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Dec 2009
IPO After initiating the action, the claimant failed to prosecute the case diligently. He failed to respond to numerous communications from the Office. This amounted to an abuse of process and the action was therefore struck out for want of prosecution. The hearing officer decided that there was no public interest in continuing the action … Continue reading Attaca Limited v Myriad Genetics, Endorecherche Inc, University of Pennsylvania and Hsc Res Dev Lp (Patent): IPO 14 Dec 2005
IPO Patent – In section 27 opposition proceedings, the opponent (Laird Security Hardware Limited) sought to file a supplementary statement, which was opposed by the applicant for amendment (Archibald Kenrick and Sons Limited) who requested that the opposition to amendment be struck out. It was held that admission of the supplementary statement would not materially … Continue reading Archibald Kenrick Sons v Laird Security Hardware Limited: IPO 13 Jun 2005
The solicitor-defendants were seeking to prove a negative and to show at the very outset of the proceedings that the claim should be struck out without the need for any further inquiry. The court considered the admission of new evidence on an appeal against a summary strike out. Held: The Ladd v Marshall criteria need … Continue reading Williams v Attridge Solicitors (a Firm): CA 8 Jul 1997
The Court was asked ‘whether the report of an inquiry ordered to be published by the House of Commons following a Motion for an Unopposed Return is protected by Parliamentary privilege. The second issue is whether the proceedings commenced by Mr Warsama and Ms Gannon (to whom we refer as the appellants) can survive a … Continue reading Foreign and Commonwealth Office v Warsama and Another: CA 11 Feb 2020
Practice and Procedure – Striking-Out/Dismissal The Claimant’s claims were automatically struck out for breach of an ‘unless’ order by failure to serve further particulars of her claims. The Claimant applied under ET Rule 38(2) to set aside the strike-out order. The ET granted the application. The Respondent appealed the decision on various grounds. The EAT … Continue reading Duncan Lewis Solicitors Ltd v Puar: EAT 19 Nov 2019
A complaint as to the privileging of civil over religious marriages in Turkey was found admissible.‘ the essential object of Article 8 is to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by the public authorities. There may in addition be positive obligations inherent in effective ‘respect’ for family life. In both contexts regard must be had … Continue reading Serife Yigit v Turkey: ECHR 20 Jan 2005
Before the auction, the estate agents had signed a contract to sell the house to the claimant. The Society, as mortgagees, said that the agents did not have authority to bind it, and that the contract did not sufficiently identify the property so as to constitute a memorandum of the sale under the 1989 Act, … Continue reading Rudra v National and Provincial Building Society; Stickley and Kent (Risk Management Unit) Ltd: CA 22 Aug 1997
Practice and Procedure – Withdrawal During a Preliminary Hearing to consider whether any of the claims should be struck out as lacking reasonable prospects of success or made the subject of deposit orders, the Claimant, who was unrepresented, indicated she was withdrawing her claim for automatically unfair dismissal pursuant to regulation 7(1)(b) Transfer of Undertakings … Continue reading Paul v Virgin Care Ltd: EAT 12 Sep 2019
The claimant police officer sought damages for malicious prosecution. The defendant applied for the claim to be struck out. Held: There was insufficient evidence to establish malice. The claim was struck out. Judges: Tugendhat J Citations: [2004] EWCh 5 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Matin v Commissioner of Police of … Continue reading McHarg v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police: ChD 9 Jan 2004
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissalA claim was struck out in mid hearing, before the Claimant’s cross-examination had concluded, and without affording her the opportunity to call further witnesses, on the basis it had no reasonable prospect of success. The claim was one in which the Claimant had been dismissed for falsely over-stating the hours … Continue reading Williams v Real Care Agency Ltd: EAT 13 Mar 2012
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Costs Appearance/response The first appeal related to a claim by Miss Marzan that she had not been paid a month’s wages due in respect of her notice period. It was initially brought against ‘Godfrey Morgan Solicitors t/a GMS Law’. There was a solicitors’ firm, Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (of which Godfrey Morgan … Continue reading Godfrey Morgan Solicitors Ltd v Marzan and Others: EAT 15 Feb 2012
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Costs Appearance/response The first appeal related to a claim by Miss Marzan that she had not been paid a month’s wages due in respect of her notice period. It was initially brought against ‘Godfrey Morgan Solicitors t/a GMS Law’. There was a solicitors’ firm, Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (of which Godfrey Morgan … Continue reading Godfrey Morgan Solicitors Ltd v Marzon and Another: EAT 15 Feb 2012
Application by two defendants to have claims struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause for action. Judges: Mr Justice Nugee Citations: [2019] EWHC 3299 (Ch) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Professional Negligence Updated: 12 October 2022; Ref: scu.646183
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to him, but retained pending the appeal. Held: His appeal was allowed: ‘an anonymity order is … Continue reading Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 27 Jan 2016
The claimant brought proceedings in the Administrative Court by way of Part 8 claim seeking to establish by way of declaration that a planning appeal rejected by the Secretary of State in August 2000 as being out of time had in fact been commenced within time. Held: The proceedings had been brought in that form … Continue reading Carter Commercial Developments v Bedford Borough Council: Admn 27 Jul 2001
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters. Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater commitment to traditional family structures did not however justify the difference. The rules were unlawful discrimination.Lord Hoffmann … Continue reading In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G: HL 18 Jun 2008
ECHR Article 5-1 Deprivation of liberty Failure to provide the rehabilitative courses to prisoners which were necessary for their release: violation Facts – By virtue of section 225 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, indeterminate sentences for the public protection were introduced. Like sentences of life imprisonment, these required the direction of the Parole Board … Continue reading James, Wells and Lee v The United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Sep 2012
The claimant sued in defamation over postings in a review of a book on the Amazon web-site and otherwise. The court now heard interim applications. Held: Various elements of the claim were struck out as being without value or prospect of succes, leaving only a request for an injunction aainst the fourth defendant. Judges: Moloney … Continue reading McGrath and Another v Dawkins and Others: QBD 30 Mar 2012
The claimant had obtained an order restricting the defendant from asserting any kind of insolvency in the claimant. The defendant now sought the strike out of the claim as an abuse of process. He said that any such disclosure had been on one occasion to one person and that the proceedings were disproportionate. It was … Continue reading Jeeg Global Ltd v Hare: QBD 29 Mar 2012
A tortious conspiracy was alleged in the conduct of a civil action. The plaintiff appealed against rejection of his claim. Held: The appeal failed as an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a wirness in defamation by framing a claim in conspiracy. Sellers LJ considered whether a complaint was privileged: ‘Whatever form of action is … Continue reading Marrinan v Vibert: CA 2 Jan 1963
The defendant sought to be allowed to amend its pleadings to add justification. They now appealed against refusal. Held: The amendment was allowed. However, in general, in a libel action, if the defendant seeks at a late stage to amend his defence by adding a plea of justification, his application will be closely inquired into … Continue reading Associated Leisure (Phonographic Equipment Co) Ltd v Associated Newspapers Ltd: CA 1970
Shareholders who receive their shares as a gift but afterwards work in the business may become entitled to enforce equitable restraints upon the conduct of the majority shareholder. To succeed the applicant must show some detriment in their capacity as a member of the company, and not as a director, though a wrongful exclusion of … Continue reading In re H R Harmer Ltd: CA 1958
(Grand Chamber) The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to detain him for a short period while his asylum claim was being subject to fast-track processing. The decision was made pursuant to a policy under which all asylum claimants falling within defined criteria (usually by nationality) were normally detained at Oakington while their claims … Continue reading Saadi v United Kingdom: ECHR 29 Jan 2008
Hudoc Violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; Just satisfaction reserved; Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement)A person detained as a juvenile in need of educational supervision should not be detained in a prison where no education is available. The applicant’s successive placements in a remand prison, by way of … Continue reading Bouamar v Belgium: ECHR 29 Feb 1988
EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out or Dismissal – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke Restriction of proceedings order The Claimant did not attend her dismissal hearing. She presented her claim out of time and did not attend the Pre-Hearing Review to determine the jurisdiction to hear the dismissal and discrimination claims. The Employment Judge struck them out. The … Continue reading Uthman v Speciality Care (EMI) Plc (T/A Craegmoor Healthcare): EAT 9 Mar 2012
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal The Employment Tribunal struck out the Claimant’s claims on the basis that, as a result of threatening emails sent to the Respondent’s primary witness, a fair trial could not be had. The ET did not hear evidence about what had happened from the Claimant or the witness on the … Continue reading Obasa v Buckinghamshire County Council: EAT 23 Feb 2012
EAT Sex Discrimination : Marital Status: A was married to the Chief Executive of R1 (H). She had for some time worked for R1 as a contractor. It was R1’s case that the Chairman told H that from the end of 2009 he should not employ any member of his family in the business, because … Continue reading Hawkins v Atex Group Ltd and Others: EAT 13 Mar 2012
Money had been taken by the Police, but after the applicants had been acquitted, they sought it to be returned. Their action was struck out after long delays. They applied to the Magistrates who turned down the application. Held: The money should be returned ‘ . . once it is clear that the claimant is … Continue reading Morgan, Regina (on the Application of) v Justices of Dyfed Powys Magistrates’ Court: Admn 18 Jun 2003
EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out or Dismissal – A letter from the Employment Tribunal was capable of misinterpretation: it might (as the author intended) have ruled adversely to the Claimant as to waiving a deposit she had been ordered to pay, but it might not (as the Claimant appeared in contemporaneous correspondence to understand … Continue reading Richardson v Canterbury College: EAT 20 Jan 2012
The vendor company had instructed agents to sell properties on its behalf and had agreed to pay commission on completion of the sale. The sale was agreed with a prospective purchaser introduced by the agents. Before the sale was completed, the vendor company withdrew from the sale because of an objection by one of its … Continue reading Luxor (Eastbourne) v Cooper: HL 1941
The Court considered whether, on exercising a break clause in a lease, the tenant was entitled to recover rent paid in advance. Held: The appeal failed. The Court of Appeal had imposed what was established law. The test for whether a clause might be implied in a contract is: ‘that it is necessary for business … Continue reading Marks and Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd and Another: SC 2 Dec 2015
Practice and Procedure, Jurisdictional/Time Points The ET made no error of law when deciding on an application for reconsideration not to vary or revoke an earlier order striking out claims of unfair dismissal and age and disability discrimination on the grounds of non-compliance with existing orders and the claimant apparently not actively pursuing the claim. … Continue reading Phipps v Priory Education Services Ltd: EAT 6 Oct 2021
A distinction has to be made in between sections 208 and 213 of the Act. Section 208 implies an element of dishonesty, rather than an intent to defraud. The difference lay in the absence of a requirement to establish that the defendant to intended to benefit himself. Though his offence was not technical, and it … Continue reading Regina v Bevis: CACD 8 Feb 2001