Enterprise Home Developments Llp v Adam (Landlord and Tenant – Service Charges): UTLC 12 May 2020

LANDLORD AND TENANT – SERVICE CHARGES – paper determination of service charge dispute by FTT – service charges disallowed due to insufficiency of evidence – whether procedure fair to unrepresented parties – appeal allowed and charges re-determined

Citations:

[2020] UKUT 151 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.651754

Induna Stables, Re (Rating – Procedure – Whether A Right of Appeal Lies To The Upper Tribunal): UTLC 26 May 2020

RATING – PROCEDURE – whether a right of appeal lies to the Upper Tribunal against the VTE’s refusal of an application to review a decision – held, no right of appeal is available – Valuation Tribunal for England (Council Tax and Rating Appeals) (Procedure) Regulations 2009 – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2020] UKUT 166 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.651755

Munir v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 11 Sep 2018

TOBACCO DUTY – assessment to duty on appellant for handling goods not duty paid – application to strike out appeal on basis appeal had no reasonable prospects of success – appellant convicted of offence under s 170(2) CEMA 1979 – whether conviction irrebuttable evidence of handling to justify assessment – whether arguable that appellant a person who was not handling the goods – application dismissed.

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 546 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.632314

Kerr and West Lothian Council: SIC 22 Aug 2019

The Council was asked about funding for child protection services. The Council replied that this information was on its website.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the Council failed to comply with the request. He did not agree that the information was available on its website.

Citations:

[2019] ScotIC 126 – 2019

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Information

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.645483

Harrison and Anir (T/A Harrison Solway Logistics Ltd) v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Employment Income): FTTTx 31 Jan 2019

INCOME TAX and NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS – Benefits from availability of cars and use of fuel cards – whether Apollo Fuels applies because fair bargain – payments for private use – whether discovery assessments on directors met conditions in s 29 TMA – effect of discovery assessment where enquiry still in train – application of s 32 TMA – whether NICs decision on Class 1A correct – whether penalties under Schedule 24 FA 2007 apply – careless or deliberate or neither? – whether penalties under regulation 81 SSCR 2001 apply – income tax appeals allowed – NICs appeals allowed in part.

Citations:

[2019] UKFTT 72 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes – Other, Income Tax

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.635667

JJ Manangement Llp and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 25 Jul 2019

Challenge to the lawfulness of an investigation by HMRC of tax affairs relating to the claimant’s businesses in Europe. HMRC had been claiming a right to conduct an informal investigation using the 2005 Act. The taxpayer sought judicial review of their actions.
Held: The request for review was refused. The statute gave to the revenue functions including both to open an enquiry into a return under the 1970 Act during the enquiry window, and to check returns without opening a section 9A enquiry, even after the enquiry window had closed, to see if there was cause to make a discovery assessment. Such checks might include not only rereading the file but also undertaking investigations and enquiries to obtain more information to satisfy their interests.
HMRC’s functions include the collection of taxes, and collecting the correct amount of tax from taxpayers. Investigating whether a taxpayer has declared all his income and paid the correct amount of tax is necessary, expedient, incidental or conducive to the exercise of that function and is authorised by the powers in section 9 CRCA 2005. The use of such an ‘informal investigation’ was not inconsistent with the statutory scheme, but was consistent with it. The statutory scheme includes not only opening an enquiry into a return under section 9A TMA 1970 during the enquiry window, but also checking returns without opening a section 9A enquiry, including after the enquiry window has closed, with a view to ascertaining if there is ground to issue a discovery assessment, and that such checking can include not just rereading the file but carrying out investigations and enquiries to see if any further information can be obtained that sheds light on the question. Given that statutory scheme, there is nothing inconsistent in HMRC having power to ask a taxpayer for information and documents on a voluntary basis. It would be the very antithesis of good administration for an arm of the state to use compulsory powers as a first step in obtaining information from an individual, rather than resort to them only when all attempts to obtain the information voluntarily had run into the sand. As a matter of common sense, cooperation and collaboration facilitates the collection of the public revenue.
Judicial review in relation to a decision to investigate will only be justified in a wholly exceptional case, and the circumstances of this case did not meet that threshold, concluding, ‘there is nothing sufficiently egregious about the present case which would justify taking the wholly exceptional course of reviewing that decision’.

Judges:

Nugee J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 2006 (Admin), [2020] 2 WLR 195, [2019] ACD 108, [2019] STC 1772, [2019] WLR(D) 493

Links:

Bailii,

Statutes:

Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 9(1), Taxes Management Act 1970 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Panel of Takeovers and Mergers ex parte Fayed CA 1992
Steyn LJ said of the reviewability of decisions of the Director of Public Prosecutions: ‘. . it seems to me that, in the absence of evidence of fraud, corruption or mala fides, judicial review will not be allowed to probe its decision to charge . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – JJ Management Consulting Llp and Others v Revenue and Customs CA 22-Jun-2020
HMRC has power to conduct informal investigation
The taxpayer, resident here, but with substantial oversea business interests, challenged the conduct of an informal investigation of his businesses under the 2005 Act, saying that HMRC, as a creature of statute, are only permitted to do that which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.640128

Windsor-Clive and Others v Rees and Another: ChD 18 Apr 2019

Claim for injunction to prevent interference with certain claimed rights over land.
Held: Some of the activities that the landlord proposed to carry out were permitted under the terms of the tenancy agreements; but others were not.

Judges:

Keyser QC HHJ

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1008 (Ch), [2019] 4 WLR 74, [2019] WLR(D) 270

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank SC 2-Nov-2011
Commercial Sense Used to Interpret Contract
The Court was asked as to the role of commercial good sense in the construction of a term in a contract which was open to alternative interpretations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. In such a case the court should adopt the more, rather than the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Rees and Another v Windsor-Clive and Others CA 1-Jul-2020
Reservation Derogation construed normally
Construction of tenancy agreement – correct approach to reservations made in favour of the landlord. The landlord required access to the tenanted farm to allow survey work anticipating development of his adjoining land. The tenant now appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Agriculture

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.636141

Asda Stores Ltd v Raymond: EAT 13 Dec 2018

The Claimant was dismissed for urinating in a loading yard, the Respondent employer alleging that this was a breach of (unspecified) Health and Safety Regulations and serious and wilful neglect of company property. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair and that the dismissal arose from the Claimant’s disability. A subsequent Judgment in relation to Remedy ordered re-instatement. The Respondent appealed both Decisions.
Held:
(1) The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the evidence, including the CCTV evidence, did not establish that the Claimant had urinated on the pallets and so the arguments on perversity and substitution mindset failed.
(2) The Respondent’s fall-back position of objective justification for section 15 discrimination had been addressed adequately by the Tribunal in the Remedy Judgment, the matter having been initially overlooked. The decision on this was not perverse.
(3) The Tribunal had not erred in its approach to re-instatement. It had considered the particular circumstances of the Claimant and found that the operative cause of the dismissal was his disability but that he considered trust and confidence could be restored. The Respondent’s contention that trust and confidence had broken down was not rationally based.
Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2018] UKEAT 0268 – 17 – 1312

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631856

Scott and Others v Magistrates of Glasgow: HL 27 Jul 1899

The Glasgow Magistrates, as the local authority under the Diseases of Animals Acts 1894 and 1896, established at Glasgow a wharf and public market for the reception and sale of foreign cattle. They are empowered by the terms of section 42 of the Markets and Fairs Clauses Act 1847 (incorporated with the Act of 1894) to make bye-laws ‘for regulating the use of the market-place and fair, and the buildings, stalls, pens, and standings therein, and for preventing nuisances or obstructions therein, or in the immediate approaches thereto.’ They are also empowered, from time to time as they think fit, to repeal or alter any such byelaws, ‘provided always that such bye-laws shall not be repugnant to the laws of that part of the United Kingdom where the same are to have effect, or to the provisions of this or the special Act.’
Under these powers the Magistrates issued a bye-law providing that ‘the sale rings shall be used only for public sales of cattle by auction on conditions of sale which shall be equally applicable to all bidders and buyers. The sale rings shall not be used for private sales, or for sales to any limited number of persons, or for sales in which any class of the public are excluded from bidding and buying.’
Objection was taken to this bye-law by certain traders, who desired to limit their auction sales to a certain class of customers, and who maintained that the bye-law was ultra vires, and directed against a particular line of trade policy.
Held ( aff. judgment of the First Division- diss. Lord Shand) that the bye-law was valid.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), Lord Shand, and Lord Davey

Citations:

[1899] UKHL 965, 36 SLR 965

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Local Government

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631839

Workingwall (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 20 Dec 2018

Section 3(1) Descriptiveness / Distinctiveness – Devoid of character – slogans
Section 3(1) Descriptiveness / Distinctiveness – Descriptiveness – geographical signs
Section 3(1) Descriptiveness / Distinctiveness – Customary in the language etc. – customary in the language
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Imperfect recollection

Citations:

[2018] UKIntelP o82118

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631791

Corporation of Glasgow v M’Ewan: HL 23 Nov 1899

The Glasgow Waterworks Commissioners were infeft in a servitude, exclusive and perpetual, of way-leave through certain lands for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a conduit. Held ( aff. judgment of the First Division) that the Commissioners were liable for assessment as heritors for the upkeep of the manse of the parish through which the conduit passed.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), and Lords Macnaghten, Shand, and Brampton

Citations:

[1899] UKHL 620, 37 SLR 620

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Land

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631843

Jun Fan (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 8 Aug 2018

Section 3(6) Bad Faith – No intention to use
Section 3(6) Bad Faith – Knowledge of opponent’s use in the UK
Section 5(4) Earlier Rights – Passing off (Issues arising from Registry proceedings)
Procedural Issues – Costs – litigants in person, actual, security for

Citations:

[2018] UKIntelP o49218

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631582

Oomf! (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 6 Aug 2018

Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Distinctive and dominant components
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Composite word marks
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Imperfect recollection

Citations:

[2018] UKIntelP o48718

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631589

Fairfield Rents Limited v Nemcova (London): FTTPC 26 Aug 2015

Application Under Section 168, of The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

Citations:

[2015] UKFTT RP – LON – 00AK –

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Nemcova v Fairfield Rents Ltd UTLC 6-Sep-2016
Holiday lets were in breach of covenant
UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – BREACH OF COVENANT – long residential lease – application under section 168(2), Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2003 – covenant not to use premises for any purpose other than as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.626739

Dennis’s Trustees v Dennis and Others: HL 19 May 1924

A testator, who was survived by his wife, left as part of his estate certain stocks and shares, some of which stood in the joint names of himself and his wife, and others in the joint names of himself and his wife and the survivor. All these investments had been made out of the testator’s own means, and the titles thereto were found in his repositories after his death, there having been no gift or delivery of them to his wife during his lifetime. The testamentary writings, which consisted of a trust-disposition and several codicils, did not contain any express revocation of prior special destinations. The last codicil, however, which was subsequent in date to the investments to which this appeal related, was practically a new settlement, and contained a general conveyance of the testator’s whole estate, and a clause which gave to his niece an option to purchase after the death of his wife any shares held by him at the time of his death, or held by his wife at the time of her death, at a valuation not greater than the cost price, and specified as shares which she might so acquire, certain shares among which were included some of the shares standing in the names of himself and his wife, and of himself and his wife and the survivor. The enumeration was followed by the words ‘or others if preferable.’
Held (aff. the judgment of the First Division) that, as the right of purchase conferred on the niece by the last codicil was irreconcilable with the special destinations in the share certificates, the destinations contained therein were revoked by the general conveyance.

Judges:

Viscount Cave, Viscount Finlay, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, and Lord Sumner

Citations:

61 SLR 484, [1924] UKHL 484

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Wills and Probate

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631559

Mr Easy (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 20 Dec 2018

Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Composite word marks
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Importance of first element
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Conceptual distinctions
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Dilution Cases – Reputation
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Dilution Cases – Link

Judges:

Ms C Boucher

Citations:

[2018] UKIntelP o81618

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631780

Gordon’s Executors v Gordon: HL 3 May 1918

Where there are communings with a view to an agreement, it is a question of the intention of parties whether a valid and effectual agreement has been made requiring no formal instrument though such formal instrument is being prepared, or whether there is to be no valid and effectual agreement until the formal instrument is completed. Circumstances in which held a formal completed instrument was required.

Citations:

[1918] UKHL 497 – 1, 55 SLR 497 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631473

Shankland and Co v Robinson and Co: HL 7 May 1920

A prospective bidder for articles about to be sold at an auction sale saw the sellers as to whether there might be difficulty in obtaining possession of the articles owing to Government impressment, and he was informed that the Government had been satisfied and the sale was to be allowed. Subsequently a subordinate Government official intimated that he wanted the articles for the Government, but his action was repudiated on application to his superior officer. This incident was not disclosed to the prospective bidder, who attended the sale, when the articles were knocked down to him. After the sale the Government intervened to prevent removal, and shortly after impressed. Held ( rev. judgment of the Second Division) that the purchaser was not entitled to rescind the contract on the ground of essential error induced by the seller, and was liable for the price, the property in the articles having passed to him on the fall of the hammer.

Citations:

[1920] UKHL 400, , 57 SLR 400

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Contract

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.631528

Hundal v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Jul 2018

Income Tax/Corporation Tax : INFORMATION NOTICES – notices to provide information and documents – whether items requested were reasonably required for the purposes of checking the Appellant’s tax position – yes – consideration of the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal in relation to information notices – appeal dismissed – appeals against penalties dismissed – applications for closure notices dismissed

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 469 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.622380

United States of America v Dempsey: Admn 6 Jul 2018

Crime – Common law offence – Perverting course of justice – Requirements of offence – Whether committed by lying to police

Judges:

Gross LJ, William Davis J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1724 (Admin), [2018] 1 WLR 110, [2018] WLR(D) 420

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Metcalf, Denton, Foster 26-May-2021
Public Inquiry is not In the Course of Justice
(Crown Court at Manchester) A retired solicitor and two retired police officers faced trial charged with doing acts tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice. They were said to have proposed alterations to statements of police . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, Crime

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.619929

C v Secretary of State for Justice: Admn 2014

The claimant sought to challenge a refusal to him, as a long standing convicted murderer of unsupervised leave from prison as part of a path to release. He was detained in a secure mental hosptal. The court now considered whether the claimant and hospital should be anonymised.
Held: The Court rejected the application for anonymity, but ordered it to be retained pending an appeal.
Cranston J said: ‘previous proceedings about this claimant are publicly available and I cannot see the justification for anonymity: the public have a right to know what I have decided about his claim for judicial review: R (M) v Parole Board [2013] EWHC 1360 (Admin), [2013] EMLR 23, paras 47-49. However, Dr H has written requesting that the hospital’s identity and that of the staff be concealed, to protect both the claimant and the other patients from potential intrusion. That is a reasonable request and there be an order of anonymity to that extent.’

Judges:

Cranston J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 167 (Admin)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – M, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board and Another Admn 22-May-2013
(Jan 2013) The court was asked whether an order for anonymity made in the course of proceedings for judicial review should be discharged upon the application of media and other interested parties. Various newspapers had applied for the order to be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Media

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.606370

HA v University of Wolverhampton and Others: Admn 12 Feb 2018

The court was asked whether a university may lawfully ask an applicant for an accredited Master of Pharmacy degree course (‘MPharm’) whether he or she has spent and unfiltered convictions and whether the university can require him or her to undergo an enhanced criminal record check as part of the application process.
Held: The decision to excude HA was quashed.

Judges:

Julian Knowles J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 144 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Education

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.604756

UK Insurance Ltd v Gentry: QBD 18 Jan 2018

Calim for damages by insurance company claiming that a claim by the defendant on which it had paid had in fact been fraudulent. The claim was made in deceit.
Held: ‘I have the required very high level of confidence that the Claimant’s allegation is true and I am not left in doubt as to what happened. The Claimant is therefore entitled to judgment on its claim.’

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 37 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority CA 1997
The court considered the effect of a party failing to bring evidence in support of its case, as regards the court drawing inferences: ‘(1) In certain circumstances a court may be entitled to draw adverse inferences from the absence or silence of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.603731

Silape v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: EAT 25 Oct 2017

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction reasons Burns-Barke
In striking out claims of discrimination, the Tribunal failed to apply the relevant principles as summarised recently in Mechkarov v Citibank NV [2016] ICR 1121, failed to take the Claimant’s case at its highest and failed to give adequate reasons for its decision.

Citations:

[2017] UKEAT 0285 – 16 – 2510

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.601910

Trioplast Industrier v Commission: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Competition – Agreements, Decisions and Concerted Practices Competition – Appeal – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in industrial plastic bags – Formal notice from the European Commission to the appellant for the payment of default interest on the amount of the fine imposed – Action for annulment and for damages

Citations:

C-364/16, [2017] EUECJ C-364/16P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Commercial

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.602117

Vaditrans v Belgische Staat: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Transport Transport Social Policy Fundamental Rights – Charter of Fundamental Rights) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Road transport – Driver’s rest periods – Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 – Article 8(6) and (8) – Whether it is possible to take daily rest periods and reduced weekly rest periods away from base and in a vehicle – Exclusion of regular weekly rest periods

Citations:

C-102/16, [2017] EUECJ C-102/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Human Rights, Transport

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.602118

Harper and Another v Hopkins: EAT 6 Aug 2009

EAT (Appeal From Order : Out of Time) Appellate jurisdiction reasons Burns-Barke – The lodging of a Notice of Appeal out of time was a conscious decision by a Respondent hotelier to leave it until after the New Year. His intervening hospitalisation did not overcome this original decision. Anyway it did not explain why his partner did not do so. There were no grounds for the exercise of discretion.

Judges:

McMullen QC HHJ

Citations:

[2009] UKEAT 0145 – 09 – 0608

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.592681

Williams, Regina (on The Application of) v Powys County Council: CA 9 Jun 2017

The court was asked whether ‘a local planning authority, when granting planning permission for a wind turbine, fall into error by failing to consult the Welsh Ministers upon the likely effects of that development on the settings of two scheduled monuments? And did it err in failing to consider the likely effects on the setting of a grade II listed church? ‘
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Lindblom, Irwin LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 427, [2017] WLR(D) 392

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.588333

Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial): EW 11 Nov 1987

‘Where the police desire to interview a child who is already a ward of court application must be made for leave for the police to do so . . If it is desired to conduct any interview beyond what is permitted by the order further application should be made for this purpose.
The President directs that all of the above applications be made to a judge on summons on notice to all parties.’

Judges:

Sir John Arnold P

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 1739

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Updated – Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial) (No 2) FD 18-Jul-1988
‘The registrar’s direction of 11 November 1987, Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial) [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1739, set out the procedure to be followed to obtain leave for the police to interview a child who is a ward of court. It provided that all . .
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.588738