Howden Joinery Group Plc and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Mar 2014

Corporation tax -management expenses- rental guarantee payments made by holding company –lump sum release payments – rental guarantee payments and provision for future guarantee payments – ‘expenses of managing the investment business’ – duality of purpose – capital or revenue — held – lump sum release payments deductible management expenses – not capital in nature -guarantee payments and provision for future guarantee payments expenditure on assets not on investment business -non deductible – re-current payments – revenue in character.

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT 257 (TC), [2014] STI 2015, [2014] SFTD 1186

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Corporation Tax

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.525265

Wilson v City of Edinburgh Council: SIC 2 May 2014

SIC Installation of cavity wall insulation – On 20 October 2013, Ms Wilson asked the City of Edinburgh Council (the Council) for information relating to the proposed installation of cavity wall insulation at a specified address. The Council informed Ms Wilson that the request was manifestly unreasonable and the information was therefore excepted from disclosure in terms of regulation 10(4)(b) of the EIRs.
The Commissioner found that the Council had failed to deal with Ms Wilson’s request for information in accordance with the EIRs, by incorrectly withholding information under the exception in regulation 10(4)(b) of the EIRs. She required the Council to respond to Ms Wilson’s requirement for review otherwise than in terms of regulation 10(4)(b).

Citations:

[2014] ScotIC 096 – 2014

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Information, Environment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.525566

R v Scottish Prison Service: SIC 2 May 2014

Notes of meetings – On 4 July 2013 and 19 September 2013, Mr R asked the Scottish Prison Service (the SPS) for notes taken at meetings held on those respective dates. In relation to the first request, the SPS advised Mr R to submit a subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 (the DPA). The SPS failed to respond to the other request and, on review, stated that it was repeated.
During the investigation, as all the information had been made available to Mr R under the DPA, the SPS concluded that it was otherwise accessible to him and applied section 25(1) of FOISA. The Commissioner accepted this following her investigation.
The Commissioner identified failures in the time taken to respond to one request and its eventual rejection as repeated.

Citations:

[2014] ScotIC 095 – 2014

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Information

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.525561

Otkritie International Investment Management Ltd and Others v Urumov and Others: ComC 10 Feb 2014

The claimants sought damages and asserted certain proprietary claims arising out of what they said were various acts of fraud and (in colloquial terms) ‘money-laundering’ activities committed towards the end of 2010 and in the course of 2011 by some or all of the defendants. In total, the alleged frauds are said to involve approximately US$ 175m.

Judges:

Eder J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 191 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.521118

Sharland v Sharland: CA 10 Feb 2014

Appeal against the order of Sir Hugh Bennett dismissing the application of the appellant wife to resume the hearing of her claim for financial provision following her divorce from the respondent.
Held: (Briggs LJ dissenting) The appeal failed. Moore-Bick LJ said: It may be unusual for a judge to conclude that despite a deliberate failure by one party to give full and frank disclosure the resulting order should not be set aside, but ultimately that must depend on the nature of the non-disclosure and its effect on the outcome of the proceedings. In this case the husband’s non-disclosure was deliberate and dishonest, but because of the rather unusual circumstances there were good reasons for concluding that it had not resulted in an order significantly different from that which the court would otherwise have made at the conclusion of the proceedings. In my view the judge was entitled to hold that the wife had not made out sufficient grounds for re-opening the hearing. That called for an exercise of judgment on his part and in my view his decision was one that was open to him.’
Briggs LJ thought having found the deceit, ‘fraud unravels all’ and the ‘the husband’s fraud undermined both the parties’ agreement and the consent order which followed ought to have been the end of the matter, and to have led to the setting aside of the consent order, and an order for a new (or perhaps resumed) hearing.’
Macur LJ said: ‘the audacity and extensive practice of a deceit cannot be determinative of the degree of its materiality to the substance of an order of the Court. It may be material in negotiations between the parties to an action or a contract or within the hearing, not least in terms of the integrity of the participants, but, applying the ratio in Livesey v Jenkins as I consider it to be, entirely in accordance with the exposition by my Lord, Lord Justice Moore-Bick, it will not necessarily undermine the rationale or content of an order made, whether by consent or after hearing in matrimonial proceedings.
In this case Sir Hugh, not being functus officio, considered the matter having directed and received further evidence from the husband and submissions from Counsel, and determined that ultimately it did not.’
Macur LJ placed particular emphasis on the wife’s failure to cross examine the husband on his affidavit.

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Briggs, Macur LJJ

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 95, [2014] 2 FCR 189

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jenkins v Livesey (formerly Jenkins) HL 1985
The parties had negotiated through solicitors a compromise of ancillary relief claims on their divorce. They agreed that the house should be transferred to the wife in consideration of her release of all other financial claims. The wife however . .
Appeal from – S v S FD 29-Apr-2013
W sought to re-open a sttlement of the financial arrangement on her divorce, saying that there had been substantial non-disclosure by H.
Held: ‘any order which would have been made if proper disclosure had taken place would not have been . .
Cited – Xydhias v Xydhias CA 21-Dec-1998
The principles of contract law are of little use when looking at the course of negotiations in divorce ancillary proceedings. In the case of a dispute the court must use its own discretion to determine whether agreement had been reached. Thorpe LJ . .
Cited – Bokor-Ingram v Bokor-Ingram CA 4-Mar-2009
W sought to re-open the financial settlement on her divorce. Within a few days of the order, H resigned and took on a new employment at a significant increase in pay. That had not been disclosed. . .
Cited – Owens v Noble CA 10-Mar-2010
The respondent had been awarded substantial damages after an accident for which the appellant was responsible. The appellant now said that the claimant had exaggerated his injuries and misled the judge. The defendant argued that the correct approach . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Sharland v Sharland SC 14-Oct-2015
The Court considered the impact of fraud upon a financial settlement agreed between divorcing parties where that agreement is later embodied in a court order? Does ‘fraud unravel all’, as is normally the case when agreements are embodied in court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.521110

The United States of America v Nolan: CA 4 Feb 2014

The employee was made redundant from working at a US watercraft repair base. She complained that on the base closing the appellant had failed to consult with her as employee representative. The appellant denied that obligation. After a reference to the ECJ, the court now considered a new issue.

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Rimer, Underhill LJJ

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 71, [2014] WLR(D) 46, [2014] ICR 685, [2014] IRLR 302

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 189 273, Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At EAT – United States of America v Nolan EAT 15-May-2009
EAT REDUNDANCY: Collective consultation and information / Protective award
An Employment Tribunal held that the USA was in breach of Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act . .
Application for leave (1) – United States of America v Nolan CA 9-Nov-2010
The claimant had sought a protective award under the 1992. She had been a civilian employee at a base operated by the appellant which it closed. She sought to sue as an employee representative, saying that the appellant had failed to consult its . .
Cited – Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) ECJ 8-Jun-1994
ECJ Despite the limited character of the harmonization of rules in respect of collective redundancies which Directive 75/129 was intended to bring about, national rules which, by not providing for a system for . .
At ECJ – United States of America v Nolan ECJ 18-Oct-2012
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 98/59/EC – Protection of workers – Collective redundancies – Scope – Closure of an American military base – Information and consultation of workers – Time at which the consultation obligation arises – . .
At SC – The United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.

Cited by:

Appeal from – The United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, European

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.521053

Dooley v Union of Construction Allied Trades and Technicians: EAT 3 May 2013

EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reason for Dismissal Including Substantial Other Reason – – Compensation – Polkey deduction – Contributory fault
The Claimant was a Union official dismissed for alleged misconduct – The Tribunal found the dismissal unfair on a mixture of substantive and procedural grounds and because of the substantive grounds directed no ‘Polkey discount’; but it did make a 50% reduction for contributory conduct.
HELD: that the Tribunal was entitled to find the dismissal unfair, but only on the procedural grounds; that accordingly a Polkey discount should have been considered and that the case should be remitted for that purpose and also to re-consider the issue of contributory conduct, since the amount of the former might affect the amount of the latter – One issue on remedy also remitted – Discussion of fairness of decision to dismiss taken in absence of two members of disciplinary panel.

Judges:

Underhill J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0088 – 12 – 0305

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495210

Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Pengelly and Another: EAT 14 Feb 2013

EAT Rights On Insolvency – Two separate Employment Tribunals decided that Claimants who had been employed (without knowing it) by a company which had entered a CVA were entitled to claim arrears of pay and holiday pay from the National Insurance Fund when subsequently the company went into liquidation. In each case, the reasoning was flawed: the first Judge introduced concepts which were not present in Part XII of the ERA 96; the second relied on a view of the meaning of the EC Directive 2008/94 which was shown by the Appellant to be mistaken. The parties agreed that unless modified by reference to the Directive the domestic legislation precluded the claims; the EAT held that the Directive did not require any such modification, nor any different interpretation.

Judges:

Langstaff P J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0312 – 12 – 1402

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 2008/94, Employment Rights Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Insolvency

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495205

Lawal v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust: EAT 11 Apr 2013

EAT Jurisdictional Points : Claim In Time and Effective Date of Termination
Contract of employment terminated on expiry of Claimant’s notice of resignation. Subsequent purported dismissal by Respondent following a disciplinary process after employment ended a nullity. ET1 presented out of time. Employment Judge entitled to refuse application to extend time. Appeal dismissed. Claims were time-barred.

Judges:

Peter Clark J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0592 – 12 – 1104

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495207

Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Mcdonagh and Others: EAT 14 Feb 2013

EAT Rights On Insolvency
Two separate Employment Tribunals decided that Claimants who had been employed (without knowing it) by a company which had entered a CVA were entitled to claim arrears of pay and holiday pay from the National Insurance Fund when subsequently the company went into liquidation. In each case, the reasoning was flawed: the first Judge introduced concepts which were not present in Part XII of the ERA 96; the second relied on a view of the meaning of the EC Directive 2008/94 which was shown by the Appellant to be mistaken. The parties agreed that unless modified by reference to the Directive the domestic legislation precluded the claims; the EAT held that the Directive did not require any such modification, nor any different interpretation.

Judges:

Langstaff P J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0287 – 12 – 1402

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 2008/94, Employment Rights Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495204

Koenig v The Mind Gym Ltd: EAT 8 Mar 2013

EAT Unfair Dismissal : Exclusions Including Worker/Jurisdiction
The question was the date on which the Claimant began work for the Respondent, for the purpose of calculating sufficient service to bring a claim for unfair dismissal. She had been engaged from 1 October, and dismissed one day short of a year’s service. She argued that her attendance at the invitation of R at a meeting of one of its employee’s with a client, who was due to become a client of C’s once employed, for some hours on the 30 September, should have been regarded by an Employment Tribunal as being work under the contract.
Held: that the question was not whether C worked for her future employer, but whether that was work under the contract of employment which had been entered into. On the facts, the ET was entitled to hold it was not. Accordingly, C’s appeal failed.

Judges:

Langstaff P J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0201 – 12 – 0803

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495206

Smith v The London and South Western Railway Company: 1870

Blackburn J said: ‘I take it that, since the case of Vaughan v Taff Vale Ry Co, which was expressly affirmed in Brand v Hammersmith Ry Co, it is clear that when a railway company is authorized by their Act of parliament to run engines on their line, and that cannot be done without their emitting sparks, the company are not responsible for injuries arising therefrom, unless there is some evidence of negligence on their part.’

Citations:

(1870-71) LR 6 CP 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Vaughan v The Taff Vale Railway Company 20-Nov-1858
A wood adjoining the defendants’ railway was set alight and burned by sparks from the locomotives. On several previous occasions it had been set on fire, and the Company had paid for the damage. Evidence was given that the defendants had done . .
Appeal from – Smith v The London and South Western Railway Company 1869
Negligence requires duty to injured
Workmen, employed by the defendant railway company to cut the grass and trim hedges bordering the railway, placed the trimmings in heaps near the line, and allowed them to remain there for fourteen days, during very hot weather in the month of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Stannard (T/A Wyvern Tyres) v Gore CA 4-Oct-2012
The defendant, now appellant, ran a business involving the storage of tyres. The claimant neighbour’s own business next door was severely damaged in a fire of the tyres escaping onto his property. The court had found him liable in strict liability . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.512174

Smith v The London and South Western Railway Company: 1869

Negligence requires duty to injured

Workmen, employed by the defendant railway company to cut the grass and trim hedges bordering the railway, placed the trimmings in heaps near the line, and allowed them to remain there for fourteen days, during very hot weather in the month of August. Fire from a passing engine ignited one of these heaps, and burned the hedge, and was carried by a high wind across a stubblefield and a public road, and burned the plaintiff’s goods in a cottage about 200 yards away. The question was whether there was evidence of negligence to go before the jury. No one argued that the railway company was strictly liable.
Held: Bovill CJ said: ‘I agree that the mere circumstance of the fire being caused by an engine of the company, is not enough to give a cause of action against them; but the plaintiff must shew some breach of duty on their part which occasioned the injury he complains of.’

Judges:

Bovill CJ

Citations:

(1869-70) LR 5 CP 98

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Vaughan v The Taff Vale Railway Company 20-Nov-1858
A wood adjoining the defendants’ railway was set alight and burned by sparks from the locomotives. On several previous occasions it had been set on fire, and the Company had paid for the damage. Evidence was given that the defendants had done . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Smith v The London and South Western Railway Company 1870
Blackburn J said: ‘I take it that, since the case of Vaughan v Taff Vale Ry Co, which was expressly affirmed in Brand v Hammersmith Ry Co, it is clear that when a railway company is authorized by their Act of parliament to run engines on their line, . .
Cited – Stannard (T/A Wyvern Tyres) v Gore CA 4-Oct-2012
The defendant, now appellant, ran a business involving the storage of tyres. The claimant neighbour’s own business next door was severely damaged in a fire of the tyres escaping onto his property. The court had found him liable in strict liability . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.512173

Richards v Manpower Services Ltd: EAT 3 Apr 2013

EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out/Dismissal – Unless Order – non-compliance – effect
The Respondent had failed to comply with an ‘unless order’ and had made no application in any form for relief against sanction. The Employment Judge declined to make an order striking out the Respondent’s responses: he ought to have made an order in effect declaring that the effect of the ‘unless order’ was that the responses were struck out automatically: Scottish Ambulance Service v Laing [2012] UKEAT/0038/12. The Employment Judge’s decision could not be read as granting relief against sanction, but it was still open to the Respondent to apply to the Employment Tribunal for relief against sanction.

Judges:

Richardson J

Citations:

[2013] UKEAT 0014 – 13 – 0304

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495208

ZZ v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 24 Jan 2014

The claimant had appealed against his exclusion, confirmed by the Special Immigration Appeal Commission. The case had been remitted to the European Court of Justice, which had now made its decision.
Held: The essence of the grounds for excluding a European Union national from the United Kingdom must be disclosed by virtue of article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Judges:

Lord Dyson MR, Richards, Christopher Clarke LJJ

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 7, [2014] 3 All ER 587, [2014] WLR(D) 26, [2014] 2 WLR 791, [2014] 2 CMLR 49, [2014] QB 820, [2014] INLR 858

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 19(1), Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Reprieve and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Prime Minister Admn 30-Jun-2020
Standing may not be enough for JR
The claimants sought judicial review of the defendant’s decision that it was no longer necessary to establish a public inquiry to investigate allegations of involvement of the United Kingdom intelligence services in torture, mistreatment and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, European, Human Rights

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.520742

William Hill Organisation Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Horserace Betting Levy Board and Others: CA 3 May 2013

The court was asked whether business customers of betting exchanges may be required to pay a horse race betting levy. If they are bookmakers within the meaning of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963, then the Horserace Betting Levy Board, the respondent, is entitled to impose a levy on them. Customers of a betting exchange will fall within the statutory definition of a bookmaker if they carry on the business of ‘receiving or negotiating bets’.

Judges:

Maurice Kay, Moses, Davis LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 487, [2013] 3 All ER 297, [2013] 1 WLR 3656, [2013] WLR(D) 174

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Taxes – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495182

Jones and Others v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Another: QBD 3 May 2013

The claimants sought an order for pre-judgment interest on the disbursements incurred in this group litigation. The clients were liable for payment of the disbursements under the conditional fee agreements, and in this case these amounted to over andpound;750,000.
Held: The order was made for the period from the date of the signing of the credit agreement.

Judges:

Swift J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1023 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Jaura v Ahmed CA 21-Feb-2002
The applicant sought damages for the wrongful termination of her lease by the respondent. The landlords re-entered in default of payment of the rent. The premises had been sub-let, and she sought damages for the loss of rental profits.
Held: . .
Cited – Bim Kemi Ab v Blackburn Chemicals Ltd CA 24-Jun-2003
It had been argued by the claimant in written submissions (although not maintained orally) that an order for payment of pre-judgment interest on costs should never be made. As to an award of interest on costs:- ‘In any event in principle there seems . .
Cited – BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt (No 2) 1979
The contract between the parties relating to an oil concession in Libya had been frustrated by the nationalisation of the field.
Held: The court considered the setting of damages where the plaintiff had delayed in notifying the defendant of . .
Cited – Tate and Lyle Food Distribution Ltd v Greater London Council 1981
Forbes J considered the principles to be applied when considering the award of interest on damages between the date of the loss and the judgment: ‘Despite the way in which Lord Herschell LC in London, Chatham and Dover Railway Co v South Eastern . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495192

HTC Europe Co Ltd v Apple Inc: CA 3 May 2013

Appeal against two findings that two patents relating to touch sensitive screens were invalid for obviousness in the light of prior art.
Held: It was appropriate for the court, when considering the patentability of computer programs, to adhere to the four-stage process set out in Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd; Macrossan’s Patent Application.

Judges:

Richards, Lewison, Kitchin LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 451

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1 CA 27-Oct-2006
In each case it was said that the requested patent concerned an invention consisting of a computer program, and was not therefore an invention and was unpatentable. In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marks CA 13-Nov-2014
The inventor company appealed against rejection of its application for a patent for a computer program.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘on the facts found by the Hearing Officer, the invention is no more than the computerisation of a process which . .
Cited – Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks PatC 4-Sep-2013
Peter Prescott QC J set out the four steps to be taken: ‘The approach is in four steps:
‘(1) properly construe the claim;
(2) identify the actual contribution;
(3) ask whether it falls solely within the excluded subject matter;
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495178

Standard Bank Plc v Via Mat International Ltd and Another: CA 3 May 2013

Aikens LJ said: ‘Overlong pleadings and written submissions . . which are manufactured by parties and their lawyers have become the bane of commercial litigation in England and Wales.’

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Aikens LJJ, David Richards J

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 490

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Tchenguiz and Others v Thornton UK Llp and Others ComC 20-Feb-2015
The court considered appropriate directions where the pleadings presented by the parties had flouted the pleadings rules set out in the Commercial Court practice guide and exceeded by a considerable way, the maximum length. The claim in esence was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.495181

Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd: QBD 5 Jul 2012

Judges:

Mr Justice Supperstone

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1855 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd QBD 26-Jan-2009
The claimants sought damages after delays by the bank in processing transfer requests. The bank said that the delays were made pending reports of suspected criminal activity. The bank’s delay had stigmatised the claimant causing further losses. The . .
Main Judgment – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd QBD 16-May-2012
The Claimants claimed damages in a sum in excess of US$300,000,000 arising out of delays by the Defendant, their bankers, in executing four transfers from the Claimants’ account during the period September 2006 to March 2007 and the Defendant’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.461956

Sommer v Landesgeschaftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Wien: ECJ 21 Jun 2012

ECJ Accession of new Member States – Republic of Bulgaria – Member State legislation making the grant of a work permit to Bulgarian nationals subject to an examination of the situation of the labour market – Directive 2004/114/EC – Conditions of admission of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service

Citations:

[2012] EUECJ C-15/11, C-15/11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Sommer v Landesgeschaftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Wien ECJ 1-Mar-2012
Opinion – Accession of new Member States – Protocol concerning the conditions and arrangements for admission of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union – Bulgaria – Applicability of Directive 2004/114/EC – Conditions for admission . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.460900

Goddard and Another v Regina: CACD 27 Jul 2012

In relation to a case based on inferences, Aikens LJ summarised the principles in Galbraith on a submission of no case to answer: ‘(1) in all cases where a judge is asked to consider a submission of no case to answer, the judge should apply the ‘classic’ or ‘traditional’ test set out by Lord Lane CJ in Galbraith. (2) Where a key issue in the submission of no case is whether there is sufficient evidence on which a reasonable jury could be entitled to draw an adverse inference against the defendant from a combination of factual circumstances based upon evidence adduced by the prosecution, the exercise of deciding that there is a case to answer does involve the rejection of all realistic possibilities consistent with innocence.
(3) However, most importantly, the question is whether a reasonable jury, not all reasonable juries, could, on one possible view of the evidence, be entitled to reach that adverse inference. If a judge concludes that a reasonable jury could be entitled to do so (properly directed) on the evidence, putting the prosecution case at its highest, then the case must continue; if not it must be withdrawn from the jury.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Aikens

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 1756

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .

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.

Crime

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.463316

Bristol Tramways and Carriage Co Ltd v Fiat Motors Ltd: CA 1910

The plaintiff complained after the purchase of a Fiat Omnibus chassis ‘for the road’, to be used for the conveyance of passengers around Bristol, in heavy and hilly traffic conditions. The chassis proved unfit for this purpose on account of breaking-down too often.
Held: There was an implied condition that the omnibus should be reasonably fit for the declared purpose. Buses manufactured by the defendant which were too slightly built for heavy city traffic were both not fit for purpose and not of merchantable quality. Nevertheless, goods may be reasonably fit for a purpose despite minor defects.
Farwell LJ said: ‘The phrase in s.14, sub-s.(2), is, in my opinion, used as meaning that the article is of such quality and in such condition that a reasonable man acting reasonably would after a full examination accept it under the circumstances of the case in performance of his offer to buy that article whether he buys for his own use or to sell it again.’
Cozens-Hardy, LJ MR considered the proper approach for a court interpreting a codifying statute: ‘I rather deprecate the citation of earlier decisions . . The object and intent of the statute . . was, no doubt, simply to codify the unwritten law applicable to the sale of goods, but in so far as there is an express statutory enactment, that alone must be looked at and must govern the rights of the parties, even though the section may to some extent have altered the prior common law’

Judges:

Cozens-Hardy, LJ MR, Farwell LJ

Citations:

[1910] 2 KB 831

Statutes:

Sale of Goods Act 1897 14(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Fulling CACD 1987
It was alleged that evidence had been obtained by police oppression. She had at first refused to answer questions, but an officer talked to her during a break between interviews, telling her that her lover had been having an affair. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Contract

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.464676

Regina v Griffiths and Others: CCA 1965

A supplier of lime and his employee were accused of conspiring with seven farmers to defraud the Ministry by submitting excessive subsidy claims. They were also charged with fraudulently obtaining money from the Ministry. There was no evidence that any of the farmers was aware of the arrangements being made between the principal defendant and any of the other farmers, but they were all charged with a single count of conspiracy.
Held: The convictions were quashed.
Conspiracy charges should be tried separately to substantive counts and the prosecution should not charge persons with conspiracy at all in the absence of evidence from which a jury could infer that the accuseds’ minds went beyond an intention to commit the substantive offences, to an agreement to do an unlawful act. The prosecution case was confusing and that evidence in any event could not have supported the conspiracy charge.
It is not necessary that a defendant in a conspiracy charge should know all the details of the scheme to which he attaches himself. However: ‘In law all must join in the one agreement, each with the others, in order to constitute one conspiracy. They may join in at various times, each attaching himself to that agreement; any of them may not know the full extent of the scheme to which he attaches himself. But what each must know is that there is coming into existence, or is in existence, a scheme which goes beyond the illegal act or acts which he agrees to do.’
Paull J gave an illustration: ‘I employ an accountant to make out my tax return. He and his clerk are both present when I am asked to sign the return. I notice an item in my expenses of andpound;100 and say: ‘I don’t remember incurring this expense’. The clerk says: ‘Well, actually I put it in. You didn’t incur it, but I didn’t think you would object to a few pounds being saved.’ The accountant indicates his agreement to this attitude. After some hesitation I agree to let it stand. On those bare facts I cannot be charged with 50 others in a conspiracy to defraud the Exchequer of andpound;100,000 on the basis that this accountant and his clerk have persuaded 500 other clients to make false returns, some being false in one way, some in another, or even all in the same way. I have not knowingly attached myself to a general agreement to defraud.’

Judges:

Paull J

Citations:

(1965) 49 Cr App R 279, [1966] 1 QB 589

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mehta v Regina CACD 31-Dec-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conspiracy to defraud. His co-defendant and alleged co-conspirator had been acquitted.
Held: The appeal against conviction failed. The defence knew that they were going to have to deal with the . .
Cited – Serious Fraud Office v Papachristos and Another CACD 19-Sep-2014
The applicants challenged their convictions and sentences for conspiracy to corrupt. They owned a company manufacturing fuel additives. Technology developments meant that they came under increasing pressure on sales. They were said to have entered . .
Cited – Bhatti and Others v Regina CACD 30-Jul-2015
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to facilitate breaches of immigration law, saying that they had been based on evidence obtained by the police from credit reference agencies in breach of their rights under the 1984 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.467721

Germany v Flatman: QBD 10 Nov 2011

In each case the defendant had succeeded in a defence of a personal injury claim, but had been unable to recover the costs, the claimant being impecunious, and the solicitors having acted on a conditional fee basis and without any after the event insurance. They now sought disclosure of the funding arrangements in detail, suspecting the action had been funded by the solicitors.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2945 (QB), [2012] 2 Costs LR 271

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Senior Courts Act 1981 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.448310

Morrison v Buckinghamshire County Council and Another: QBD 20 Dec 2011

The claimant brought an action in defamation against officers of the Council. Applications were now made for permission to amend, and for the defendant summary judgment on the basis that the claim had no prospect of success.

Judges:

Parkes QC J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3444 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Defamation

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.450163

Derby and Co v Weldon: CA 2 Aug 1988

The court has a power to make a pre-judgment worldwide asset freezing order (a mareva injunction) on satisfaction of the following conditions: 1. That the defendant can be protected against too many and oppressive actions, 2. That he can be protected effectively against the misuse of any information so obtained, and 3. That the interests of third parties are protected.

Citations:

Times 02-Aug-1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Derby v Weldon (No. 3) ChD 7-Nov-1988
The plaintiff alleged conspiracy to defraud in a sum in excess of andpound;25m. During the application for a freezing order the stance of the defendant had been one of ‘taciturnity’ and non-disclosure. But on the last day of the hearing it was said . .
See also – Derby and Co v Weldon (No2) CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff appealed against the refusal of a world-wide Mareva injunction.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR said: ‘We live in a time of rapidly growing commercial and financial sophistication and it behoves the . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff sought damages for breach of contract, for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and deceit and conspiracy. It sought a world-wide injunction.
Held: A freezing order (Mareva injunction) can be made in respect of assets which were . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (Nos 3 and 4) CA 1990
The plaintiff had obtained an asset freezing order against a defendant Panamanian Company, which now appealed saying that it was inappropriate to make such an order where the company had no assets in the jurisdiction.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
See Also – Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6) CA 3-Jan-1990
The court considered its power to order transfer of assets from one jurisdiction (in this case Switzerland) to another in aid of a Mareva injunction.
Held: An order that assets be delivered or transferred to a receiver was a usual one.
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 9) ChD 25-Jul-1990
The court considered the application of rules relating to the discovery of documents to material held on computer: ‘the database of a computer, so far as it contained information capable of being retrieved and converted into readable form, and . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (No 8) CA 27-Jul-1990
There had been a lengthy and contentious process of discovery. Certain documents with legal professional privilege had also been handed over inadvertently. The plaintiff sought their return and an order against them being used.
Held: The . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 10) CA 1991
A document had been disclosed by mistake.
Held: The inspecting parties must have realised that the documents had been disclosed by mistake. Fairness on the opposite party is the basis for the courts to hold for a waiver of legal privilege.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.449762

In re Glen Express Ltd: ChD 2000

The rule against double proof is implicit in the Insolvency Act 1986, and ‘remains good law. It is an overarching principle which still applies to insolvency, and nothing in Stein v Blake [1996] AC 243 calls it into question.’

Judges:

Neuberger J

Citations:

[2000] BPIR 456

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander Ltd SC 19-Oct-2011
The bank had been put into administrative receivership, and the court was now asked as to how distributions were to be made, and in particular as to the application of the equitable rule in Cherry v Boultbee in the rule against double proof as it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.449845

Barrett v Bem and Others: CA 31 Jan 2012

Under section 9(a) of the Wills Act 1937, as amended, the court should not find that a will has been signed by a third party at the direction of the testator unless there is a positive and discernible communication (which may be verbal or non-verbal) by the testator that he wishes the will to be signed on his behalf by the third party

Judges:

Maurice Kay P, Hughes, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 52, [2012] 2 All ER 920, [2012] WTLR 567, [2012] 3 WLR 330, [2012] WLR(D) 17, [2012] Ch 573

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Wills Act 1937 9(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Barrett v Bem and Others ChD 19-May-2011
The court retried an action disputing the validity of the will, new evidence having emerged post trial. The doubtful signature was explained by witnesses who said that he had been assisted.
Held: The matter might have been handled better, but . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wrangle v Brunt and Another ChD 6-Jul-2020
Challenge to purported wills as forgeries.
Held: Though the will was not executed as described in the attestation clause: ‘On the totality of the evidence before me, I am satisfied Dean understood and approved what was in the will when it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.450518

Torbensrichard Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 31 Jan 2012

Schedule 18 Finance Act 1998 – successive failures to file company tax return – whether shortage of funds to pay agent reasonable excuse – no – whether proportionality to be taken into account by Tribunal – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2012] UKFTT 99 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Corporation Tax

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.451943

Rail Safety and Standards Board Ltd v British Telecommunications Ltd: CA 31 Jan 2012

Claim for damages for the failure of the defendant, Rail Safety and Standards Board Limited, to take an underlease of the first floor and an underlease of the second floor of a building at Holborn, London EC1, pursuant to an agreement between BT and RSSB. RSSB intended to carry out substantial works to those premises.

Judges:

Lord Justice Etherton

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 553

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.454036

Derby v Weldon (No. 3): ChD 7 Nov 1988

The plaintiff alleged conspiracy to defraud in a sum in excess of andpound;25m. During the application for a freezing order the stance of the defendant had been one of ‘taciturnity’ and non-disclosure. But on the last day of the hearing it was said that the defendant held certain assets. Another defendant, to whom over andpound;50m had been paid, had no assets. That disclosure led to the application for a receivership order. Counsel for the defendant against whom the receivership order was sought presented no argument to the court on the question whether receivers should be appointed.
Held: Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson VC appointed receivers in a case where the court had earlier made an asset freezing order, saying: ‘The first question of law, which does not give me much trouble but was very properly referred to by [counsel], is whether a Receiver can be appointed in aid of a Mareva injunction. In my judgment it plainly can be done. If the proper preservation of the assets frozen under the Mareva order requires the introduction of a Receiver to hold certain assets, I can see no reason why such a Receiver should not be appointed as a matter of law.’

Judges:

Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson VC

Citations:

Unreported, 7 November 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Derby and Co v Weldon CA 2-Aug-1988
The court has a power to make a pre-judgment worldwide asset freezing order (a mareva injunction) on satisfaction of the following conditions: 1. That the defendant can be protected against too many and oppressive actions, 2. That he can be . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (Nos 3 and 4) CA 1990
The plaintiff had obtained an asset freezing order against a defendant Panamanian Company, which now appealed saying that it was inappropriate to make such an order where the company had no assets in the jurisdiction.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – JSC BTA Bank v A CA 19-Oct-2010
The court heard an appeal in private, against the order of Teare J imposing a receivership on the assets of Mr A pending the trial of claims made against him for misappropriations allegedly made by him while he was chairman of the claimant bank in . .
See also – Derby and Co v Weldon (No2) CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff appealed against the refusal of a world-wide Mareva injunction.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR said: ‘We live in a time of rapidly growing commercial and financial sophistication and it behoves the . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff sought damages for breach of contract, for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and deceit and conspiracy. It sought a world-wide injunction.
Held: A freezing order (Mareva injunction) can be made in respect of assets which were . .
See Also – Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6) CA 3-Jan-1990
The court considered its power to order transfer of assets from one jurisdiction (in this case Switzerland) to another in aid of a Mareva injunction.
Held: An order that assets be delivered or transferred to a receiver was a usual one.
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 9) ChD 25-Jul-1990
The court considered the application of rules relating to the discovery of documents to material held on computer: ‘the database of a computer, so far as it contained information capable of being retrieved and converted into readable form, and . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (No 8) CA 27-Jul-1990
There had been a lengthy and contentious process of discovery. Certain documents with legal professional privilege had also been handed over inadvertently. The plaintiff sought their return and an order against them being used.
Held: The . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 10) CA 1991
A document had been disclosed by mistake.
Held: The inspecting parties must have realised that the documents had been disclosed by mistake. Fairness on the opposite party is the basis for the courts to hold for a waiver of legal privilege.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.449759

Derby and Co v Weldon (No2): CA 2 Jan 1989

The plaintiff appealed against the refusal of a world-wide Mareva injunction.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR said: ‘We live in a time of rapidly growing commercial and financial sophistication and it behoves the courts to adapt their practices to meet the current wiles of those defendants who are prepared to devote as much energy to making themselves immune to the courts’ orders as to resisting the making of such orders on the merits of their case.’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR

Citations:

[1989] 1 All ER 1002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ashtiani v Kashi CA 1986
On the grant of a Mareva injunction, the defendant had disclosed assets outside the jurisdiction in bank accounts in Europe. The plaintiff then obtained injunctions relating to those assets. The defendant obtained the discharge of those orders on . .
Cited – Derby and Co v Weldon (No2) ChD 19-Oct-1988
The claimant sought a world-wide Mareva injunction against the assets of the defendant abroad.
Held: The injunction was refused. A Mareva injunction should only operate within the jurisdiction. . .
See also – Derby and Co v Weldon CA 2-Aug-1988
The court has a power to make a pre-judgment worldwide asset freezing order (a mareva injunction) on satisfaction of the following conditions: 1. That the defendant can be protected against too many and oppressive actions, 2. That he can be . .
See also – Derby v Weldon (No. 3) ChD 7-Nov-1988
The plaintiff alleged conspiracy to defraud in a sum in excess of andpound;25m. During the application for a freezing order the stance of the defendant had been one of ‘taciturnity’ and non-disclosure. But on the last day of the hearing it was said . .

Cited by:

See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon CA 2-Jan-1989
The plaintiff sought damages for breach of contract, for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and deceit and conspiracy. It sought a world-wide injunction.
Held: A freezing order (Mareva injunction) can be made in respect of assets which were . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (Nos 3 and 4) CA 1990
The plaintiff had obtained an asset freezing order against a defendant Panamanian Company, which now appealed saying that it was inappropriate to make such an order where the company had no assets in the jurisdiction.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
See Also – Derby and Co v Weldon (No 6) CA 3-Jan-1990
The court considered its power to order transfer of assets from one jurisdiction (in this case Switzerland) to another in aid of a Mareva injunction.
Held: An order that assets be delivered or transferred to a receiver was a usual one.
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 9) ChD 25-Jul-1990
The court considered the application of rules relating to the discovery of documents to material held on computer: ‘the database of a computer, so far as it contained information capable of being retrieved and converted into readable form, and . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd v Weldon (No 8) CA 27-Jul-1990
There had been a lengthy and contentious process of discovery. Certain documents with legal professional privilege had also been handed over inadvertently. The plaintiff sought their return and an order against them being used.
Held: The . .
See Also – Derby and Co Ltd And Others v Weldon And Others (No 10) CA 1991
A document had been disclosed by mistake.
Held: The inspecting parties must have realised that the documents had been disclosed by mistake. Fairness on the opposite party is the basis for the courts to hold for a waiver of legal privilege.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.449764

Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd: CA 13 Oct 2011

Judges:

Pill, Munby, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1154, [2012] Lloyd’s Rep FC 105

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd QBD 26-Jan-2009
The claimants sought damages after delays by the bank in processing transfer requests. The bank said that the delays were made pending reports of suspected criminal activity. The bank’s delay had stigmatised the claimant causing further losses. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Crime

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.445451

Matthey v Curling: CA 1920

Citations:

[1920] 3 KB 608

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Matthey v Curling HL 1922
During the term of the lease, the property had been taken over by the military authorities under wartime powers. Shortly before the term expired the house was destroyed in a fire. The lessor claimed the last quarter’s rent and for breach of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.443848

Iqbal v Mansoor and Others: QBD 26 Aug 2011

The claimant sought the disapplication of the limitation period in order to pursue the defendant solicitors, his former employers, in defamation.

Judges:

Parkes QC J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2261 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Iqbal v Dean Manson Solicitors CA 15-Feb-2011
The claimant sought protection under the Act from his former employers’ behaviour in making repeated allegations against him. He appealed against the striking out of his claim.
Held: The appeal suceeded. The matter should go to trial. The . .
Cited – Thomas v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 18-Jul-2001
The publication of articles in a newspaper describing how a ‘black clerk’ had complained about the allegedly racist comments of two policemen was said to have caused the claimant to receive racist hate mail.
Held: The court considered the type . .
Cited – Munster v Lamb CA 1883
Judges and witness, including police officers are given immunity from suit in defamation in court proceedings.
Fry LJ said: ‘Why should a witness be able to avail himself of his position in the box and to make without fear of civil consequences . .
Cited – Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police HL 1-Aug-2000
The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were . .
Cited – Lincoln v Daniels CA 1961
The defendant claimed absolute immunity in respect of communications sent by him to the Bar Council alleging professional misconduct by the plaintiff, a Queen’s Counsel.
Held: Initial communications sent to the secretary of the Bar Council . .
Cited – Lincoln v Daniels CA 1961
The defendant claimed absolute immunity in respect of communications sent by him to the Bar Council alleging professional misconduct by the plaintiff, a Queen’s Counsel.
Held: Initial communications sent to the secretary of the Bar Council . .
Cited – Watson v M’Ewan HL 1905
A claim was brought against a medical witness in respect of statements made in preparation of a witness statement and similar statements subsequently made in court. The appellant was a doctor of medicine who had been retained by the respondent in . .
Cited – Marrinan v Vibart QBD 1963
The plaintiff sought to sue police officers who had prepared a report for the Director of Public Prosecutions and appeared as witnesses against him at his criminal trial.
Held: The claim failed. Salmon J considered the principle of the . .
Cited – Lincoln v Daniels CA 1961
The defendant claimed absolute immunity in respect of communications sent by him to the Bar Council alleging professional misconduct by the plaintiff, a Queen’s Counsel.
Held: Initial communications sent to the secretary of the Bar Council . .
Cited – Samuels v Coole and Haddock (a Firm) CA 22-May-1997
The defendant solicitors had acted for defendants in an action brought by the plaintiff. They swore and filed an affidavit in support of an application to strike out elements of the action. The affidavit spoke as to abusive and threatening calls and . .
Cited – Smeaton v Butcher and others CA 31-May-2000
An affidavit had been supplied by defendants to landlord and tenant proceedings, against whom the claimant alleged unlawful eviction, to a landlord who was also a defendant to an unlawful eviction claim brought by the claimant, and who used it for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.443323

Potter v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd: 21 Aug 1905

VLR (Supreme Court – Victoria) International law – Conflict of laws – Tort committed abroad – Jurisdiction – Patent in New South Wales – Infringement by Victorian company in New South Wales of New South Wales patent – Action not justiciable in Victoria – ‘Local action’ – ‘Transitory action’ – Practice – Demurrer – Right of reply.
Patents could be granted by the several States in Australia. Potter obtained a patent in Victoria for the separation of metals from sulphide ores and a patent for the same process in New South Wales. He claimed that (as well as a threatened infringement of the Victorian patent in Victoria) the defendant had infringed the New South Wales patent at its mine in New South Wales. Broken Hill denied novelty and utility, but also said that an action for the infringement in New South Wales of a New South Wales patent was not justiciable in the Victorian courts.
Held: The Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria, decided by a majority that the claim was not justiciable.

Judges:

Hodges, Hood JJ

Citations:

[1905] VLR 612, [1905] VicLawRp 93, [1905] 11 ALR 357, [1905] 27 Alt 74

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

Appeal from – Potter v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd 20-Mar-1906
(High Court of Australia) (affirmed) . .
Cited – Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another SC 27-Jul-2011
The claimant had produced the Star War films which made use of props, in particular a ‘Stormtrooper’ helmet designed by the defendant. The defendant had then himself distributed models of the designs he had created. The appellant obtained judgment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.442606

Evans, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Coroner for Cardiff and The Vale of Glamorgan: Admn 3 Dec 2010

The claimant nurse sought judicial review of a finding by the coroner of an unlawful killing after the administration by the claimant to the deceased of a tenfold overdose of medication.

Judges:

Wilkie J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3478 (Admin), [2010] Inquest LR 217

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Coroners, Health Professions

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.443287

Re Cohen’s Will Trusts: ChD 1959

An application was made for the variation of trust provisions on behalf of a child beneficiary.
Held: Where the outcome of the arrangement cannot be predicted with certainty then the Court should be prepared to take on behalf of a minor, a risk which an adult would be prepared to take

Citations:

[1959] 1 WLR 165

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wright and Another v Gater and Others ChD 7-Nov-2011
The beneficiary, a child was to inherit estates of his grandparents and parents, all of which were intestate. An application was made to vary the provisions in order to reduce the liability to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A deferment of vesting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.448127

Cowderoy v Cranfield: ChD 13 Oct 2011

Judges:

Morgan J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2628 (Ch), [2011] WTLR 1741

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Principal judgment – Cowderoy v Cranfield ChD 24-Jun-2011
The claimant challenged a will alleging lack of capacity, non-approval and undue influence.
Held: Morgan J discussed the standard of proof applicable: ‘The requisite standard is proof on the balance of probabilities but as the allegation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Costs

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.446008

Fenland District Council v Sheppard and Others: ChD 3 Nov 2011

Short but somewhat difficult point under the provisions governing the vesting of disclaimed property of a bankrupt’s estate under section 320 of the Insolvency Act 1986

Judges:

Roth J

Citations:

[2011] 45 EG 96 (CS),, [2012] 2 EG 68, [2011] EWHC 2829 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Insolvency

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.448120