Click the case name for better results:

Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit her enjoyment of her land. Held: The interference with TV reception by an … Continue reading Hunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd: HL 25 Apr 1997

Science Research Council v Nasse; BL Cars Ltd (formerly Leyland Cars) v Voias: HL 1 Nov 1979

Recent statutes had given redress to anyone suffering unlawful discrimination on account of race sex or trade union activities. An employee sought discovery of documents from his employer which might reveal such discrimination. Held: The court ought not to order breach of properly given confidences unless it is necessary in the interests of justice. Lord … Continue reading Science Research Council v Nasse; BL Cars Ltd (formerly Leyland Cars) v Voias: HL 1 Nov 1979

Yeoman’s Row Management Ltd and Another v Cobbe: HL 30 Jul 2008

The parties agreed in principle for the sale of land with potential development value. Considerable sums were spent, and permission achieved, but the owner then sought to renegotiate the deal. Held: The appeal succeeded in part. The finding that Mrs Lisle-Mainwaring’s behaviour in repudiating, and seeking an improvement on, the core financial terms of the … Continue reading Yeoman’s Row Management Ltd and Another v Cobbe: HL 30 Jul 2008

McFaddens (A Firm) v Platford: TCC 30 Jan 2009

The claimant firm of solicitors had been found negligent, and now sought a contribution to the damages awarded from the barrister defendant. They had not managed properly issues as to their clients competence to handle the proceedings. Held: The standard of care required was that: ‘the barrister must conduct himself in his professional work with … Continue reading McFaddens (A Firm) v Platford: TCC 30 Jan 2009

Rondel v Worsley: HL 1967

Need for Advocate’s Immunity from Negligence The appellant had obtained the services of the respondent barrister to defend him on a dock brief, and alleged that the respondent had been negligent in the conduct of his defence. Held: The House considered the immunity from suit of barristers acting in court. An advocate should remain immune … Continue reading Rondel v Worsley: HL 1967

In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995

Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still been been found. Held: A care order could … Continue reading In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995

Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark and Another: ChD 8 Oct 2008

The court was asked whether section 101 of the 1925 Act infringes the Convention rights of residential mortgagors by allowing mortgagees to overreach the mortgagor by selling the property out of court, without first obtaining a court order either for possession or sale. The owners had charged the property, but fell into arrears. The creditor … Continue reading Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark and Another: ChD 8 Oct 2008

Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987

Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised. Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an Industrial Tribunal is not … Continue reading Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987

F Hoffmann La Roche and Co A G v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: HL 1975

The Secretary of State sought an interlocutory injunction under the Act to restrain the appellant from charging prices in excess of those fixed by a statutory instrument he had made. The appellant argued that the statutory instrument was ultra . .

Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen (The ‘Diana Prosperity’): HL 1976

References: [1976] 1 WLR 989, [1976] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 621, [1976] 3 All ER 570 Coram: Lord Wilberforce Ratio:In construing a contract, three principles can be found. The contextual scene is always relevant. Secondly, what is admissible as a matter of the rules of evidence under this heading is what is arguably relevant, but admissibility … Continue reading Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen (The ‘Diana Prosperity’): HL 1976

Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen (The Diana Prosperity”): HL 1976″

References: [1976] 1 WLR 989, [1976] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 621, [1976] 3 All ER 570 Coram: Lord Wilberforce In construing a contract, three principles can be found. The contextual scene is always relevant. Secondly, what is admissible as a matter of the rules of evidence under this heading is what is arguably relevant, but admissibility … Continue reading Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen (The Diana Prosperity”): HL 1976″