Search Results for: Court of Session Act 1988 88

Click the case name for better results:

City of London Corporation v Bovis Construction Ltd: CA 18 Apr 1988

An injunction had been granted to restrain Bovis from causing a noise nuisance outside certain hours specified in a notice served by the council under the 1974 Act which created a criminal offence ‘without reasonable excuse’ to contravene the notice. A number of informations were laid against Bovis but they were adjourned and the injunction … Continue reading City of London Corporation v Bovis Construction Ltd: CA 18 Apr 1988

Attorney General’s Reference No 88 of 2002 (Hahn and Webster): CACD 7 Nov 2003

The Attorney General referred the sentences as too lenient for armed robbery, and aggravated vehicle taking. The defendants worked as a team, and used an imitation firearm, and threatened a victim with it. Held: The possession of firearms should be regarded as an aggravating feature in relation to other offences. When passing sentence, it is … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 88 of 2002 (Hahn and Webster): CACD 7 Nov 2003

John G McGregor (Contractors) Ltd v Grampian Regional Council: HL 1991

The House dismissed the Council’s appeal as incompetent. An opinion of the court upon questions of law given on consideration of a case stated under provisions such as those in section 3 of the 1972 Act did not constitute a ‘judgment’ within the meaning of section 40(1) of the 1988 Act. Citations: 1991 SC (HL) … Continue reading John G McGregor (Contractors) Ltd v Grampian Regional Council: HL 1991

Mount Carmel Investments Limited v Peter Thurlow Limited: CA 1988

The court considered a defence to an assertion of adverse possession, that the plaintiff had given notice of his intention to recover the land: ‘no one, either lawyer or non-lawyer, would think that a householder ceases to be in possession of his house simply by reason of receiving a demand that he should quit. On … Continue reading Mount Carmel Investments Limited v Peter Thurlow Limited: CA 1988

Webb and Barrett v London Borough of Barnet: CA 1988

The authority resisted an application by the tenant to buy the property let as a council dwelling saying that the tenant was using it for mixed residential and business purposes. The tenant said that the business use had finished, and that the tenancy had become secure. Held: The court noted the change in definitions of … Continue reading Webb and Barrett v London Borough of Barnet: CA 1988

Kemmis v Kemmis (Welland and Others Intervening): CA 1988

H had mortgaged the matrimonial home to release funds to support his lifestyle. The bank knew about the family circumstances and the mortgage was set aside at first instance. W applied to have the charge set aside. Held: The application failed. The charge had been executed long before W had commenced her claims. The Court … Continue reading Kemmis v Kemmis (Welland and Others Intervening): CA 1988

Eckersley v Binnie: CA 1988

The court considered the duties of a judge considering conflicting expert evidence: ‘In resolving conflicts of expert evidence, the judge remains the judge; he is not obliged to accept evidence simply because it comes from an illustrious source; he can take account of demonstrated partisanship and lack of objectivity. But, save where an expert is … Continue reading Eckersley v Binnie: CA 1988

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1988): HL 1989

The defendant received price-sensitive information. He was acquitted of ‘obtaining’ the information, the judge finding that he had done nothing positive to acquire it. On appeal the court held that no such act was required, Held: Nothing further was required than to have received the information, to be found to have obtained it. Parliament must … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1988): HL 1989

Regina v Newcastle upon Tyne County Court, ex parte Thompson: 1988

Citations: (1988) 20 HLR 430 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Loveridge and Loveridge v Healey CA 20-Feb-2004 The landowner sought to recover possession of land occupied under an agreement by a mobile home owner. Held: It was necessary for the land owner to show that he had complied with the requirements under … Continue reading Regina v Newcastle upon Tyne County Court, ex parte Thompson: 1988

Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988

Claim by a wife that she has a beneficial interest in a house registered in the sole name of her husband and that her interest has priority over the rights of a bank under a legal charge executed without her knowledge. The case raises a point of importance in the law of registered conveyancing. Shortly … Continue reading Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988

Hornsey Local Board v Monarch Investment Building Society: CA 1889

The local authority had incurred expense in paving a street. They were entitled to apportion those expenses amongst the owners of the properties fronting onto that street and summarily to recover from the respective owners the amounts so apportioned. In addition statute provided that such expenses should be charged on the premises in respect of … Continue reading Hornsey Local Board v Monarch Investment Building Society: CA 1889

Al-Kandari v J R Brown and Co: CA 1988

A solicitor had undertaken to look after certain passports, but failed to do so. The husband had twice previously kidnapped his children whose custody was an issue before the court. Once the husband regained the passports, he again fled with the children. Held: The court should be prepared to find a duty of care on … Continue reading Al-Kandari v J R Brown and Co: CA 1988

Regina v Dudley Magistrates Court ex parte Hollis; Robert v Same: Admn 25 Nov 1997

An award of costs is inevitable after a finding of statutory nuisance and such costs include cost of establishing the nuisance. ‘The wide discretion as to whether to grant an adjournment conferred by section 10 and section 54 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 cannot, usually, be impugned. But it is a power which must … Continue reading Regina v Dudley Magistrates Court ex parte Hollis; Robert v Same: Admn 25 Nov 1997

A G Securities v Vaughan; Antoniades v Villiers and Bridger: HL 10 Nov 1988

In Antoniades, the two tenants occupied an attic, living together. Each had at the same time signed identical agreements purporting to create licences. The landlord had reserved to himself the right to occupy the property and to allow others to occupy it so as to create no more than a licence. Held: Behaviour by the … Continue reading A G Securities v Vaughan; Antoniades v Villiers and Bridger: HL 10 Nov 1988

Rush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council: HL 3 Nov 1988

The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the agreement so that it could pursue its own action. The council said that the document was covered by … Continue reading Rush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council: HL 3 Nov 1988

Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc v Maclaine Watson and Co Ltd and International Tin Council (Intervener) (No. 2): HL 1988

Article 7(1) of the International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972 provided that the ITC ‘shall have the like inviolability of official archives as in accordance with the 1961 Convention Articles is accorded in respect of the official archives of a diplomatic mission’. In the litigation which arose out of its insolvent collapse, the … Continue reading Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc v Maclaine Watson and Co Ltd and International Tin Council (Intervener) (No. 2): HL 1988

Regina v Martin (Colin): CACD 29 Nov 1988

Defence of Necessity has a Place in Criminal Law The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving whilst disqualified. He said he had felt obliged to drive his stepson to work because his stepson had overslept. His wife (who had suicidal tendencies) had been threatening suicide unless he drove the boy to work, since she … Continue reading Regina v Martin (Colin): CACD 29 Nov 1988

Online Catering Ltd v Acton and Another: CA 10 Feb 2010

The claimant agreed for the defendant to repair its fleet of vehicles. The defendant, having fees outstanding, entered the claimants’ premises and removed vehicles saying falsely that they were to be repaired, and then refused to return them. The claimants said that they were not bound by the defendants terms saying that they had not … Continue reading Online Catering Ltd v Acton and Another: CA 10 Feb 2010

Compagnie Financiere du Pacifique v Peruvian Guano Co: CA 1882

Brett LJ defined the test to identify which documents are relevant for disclosure in court proceedings: ‘It seems to me that every document relates to the matters in question in the action, which not only would be evidence upon any issue, but also which, it is reasonable to suppose, contains information which may – not … Continue reading Compagnie Financiere du Pacifique v Peruvian Guano Co: CA 1882

Lord Advocate v Lord Lovat: 1880

Lord O’Hagan considered the nature of possession as regards land: ‘As to possession, it must be considered in every case with reference to the peculiar circumstances. The acts, implying possession in one case, may be wholly inadequate to prove it in . .

Acts

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

Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd (Scotland): SC 13 Jun 2013

After long running litigation between the parties, a shareholder and director of Apollo sought to represent the company in person. He was refused leave by the Court of Session, and now sought to appeal. The Court considered the possibility of an appeal given that he was not a party to the action. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd (Scotland): SC 13 Jun 2013

Apollo Engineering Ltd (In Liquidation) v James Scott Ltd: SCS 18 Jan 2012

The parties had for several years been involved in litigation and arbitration. Apollo’s funds had run out and a director sought permission to represent the company before the court. He had asked the court to make an order under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights which would allow him to represent the … Continue reading Apollo Engineering Ltd (In Liquidation) v James Scott Ltd: SCS 18 Jan 2012

Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited: HL 19 Jun 2003

Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal. Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the circumstances which have a bearing on the suggestion that the judge was biased. … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited: HL 19 Jun 2003

Reichman and Another v Beveridge: CA 13 Dec 2006

The defendants were tenants of the claimant. They vacated the premises and stopped paying the rent. The claimant sought payment of the arrears of rent. The defendants said that the claimants should have taken steps to reduce their damages by seeking another tenant. Held: The defendant’s appeal against a ruling that a landlord was under … Continue reading Reichman and Another v Beveridge: CA 13 Dec 2006

Chattey and Another v Farndale Holdings Inc and others: CA 11 Oct 1996

The plaintiffs had paid deposits for apartments which were to be built. After the developer became insolvent the plaintiffs sought recovery of the deposits, saying they had a lien which preceded the claims of chargees. Held: The one appeal failed and another succeeded. ‘the circumstances in which a purchaser’s lien will arise are not limited … Continue reading Chattey and Another v Farndale Holdings Inc and others: CA 11 Oct 1996

N Ltd and Another, Regina v: CACD 10 Jun 2008

The defence had requested and been give a ruling of no case to answer. The prosecutor now appealed saying that this had been before he had closed the prosecution case, and had been not with his consent. Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded. The Galbraith case did not suggest that the judge had the power he … Continue reading N Ltd and Another, Regina v: CACD 10 Jun 2008

Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others: HL 24 May 2006

Application had been made to register as a town or village green an area of land which was largely a boggy marsh. The local authority resisted the application wanting to use the land instead for housing. It then rejected advice it received from a non-statutory enquiry, and sought a declaration from the court as to … Continue reading Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others: HL 24 May 2006

Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd: CA 15 Apr 2008

The appellant had contracted to provide office accomodation to the defendant. The air conditioning did not work and there were other defects. The appellant now challenged a finding of liability and that its contract terms which were said to totally exclude liability were unfair under the 1977 Act. Held: The appeal succeeded. Alternative remedies would … Continue reading Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd: CA 15 Apr 2008

Artesian Residential Investments Limited v Beck: CA 19 Mar 1999

The tenant sought relief from forfeiture under section 138 against a landlord seeking possession of his assured tenancy. There were arrears of rent which he believed he could pay. Held: The grounds for possession were statutory, and had been demonstrated. The action was not an action for forfeiture. ‘section 5(1) makes it abundantly clear that … Continue reading Artesian Residential Investments Limited v Beck: CA 19 Mar 1999

Boyland and Son Ltd v Rand: CA 20 Dec 2006

The defendant travellers occupied land belonging to the claimants. A possession order had been obtained, and the defendants now sought a reasonable time to be allowed to leave. Held: The law had not changed, and section 89 could not be used to argue for a suspension of the order for possession. Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ … Continue reading Boyland and Son Ltd v Rand: CA 20 Dec 2006

Southward Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Walker and Another: ChD 8 Jun 2015

The court was asked as to the nature and effect of tenancies for life granted by fully mutual housing co-operatives and in particular how they can lawfully be brought to an end and a possession order obtained. The tenants sought a declaration of incompatibility in respect of section 80. The Co-operative was fully mutual and … Continue reading Southward Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Walker and Another: ChD 8 Jun 2015

Ferrishurst Ltd v Wallcite Ltd: CA 30 Nov 1998

A person in actual occupation of registered land at time of transfer can enforce his rights against the transferee. A sub-underlessee in occupation of part could enforce an option to purchase against the freeholder acquiring intermediate registered title. Actual occupation of part of the land comprised in a registered disposition protected a right or interest … Continue reading Ferrishurst Ltd v Wallcite Ltd: CA 30 Nov 1998

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Root: CA 12 Jan 2005

The tenant had a partner whom she could not control, and who had terrorised her to the nuisance also of her neighbours. The landlord sought possession, and until that was granted an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) against the partner. Before the hearing an interim ASBO had been granted which effectively excluded the partner from the … Continue reading London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Root: CA 12 Jan 2005

Wrexham County Borough Council v Berry; South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another; Chichester District Council v Searle and others: HL 22 May 2003

The appellants challenged the refusal to grant them injunctions to prevent Roma parking caravans on land they had purchased. Held: Parliament had given to local authorities exclusive jurisdiction on matters of planning policy, but when an authority sought assistance in enforcement by requesting an injunction, the role of the court was not merely supervisory, but … Continue reading Wrexham County Borough Council v Berry; South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another; Chichester District Council v Searle and others: HL 22 May 2003

Berkeley Square Holdings and Others v Lancer Property Asset Management Ltd and Others: ChD 1 May 2020

Application by the Claimants to strike out parts of the Defence as an abuse of process and an application by the Defendants to amend their Defence. However, both applications turn on the question whether certain facts on which the Defendants seek to rely are excluded as privileged under the Without Prejudice (‘WP’) rule, or admissible … Continue reading Berkeley Square Holdings and Others v Lancer Property Asset Management Ltd and Others: ChD 1 May 2020

Wandsworth London Borough Council v Osei-Bonsu: CA 22 Oct 1998

Where one joint tenant had given notice and the landlord mistakenly excluded the other tenant, the husband, from possession, the landlord could not rely on the defence of ‘reasonable cause’. The tenant has the choice of possession or statutory damages. Statutory damages had been agreed between the parties’ representatives at 30,000 pounds. The Council now … Continue reading Wandsworth London Borough Council v Osei-Bonsu: CA 22 Oct 1998

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Sandra Ison: 8 Sep 2003

(Romford County Court) ‘A judge who adjourns the hearing of a ground 8 possession claim solely in order to allow a defendant an opportunity to defeat that claim, whether by extracting payment from the housing benefit authority or from any other source, is choosing not to apply the law in force at the date of … Continue reading London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Sandra Ison: 8 Sep 2003

Knowsley Housing Trust v Revell; Helena Housing Ltd v Curtis: CA 9 Apr 2003

The local authority landlord commenced proceedings for possession, but then transferred the properties to a registered social landlord. The tenants objected that the new landlords could not continue the proceedings. Held: The transfer moved tenants from the secure tenancy regime to the assured tenancy regime, with different notices and procedures. The notices were not significantly … Continue reading Knowsley Housing Trust v Revell; Helena Housing Ltd v Curtis: CA 9 Apr 2003

Liverpool City Council v Pleroma Distribution Ltd: Admn 21 Nov 2002

The defendant had applied for an adjournment of the council’s application for a liability order. The court made an order without considering the application, not having been told of it. On later discovering the application, they set aside the liability order to consider the application. The council objected. Held: Although no statutory basis existed for … Continue reading Liverpool City Council v Pleroma Distribution Ltd: Admn 21 Nov 2002

Gray and others v Taylor: CA 2 Apr 1998

A right of occupation given by an almshouse under a charitable trust was an occupation under a licence without right of possession, not an assured tenancy. The plaintiff’s conditions of occupancy stated: ‘Residents are licensees and pay a contribution towards the cost of providing accommodation at the Court: residents are not tenants and do not … Continue reading Gray and others v Taylor: CA 2 Apr 1998

Doogan and Another v NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board: SCS 24 Apr 2013

(Extra Division, Inner House) The reclaimers, Roman Catholic midwives working on a labour ward as co-ordinators, sought to assert a right of conscientious objection under the 1967 Act. The respondents said that only those directly involved in the termination of a pregnancy could assert such a right. Held: The midwives’ appeal succeeded. The Act set … Continue reading Doogan and Another v NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board: SCS 24 Apr 2013

Laimond Properties Limited v Al-Shakarchi: CA 10 Feb 1998

If ‘suitable alternative accommodation’ was offered in exchange for a protected tenancy, the court need look only for some security for the tenant, not that he should receive equal protection. Where the landlord persuades the Rent Act protected tenants to surrender their old tenancy before taking a new tenancy, the lessees would not have been … Continue reading Laimond Properties Limited v Al-Shakarchi: CA 10 Feb 1998

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 against the respondent in the US for punitive damages, but these had not been collected, and … Continue reading Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2): ChD 12 May 2004

A logo had been created for the claimants, by an independent sub-contractor. They sought assignment of their legal title, but, knowing of the claimant’s interest the copyright was assigned to a third party out of the jurisdiction. The claimant sought an order for its transfer, and an order was so made. Before it was perfected … Continue reading R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2): ChD 12 May 2004

Fish and Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and Another: AdCt 25 Jun 2012

The claimant company was engaged in tuna fish culture off shore to Malta. The defendant ship was owned by a charity which campaigned against breaches of animal preservation conventions. Fish were being transporting live blue fin tuna in towed underwater cages. The defendant ‘attacked’ the cages causing much damage, on the basis that the fish … Continue reading Fish and Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and Another: AdCt 25 Jun 2012

Ujima Housing Association v Ansah and Another: CA 17 Oct 1997

The tenant had created a sub tenancy, the result of which was that he no longer had any right to enter upon the property unless the sub-tenant surrendered his lease. Held: The tenant could not be said properly to be in occupation of the tenanted property. When a tenant has sublet, the question of whether … Continue reading Ujima Housing Association v Ansah and Another: CA 17 Oct 1997

Zionmor v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Islington: CA 10 Oct 1997

The council appealed a finding that the claimant, a secure tenant, had not surrendered his tenancy. He had sought to exercise his right to buy the property, but was said to have left the premises before the lease was completed. The property was vandalised, and he had left a note to say they he lived … Continue reading Zionmor v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Islington: CA 10 Oct 1997

King v Jackson (T/a Jackson Flower Company): CA 16 Jul 1997

The defendant appealed an award of pounds 11,000 damages for unlawful eviction of his tenant. The tenant had found herself unable to pay the rent and had given notice to quit. She was then told to leave immediately. The judge awarded statutory damages under section 27 representing the difference between the vacant possession value of … Continue reading King v Jackson (T/a Jackson Flower Company): CA 16 Jul 1997

Andrews and Another v Brewer and Another: CA 17 Feb 1997

Tenants challenged an order for possession, saying the form of notice was defective. The date specified in the notice was clearly a clerical error. It provided that the tenancy would commence on 29 May 1993 and end on 28 May 1993, on the face of it, a day before its commencement. The premises had previously … Continue reading Andrews and Another v Brewer and Another: CA 17 Feb 1997

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 witness who might be expected to have material evidence to give on … Continue reading Wisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority: CA 1997

Z And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 May 2001

Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their parents. Suspicions of abuse had arisen in 1987, but they were given effective support only in … Continue reading Z And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 May 2001

Graves v Graves and others: CA 3 Jul 2007

The parties had divorced and settled financial provision, but the former wife and her children came to need a house and one of the claimant’s properties became vacant, and she was allowed to occupy it as a tenant, with the majority of the rent being paid through housing benefit. The council refused to pay housing … Continue reading Graves v Graves and others: CA 3 Jul 2007

Panayi and Pyrkos v Roberts: CA 1993

A shorthold tenancy notice was issued before the tenancy began, but it gave the wrong date for termination. Held: The prescribed form required the correct termination date. A notice with a wrong date is not substantially the same as one with a correct date. The tenancy was therefore not an assured shorthold tenancy, and the … Continue reading Panayi and Pyrkos v Roberts: CA 1993

Tan and Another v Sitkowski: CA 1 Feb 2007

The tenant claimed Rent Act protection for his tenancy. He had been rehoused and began his tenancy in 1970 with the ground floor used as a shop, and the first floor as living accomodation. He later abandoned the business use. He appealed a finding that he did not have protection under the 1977 Act. Held: … Continue reading Tan and Another v Sitkowski: CA 1 Feb 2007

Marks and Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd and Another: SC 2 Dec 2015

The Court considered whether, on exercising a break clause in a lease, the tenant was entitled to recover rent paid in advance. Held: The appeal failed. The Court of Appeal had imposed what was established law. The test for whether a clause might be implied in a contract is: ‘that it is necessary for business … Continue reading Marks and Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd and Another: SC 2 Dec 2015

Totton and Eling Town Council v Caunter and Another: ChD 11 Jun 2008

The council appealed against an award by the adjudicator of title by adverse possession in favour of the respondents. Held: The appeal succeeded. On any sensible analysis from the Council’s perspective, the Caunters were entitled to remain in possession of the land until such time as it chose to communicate with them to revoke it, … Continue reading Totton and Eling Town Council v Caunter and Another: ChD 11 Jun 2008

Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-Operative Ltd: SC 9 Nov 2011

The tenant appealed against an order granting possession. The tenancy, being held of a mutual housing co-operative did not have security but was in a form restricting the landlord’s right to recover possession, and the tenant resisted saying that it was worded to create a lease for life (applying the LRB case). Held: The tenant’s … Continue reading Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-Operative Ltd: SC 9 Nov 2011

Salmon and Moore v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 13 Nov 1998

The court considered the burden of proof placed on the prosecution under s28 of the 1971 Act. Held: ‘Subsections (2) and (3) of Section 28 are both designed to come into play at a stage when the Crown have proved all that they need to prove in order to establish guilt either of a contravention … Continue reading Salmon and Moore v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 13 Nov 1998

North British Housing Association Ltd v Matthews, Same v Others: CA 21 Dec 2004

In each case the tenants requested adjournment of the possession proceedings brought against them by the landlord for arrears of rent to allow them time to bring the arrears below the level at which a possession order could be made. In each case it was said that the situation arose from maladministration by the local … Continue reading North British Housing Association Ltd v Matthews, Same v Others: CA 21 Dec 2004

Regina v Walsall Justices, ex parte W (a minor): QBD 1990

A youth was charged with causing grievous bodily harm. His trial was fixed for 11 October 1988. On the date of trial, the prosecution applied for an adjournment on the grounds that, if the trial proceeded immediately and the magistrates decided that the victim did not have sufficient understanding to take the oath by reason … Continue reading Regina v Walsall Justices, ex parte W (a minor): QBD 1990

Lehman Brothers International (Europe) v Exotix Partners Llp: ChD 9 Sep 2019

The parties had contracted to trade global depository notes issued by the Peruvian government. Each made mistakes as to their true value, thinking them scraps worth a few thousand dollars, whereas their true value was over $8m. On the defendant recognising their worth, they sought to sell and pocket the profit. The claimant sought restitutionary … Continue reading Lehman Brothers International (Europe) v Exotix Partners Llp: ChD 9 Sep 2019

Pirabakaran v Patel and Another: CA 26 May 2006

The landlord had wanted possession. The tenant said that the landlord had been harassing him. The landlord said that the tenancy was a mixed residential and business tenancy and that the 1977 Act did not apply. Held: The 1977 Act applied. A tenancy for mixed purposes falls under the protection of the Act of 1954, … Continue reading Pirabakaran v Patel and Another: CA 26 May 2006

Franses v Al Assad and others: ChD 26 Oct 2007

The claimant had obtained a freezing order over the proceeds of sale of a property held by solicitors. The claimant was liquidator of a company, and an allegation of wrongful trading had been made against the sole director and defendant. The defendant argued that information now used before the court could only have been obtained … Continue reading Franses v Al Assad and others: ChD 26 Oct 2007

Loveridge and Loveridge v Healey: CA 20 Feb 2004

The landowner sought to recover possession of land occupied under an agreement by a mobile home owner. Held: It was necessary for the land owner to show that he had complied with the requirements under the Act. It was insufficient for the matters to be admitted in the pleadings. Pleadings are not superfluous and are … Continue reading Loveridge and Loveridge v Healey: CA 20 Feb 2004

Regina on the Application of Uttley v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Jul 2003

Licence conditions imposed at the time of sentence would restrict the defendant after he had served his sentence and been released, and so operated as a heavier penalty, and section 33(1) was incompatible with the defendant’s Art 7.1 rights. Held: Before the 1991 Act, a prisoner was entitled to release after serving the necessary part … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Uttley v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Jul 2003

McDonald and Another v Fernandez and Another: CA 19 Jul 2003

The landlord served a notice to terminate a shorthold tenancy saying that he required possession on a certain day. The tenancy had been a periodic tenancy, and the date was not the last day of a period of the tenancy. Held: The Act was specific. What was being served was not a notice to quit … Continue reading McDonald and Another v Fernandez and Another: CA 19 Jul 2003

University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others: ChD 9 Dec 2004

The University wanted to sell land for development free of restrictive covenants. It had previously been in the ownership of both the servient and dominant land in respect of a restrictive covenant. The Borough contended that the restrictive covenants remained in effect. The University sought their discharge. Held: The Borough had owned the dominant and … Continue reading University of East London Higher Education Corporation v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and others: ChD 9 Dec 2004

London Borough of Hackney v Findlay: CA 20 Jan 2011

An application had been made to set aside a possession order obtained by a social landlord and determined by a district judge who applied CPR3.1 (7), when setting the possession order aside. By the time the landlord’s appeal against that decision was heard, the decision in Forcelux was available and the circuit judge held that … Continue reading London Borough of Hackney v Findlay: CA 20 Jan 2011

Re Citro, Lloyds Bank plc v Byrne and Byrne, Abbey National plc v Moss and others and Barclays Bank plc v Hendricks: CA 1991

Trustees in bankruptcy of bankrupt husbands successfully appealed for the removal of provisos delaying the operation of orders for sale made under s30 in respect of each husband’s matrimonial home for the benefit of that husband’s wife who had been declared by the judge at first instance to be an equal owner with the husband … Continue reading Re Citro, Lloyds Bank plc v Byrne and Byrne, Abbey National plc v Moss and others and Barclays Bank plc v Hendricks: CA 1991

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2010

The parties had settled their disagreement, but now disputed the interpretation of the settlement. The defendant sought to be allowed to give in evidence correspondence leading up to the settlement which had been conducted on a without prejudice basis. Held: The evidence was not admissible. There was no additional class of situation where without prejudice … Continue reading Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2010

Regina v Poulton; Regina v Celaire: CACD 24 Oct 2002

The applicants appealed sentences for possession of offensive weapons. Held: The court gave guidance on the issues of relevance in sentencing. The court should follow the Sentencing Advisory Panel in considering the intentions of the defendant. Particular aggravations might be the specific planned use, any racial aggravation, or being under the influence of drugs. As … Continue reading Regina v Poulton; Regina v Celaire: CACD 24 Oct 2002

In re Nortel Companies and Others: SC 24 Jul 2013

The court was asked as to the interrelationship of the statutory schemes relating to the protection of employees’ pensions and to corporate insolvency. Held: Liabilities which arose from financial support directions or contribution notices issued by the Pensions Regulator under the 2004 Act after the company had gone into administration, which required the company to … Continue reading In re Nortel Companies and Others: SC 24 Jul 2013

Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 25 Mar 2020

Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The issue in this case is the legality of the Government’s decision to provide mutual … Continue reading Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 25 Mar 2020

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005