Tag: Litigation Practice

Blue Tropic Ltd and Another v Chkhartishvili: CA 9 Dec 2016

The court was asked whether the trial judge (Peter Smith J) was wrong to grant permission for a late amendment to the claim, pursuant to an application made shortly before the start of the trial. Following the trial, the claim succeeded on the amended basis, but in the light of the judge’s findings of fact and of foreign law would have failed on the basis of the claim as it was pleaded before the amendment.

[2016] EWCA Civ 1259
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572410

RE The RBS Rights Issue Litigation: ChD 8 Dec 2016

The court considered three issues arising in the context of RBS’s claim for privilege in respect of two categories of document of which the Claimants now seek specific disclosure and inspection. There is no dispute as to the relevance of the documents in question. Only ‘legal advice privilege’ and ‘lawyers’ working papers privilege’ are claimed.

Hildyard J
[2016] EWHC 3161 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572395

Teva UK Ltd v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma Gmbh and Co Kg: CA 16 Dec 2016

The Court considered the rights or otherwise of appealing to the Court of Appeal in Patents cases.

Kitchin, Floyd LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1296
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 52.3(6)
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572422

Adepoju v Akinola: ChD 7 Dec 2016

The claimant disputed whether the defendant had been lawfully married to the claimat’s deceased mother, and possible marriage having been polygaous, and without the defendant having divorced his first wife.
Held: Master Matthews set out the approach of the courts to matters of evidence and the burden of proof. Pointing out that: ‘the decision of the court is not necessarily the objective truth of the matters in issue. Instead it is the most likely view of what happened, based on the material that the parties have chosen to put before the court, taking into account to some extent also what the court considers that they should have been able to put before the court but chose not to’

[2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Wills and Probate

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571991

Sands (As Trustee In Bankruptcy) v Layne and Another: CA 29 Nov 2016

The court was asked whether section 375 allowed a court to review, rescind or vary an order which was previously made by that court in exercise of its jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a lower court.

Arden, Lewison, McCombe LJJ
[2016] WLR(D) 632, [2016] EWCA Civ 1159
Bailii, WLRD
Insolvency Act 1986 375(1)
England and Wales

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571941

Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca Ab: ChD 8 Nov 2016

The parties had agreed to work tgether in the development of new drugs, but came to dispute whether certain projects were subject to the agreement. The claimant sought details of the defendant’s internal documents justifying that conclusion. The defendant then refused access to certain documents asserting legal professional privlege. The claimants now sought an order requiring the defendants to give further details to support the claimed assertion of privilege,
Held: Exceptionally this was a case when further evidence abiut the claim should be provided.

Marsh CM
[2016] EWHC 2759 (Ch)
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 31
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Three Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Co of the Bank of England (No 5) CA 3-Apr-2003
Documents had been prepared by the respondent to support a request for legal advice in anticipation of the Bingham enquiry into the collapse of BCCI.
Held: Legal advice privilege attached to the communications between a client and the . .
Cited – West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and Another v Total UK Ltd and others Comc 22-Jul-2008
The court was asked whether it could go behind an affidavit sworn by a person claiming litigation privilege, and, if so, in what circumstances and by what means.
Held: The burden of proof is on the party claiming privilege to establish it; An . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571444

Re W (A Child): CA 17 Nov 2016

The court was asked: ‘Can a witness in Family proceedings, who is the subject of adverse judicial findings and criticism, and who asserts that the process in the lower court was so unfair as to amount to a breach of his/her rights to a personal and private life under ECHR Art 8, challenge the judge’s findings on appeal?
If so, on what basis and, if a breach of Article 8 is found, what is the appropriate remedy?’

Munby P FD, McFarlane, Christopher Clarke LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1140, [2016] WLR(D) 628, [2017] 1 FCR 349, [2017] 1 WLR 2415, [2017] 1 FLR 1629
Bailii
Eurppean Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571425

Hussain, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: CA 15 Nov 2016

The claimant appealed against case management decision made in his claim relating to his treatment in prison. In pursuing his case for reclassification, he had requested his personal data from the prison but was dissatisfied with the responses.

Gross, Sales, Simon LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1111, [2016] WLR(D) 605,
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Prisons, Litigation Practice, Information

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571422

Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc and Others v Zhunus and Others: ComC 29 Sep 2016

Application by the claimants to re-amend the particulars of claim the focus of dispute lies, unusually, not in amendments which the claimants wish to make but in amendments which the claimants do not wish to make to their statement of case. The defendants contend that the claimants’ decision to leave certain claims in the particulars of claim and not to delete those claims comes too late, because the claims have already been discontinued. The claimants deny that they have discontinued the claims. If it is found that the claims have not been discontinued, the defendants renew an application issued much earlier in the proceedings, but which has never been decided, and seek a declaration that the court has no jurisdiction to determine the claims in question because those claims do not raise a serious issue to be tried.

Leggatt J
[2016] EWHC 2363 (Comm), [2016] WLR(D) 516, [2017] 1 WLR 467
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570152

Shalabayev v JSC BTA Bank: CA 7 Oct 2016

Appeal by Mr Shalabayev against an order by which the judge dismissed Mr Shalabayev’s application to intervene in an application by the respondent, JSC BTA Bank a Kazakhstan bank, for a final charging order over a property.

Jackson, Gloster, King LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 987
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569919

Allen Tod Architecture Ltd v Capita Property and Infrastructure Ltd: TCC 26 Aug 2016

The defendant had given notice requiring specific discosure of documents associated with the claimant’s expert report. They complained that only partial disclosure had been given, particularl as to a change of expert.

David Grant HHJ
[2016] EWHC 2171 (TCC)
Bailii

Litigation Practice

Updated: 22 January 2022; Ref: scu.568724

Barton v Fincham: CA 1921

Where the court lacks jurisdiction, jurisdiction cannot be conferred merely by the consent of the parties. Atkin LJ said: ‘but apart from such an admission the Court cannot give effect to an agreement, whether by way of compromise or otherwise, inconsistent with the provisions of the Act.’

Bankes LJ, Atkin LJ
[1921] 2 KB 291
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Broadway Investments Hackney Ltd v Grant CA 20-Dec-2006
The respondent had taken a tenancy of premises from the local authority. The ground floor was for use as a shop, and the first was residential. He had previously taken a licence and had refurbished the premises. The authority sold the freehold to . .
Cited – Guangzhou Dockyards Co Ltd v Ene Aegiali I ComC 5-Nov-2010
No appeal on facts from award
The defendant ship owners sought to strike out the claimant’s appeal against an arbitration award to the extent that that appeal consisted of an appeal against the factual findings. The claimant argued that the parties had agreed that such an appeal . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 22 January 2022; Ref: scu.247622

Attorney General v Chaudry: CA 1971

The court has jurisdiction to grant a civil law remedy by way of injunction in order to enforce the public law, except in cases where statute had expressly or by necessary implication removed the jurisdiction. Whenever Parliament has enacted a law and given a particular remedy for the breach of it, such remedy being in an inferior court, nevertheless the High Court always has reserve power to enforce the law so enacted by way of an injunction or declaration or other suitable remedy. The High Court has jurisdiction to ensure obedience to the law whenever it is just and convenient so to do.

Lord Denning MR
[1971] 1 WLR 1614
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Another CA 30-Oct-2008
The Council appealed a finding that the court did not have jurisdiction to obtain without notice injunctions to control the behaviour of youths said to be creating a disturbance, including restricting their rights to enter certain parts of the city . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Administrative

Updated: 22 January 2022; Ref: scu.182498

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 where fraud was alleged was to commence an action to set aside the judgment.
Held: Permission to appeal was granted, the new evidence admitted, the appeal allowed and the matter remitted for rehearing. Where new evidence, which might show that the judge at first instance had been deliberately misled, was admitted at appeal, a new trial should be ordered only if the fraud was admitted or if the evidence was incontrovertible. If neither applied, then the issue of the fraud should be settled before a decision was made on further progress.

Sedley, Smith, Elias LJJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 224, [2010] WLR (D) 73
Bailii, WLRD, Times
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ladd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Cited – Flower v Lloyd CA 11-Jun-1877
The plaintiffs tried to restrain the defendant from infringing their patent. They succeeded at first instance but the order was overturned on appeal. An expert went to inspect the process at the defendant’s works. Later, employees gave affidavits . .
Followed – Jonesco v Beard HL 1930
The plaintiff was a race horse trainer. He had made two claims against the defendant owner alleging first that the defendant had agreed to give him a share in some horses and second that the plaintiff had sold two horses to him but not been paid for . .
Cited – Hamilton v Al Fayed CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimant sought an order saying that his counsel had discarded confidential documents which were retrieved from his dustbin by a Mr Pell who then sold them to his opponent who had used them to obtain an unfair advantage.
Lord Phillips MR . .
Cited – De Beauville v Swycher and Co and Another 22-Nov-1999
. .
Cited – Mulholland v Mitchell HL 1971
The House was asked whether to re-open an assessment of damages where there had been a very marked change in the injured person’s situation shortly after the trial. There was no suggestion of fraud. The Court of Appeal had decided to admit the fresh . .
Cited – Skone v Skone and Another HL 1971
The husband appealed, seeking a new trial of a divorce petition following the discovery of fresh evidence consisting of a bundle of love letters from the co-respondent to the wife clearly showing that, contrary to his sworn evidence, he had . .
Cited – Roe and Another v Robert McGregor and Sons Ltd; Bills v Roe CA 1968
The plaintiff was driving a van at night. He didn’t see a ‘road closed’ sign erected by the defendant contractors, and proceede down a 30 ft bank injuring himself and his passenger. He said the contractors’ the sign was inadequate and that he had . .
Cited – Hip Foong Hong v H Neotia and Co PC 15-Jul-1918
An appellate Court has inherent power to set aside a judgment obtained through fraud. Lord Buckmaster described how an appellate court should deal with an allegation that an earlier judgment had been obtained by fraud: ‘Where a new trial is sought . .
Cited – Sir William Jaffray and others v The Society of Lloyds CA 20-Jun-2007
The appellant sought to re-open a decision of the Court of Appeal saying that fresh evidence had emerged which he said demonstrated that Lloyd’s had misled the court at first instance. . .
Instructive – Hamilton v Brodie Brittain Racing Ltd CA 13-Dec-1995
The defendant disputed at trial the authenticity of invoices, but provided no forensic evidence to support his challenge. The trial judge had accepted the invoices as authentic. The defendant subsequently adduced evidence which strongly suggested . .
Cited – Sohal v Sohal CA 30-Jul-2002
It was alleged that a verdict upholding a will had been obtained by fraud. Permission was sought to appeal.
Held: It is possible to seek to establish that a judgment was obtained by fraud by adducing fresh evidence on an appeal: ‘There is no . .
Cited – Taylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .

Cited by:
Main Judgment – Owens v Noble CA 18-Mar-2010
In its principal judgment the court referred the case back to the judge to assess whether one or more of the parties had committed a fraud on the court. The court now explained its answer to submissions made on the draft judgment.
Held: It was . .
Cited – 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. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 January 2022; Ref: scu.403316

Glenluce Fishing Company Ltd v Watermota Ltd: TCC 21 Jul 2016

Application by the Claimant to amend the Claim Form to reflect the sums now claimed in the Particulars of Claim. This application is resisted upon the basis that with due diligence the claim now put forward could and should have been recognised in the Claim Form. It is said that that not having happened, an inappropriate fee was paid when the proceedings were commenced, with the consequence that the amendment to introduce a new head of claim outside the limitation period should not be allowed.

Roger ter Haar QC DHCJ
[2016] EWHC 1807 (TCC)
Bailii

Litigation Practice, Limitation

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.567834

Merchant International Company Ltd v Natsionalna Aktsionerna Kompaniia Naftogaz Ukrainy: CA 7 Jul 2016

Application for condition to be attached to leave to appeal Naftogaz should provide security for (a) the full amount of the unpaid judgment debt plus interest down to the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal; (b) historic unpaid costs; and (c) estimated costs of the appeal, amounting in total to $28,500,000. Alternatively MIC seeks an order that Naftogaz provide security for MIC’s costs of the appeal estimated at andpound; 210,000. It is not in dispute that the conditions under which an order for security for costs may be made are met.

Christopher Clarke LJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 710
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.566841

Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd v Vgenopoulos and Others: QBD 22 Jun 2016

The court was asked: ‘first, whether, in the case of a worldwide freezing order obtained in a foreign jurisdiction, the effect of obtaining an order under Article 38 of the Judgments Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 of 22 December 2000) (the ‘Judgments Regulation’) permitting the registration of the worldwide freezing order as a judgment of the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales is that the worldwide freezing order becomes immediately effective and fully enforceable or whether it only becomes effective and fully enforceable if there is no appeal brought in respect of the registration order within two months of its being made or, if there is an appeal in that time period, on determination of that appeal; and secondly, whether ‘measures of enforcement’ (as referred to in Article 47.3 of the Judgments Regulation) includes service of the worldwide freezing order on, and/or notification of its terms to, third parties or whether ‘measures of enforcement’ are confined to processes in which the Court is involved in securing enforcement.’

Picken J
[2016] EWHC 1442 (QB)
Bailii

European, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.565983

Ghadami v Bloomfield and Others: ChD 17 Jun 2016

Proceedings against 19 defendants for damages of up to andpound;36,000,000 for conspiracy, interference with a contract or business, inducing or procuring a breach of contract and causing loss by unlawful means. The court now explained how the court had dealt with a letter received from one party, and replied to allegations of bias.

Norris J
[2016] EWHC 1448 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Ghadami v Bloomfield and Others CA 14-Jul-2015
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.565852

ADM Asia-Pacific Trading Pte Ltd v Toepfer International Asia Pte Ltd and Another: ComC 20 Jun 2016

ADM applied for a final anti-suit injunction to restrain the defendant from continuing proceedings against ADM in Indonesia on the grounds that those proceedings are in breach of a FOSFA arbitration agreement between the parties.

Phillips J
[2016] EWHC 1427 (Comm)
Bailii

Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 January 2022; Ref: scu.565734

Compagnie Noga D’Importation et d’Exportation SA v Abacha: ComC 5 Mar 2001

A party asked the court to reconsider its judgment after it had been handed down saying that the judge had acted in error. Rix LJ referred to the need to balance the concern for finality against the ‘proper concern that courts should not be held by their own decisions in a straitjacket pending the formality of drawing up the order’. He continued: ‘Provided that the formula of ‘exceptional circumstances’ is not turned into a straitjacket of its own, and the interests of justice and its constituents as laid down in the overriding principle are held closely to mind, I do not think that the proper balance will be lost. Clearly, it cannot be in every case that a litigant should be entitled to ask the judge to think again. Therefore, on one ground or another the case must raise considerations, in the interests of justice, which are out of the ordinary, extraordinary or exceptional. An exceptional case does not have to be uniquely special. ‘Strong reasons’ is perhaps an acceptable alternative to ‘exceptional circumstances’. It will necessarily be in an exceptional case that strong reasons are shown for reconsideration.’

Rix LJ
[2001] 3 All ER 513, [2001] CP Rep 93, [2001] EWHC QB B1
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – TZ v General Medical Council Admn 17-Apr-2015
Appeal against decision of a Fitness to Practise Panel holding that the Appellant’s fitness to practise as a medical practitioner was impaired by reason of his misconduct. It directed that his name be erased from the Medical Register under section . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 January 2022; Ref: scu.545670

Abacha and Another v Compagnie Noga D’Importantion Et D’Exportation Sa: QBD 3 May 2001

The court had handed to the parties a draft judgement, but one party then asked the judge to reconsider it.
Rix LJ referred to the need to balance the concern for finality against the ‘proper concern that courts should not be held by their own decisions in a straitjacket pending the formality of drawing up the order’. He continued: ‘Provided that the formula of ‘exceptional circumstances’ is not turned into a straitjacket of its own, and the interests of justice and its constituents as laid down in the overriding principle are held closely to mind, I do not think that the proper balance will be lost. Clearly, it cannot be in every case that a litigant should be entitled to ask the judge to think again. Therefore, on one ground or another the case must raise considerations, in the interests of justice, which are out of the ordinary, extraordinary or exceptional. An exceptional case does not have to be uniquely special. ‘Strong reasons’ is perhaps an acceptable alternative to ‘exceptional circumstances’. It will necessarily be in an exceptional case that strong reasons are shown for reconsideration.’

Rix LJ
[2001] 3 All ER 513, [2001] EWHC QB B1, [2001] CP Rep 93
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In re Barrell Enterprises CA 1972
A judge has power to reconsider a judgement which he has delivered before the order consequent upon it has been sealed, but the judge should only exercise this power if there are strong reasons for doing so. When oral judgments have been given the . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Compagnie Noga D’Importation Et D’Exportation Sa v Abacha and others CA 23-Jul-2003
. .
Cited – McKeown v British Horseracing Authority Admn 12-Mar-2010
The judge had been asked to revise his draft judgment. The court set out the circumstances under which a draft judgment might be amended and why in this case he had rejected the request save as to clerical errors. . .
Cited – Re L and B (Children) SC 20-Feb-2013
The court was asked as to the extent to which a court, having once declared its decision, could later change its mind. Though this case arose with in care proceedings, the court asked it as a general question. The judge in a fact finding hearing in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 January 2022; Ref: scu.241555

Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority and Others v Bestfort Development Llp and Others: CA 19 Jul 2017

The main question of law raised by this appeal is whether an applicant for a worldwide freezing order has to show that (1) it is likely that a defendant has assets that will be caught by the order or (2) a good arguable case that a defendant has such assets or (3) grounds for believing that a defendant has (or is likely to have) such assets or (4) merely that the defendant is wealthy and must therefore have assets somewhere.

Longmore, Henderson, LJJ, Sir Patrick Elias
[2017] EWCA Civ 1014, [2017] WLR(D) 489
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 January 2022; Ref: scu.591190

Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: CA 21 Mar 2017

Patten, King, Simon LJ j
[2017] EWCA Civ 147, [2017] WLR(D) 194
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others ChD 6-May-2015
The claimant alleged that the defendant had obtained its judgment in earlier proceedings by fraud. The defendant now applied for the claim to be dismissed as an abuse of process. . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others SC 20-Mar-2019
Whether to set aside judgment said to have been obtained fraudulently . .
See Also – Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others ChD 23-Oct-2020
The Claimant seeks to set aside a judgment obtained against her by the Defendants in 2010 in an earlier action – allegation that new evidence of forgery of signature. . .
See Also – Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others (Consequential Orders) ChD 11-Nov-2020
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 January 2022; Ref: scu.581079

C Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General: ChD 26 May 2006

The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful images of children were found. The searching officer asked the court for directions as to what to do.
Held: The privilege against self incrimination applied to statements and written material made or created by the defendant under compulsion. It did not apply to self-standing evidence such as the material in this case.

Evans-Lombe J
Times 08-Jun-2006, [2006] EWHC 1226 (Ch), [2007] 3 WLR 437
Bailii
Civil Procedure Act 1997 7, Civil Evidence Act 1968 14, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre HL 1-Mar-1981
The plaintiffs claimed large-scale copyright infringement, and obtained Anton Pillar orders. The House considered the existence of the privilege against self-incrimination where the Anton Piller type of order has been made. The Court of Appeal had . .
Cited – Regina v Hertfordshire County Council ex parte Green Environmental Industries Limited, Moynihan CA 9-Oct-1997
There was no protection against self-incrimination where information was properly required by the Waste Regulation Authority to carry out its duties. . .
Cited – O Ltd v Z ChD 23-Feb-2005
The court was asked whether a search under a court order of a former employee’s computer for materials alleged to have been taken, which discovered material possession of which itself was a crime, infringed the defendant’s rights against self . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
Cited – Rio Tinto Zinc Corporation v Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Re Westinghouse Electric Corpn Uranium Contract Litigation MDL Docket No 235 (No 2) HL 1977
The court considered a claim that a party was not compelled to give evidence where it might incriminate him: ‘No one is bound to furnish information against himself. It [the common law] says: ‘If a witness claims the protection of the court, on the . .
Cited – Warman International Ltd and Others v Envirotech Australia Pty Ltd and Others 1986
(Australia High Court) The court considered an application that the privilege against self incrimination be allowed to prevent a requirement to produce documents at court under a sub-poena: ‘Production is to the Court. Unless and until the contents . .
Cited – Downie and Others v Coe and Others (a Firm) CA 28-Nov-1997
A claim to a right of a witness against self incrimination must be made by that person in person on oath though substantiation elsewhere. . .
Cited – Triplex Safety Glass Co Ltd v Lancegaye Safety Glass (1934) Ltd 1939
A company is to have the benefit of protection against self incrimination just as much as an individual. A court is not bound without more, by a claim to the privilege by a party to litigation. . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 7 of 2000) CACD 29-Mar-2001
The defendant had been convicted of offences under the Insolvency Act. Evidence of his gambling was found in cheque stubs, bank statements, returned cheques and a betting file containing loose gambling statements by way of computer print outs . .
Cited – Regina v Kearns CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant had failed to account for the disappearance of a substantial part of his estate to the official receiver following his bankruptcy. He appealed his conviction for failing to provide an account, saying that the requirement to provide . .
Cited – Regina v Khan (Attorney-General’s Reference No 7 of 2000); Same v Saunders (AG Ref 10 of 2000); Same v Paul (AG Ref 9 of 2000); Same v Wakelin (AG Ref 8 of 2000) CACD 15-Jun-2000
Robbery committed on public transport, against young persons, will lead to a custodial sentence, save in wholly exceptional circumstances. There is a need to provide deterrence, for what has become a common crime. Sentences of between twelve and . .
Cited – Thompson Newspapers Ltd v Director of Investigation and Research 1990
(Supreme Court of Canada) The court considered a claim to exercise the privilege against self-incrimination.
Held: Whereas a compelled statement is evidence that would not have existed independently of the exercise of the powers of compulsion, . .
Cited – X and Y v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1985
A parent complained to the police about a sexual assault on his daughter a mentally defective girl of 16. The prosecutor’s office decided not to prosecute provided the accused did not repeat the offence. X appealed against the decision and requested . .
Cited – A T and T Istel Ltd v Tully HL 9-Sep-1992
The second plaintff had agreed to supply computer systems to a health authority. New owners of the company discovered allegations that the contract had been operated fraudulently. An order had been obtained for production of documents, but the order . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Regina v Boyes 27-May-1861
A defendant seeking to avoid answering questions so as not to incriminate himself is to be given some understanding and latitude in respecting his own interpretation. The beneficiary of a pardon could be called upon to incriminate himself because he . .
Cited – Re Arrows Ltd No 4 HL 1995
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – L v United Kingdom ECHR 2000
The court coinsidered a claim for the privilege against self-incrimination: ‘As held in Saunders v. United Kingdom . . the right not to incriminate oneself is primarily concerned with respecting the will of the accused person to remain silent and . .

Cited by:
Applied – Malik v Manchester Crown Court and others; Re A Admn 19-Jun-2008
The claimant was a journalist writing about terrorism. He had interviewed a man with past connections with Al-Qaeda, and he now objected to a production order for documents obtained by him in connecion with his writings. The court had acted on . .
Cited – Regina v S and A CACD 9-Oct-2008
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2000 Act for failing to disclose the key used to encrypt a computer file. He was subject to a control order as a suspected terrorist. As the police raided his house, they found the key had been . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 15 January 2022; Ref: scu.242224

Oak Cash and Carry Ltd v British Gas Trading Ltd: CA 15 Mar 2016

Appeal by a defendant, whose defence had been struck out for non-compliance with court orders, against the refusal of relief from that sanction pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 3.9. The principal issues in this appeal were:
i) whether, in assessing the seriousness of non-compliance with an ‘unless’ order, the court should have regard to the original breach which gave rise to the ‘unless’ order;
ii) the effect of delay in applying for relief.

Jackson, King, Lindblom LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 153
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 1998 3.9
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561126

Gentry v Miller and Another: CA 9 Mar 2016

This appeal raises the question of how the court should approach the grant of relief from sanctions in a case where the defaulting party has delayed in applying for relief but is able to point to evidence that enables it to allege that the claim is a fraudulent one.

Lewison, Beatson, Vos LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 141, [2016] WLR(D) 136
Bailii, WLRD
Civil Procedure Rules
England and Wales

Civil Procedure Rules, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561123

The National Crime Agency v Perry and Others: QBD 12 Nov 2014

The agency had taken proceedings against the defendant to reciver what it said were theproceeds of crime. That claim was dicontinued. The defendant sought to recover his costs on an indemnity basis, and relying upon a witness statement from an Agency lawyer said that since she had referred to legal advice from Israel, that should now be disclosed.
Held: The statement went no further than to say that adice had been sought. That was not enough to justify the setting aside of legal privilege. There had been no waiver.

Wilkie J
[2014] EWHC 3759 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Brennan and others v Sunderland City Council Unison GMB EAT 16-Dec-2008
No Waiver for disclosure of Advice
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Admissibility of evidence
The claimant sought disclosure of certain legal advice on the basis that its effect, and a summary of its contents, had been put before the court and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.538712

CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Thomas (2): QBD 23 May 2011

The claimant had obtained a privacy injunction, but the name of the claimant had nevertheless been widey distributed on the Internet. The defendant newspaper now sought to vary the terms. The second defendant did not oppose the injunction. Additionally the claimant said that given that the defendant claimed to have clean hands in the matter, it should provide disclosure of dicuments which might support or undermine that claim.
Held: The applications failed. That the defendant still wanted to pubish the story was itself evidence that there remained some privacy to protect, and: ‘the right question for me to ask . . is whether there is a solid reason why the Claimant’s identity should be generally revealed in the national media, such as to outweigh the legitimate interests of himself and his family in maintaining anonymity. The answer is as yet in the negative. They would be engulfed in a cruel and destructive media frenzy. Sadly, that may become unavoidable in the society in which we now live but, for the moment, in so far as I am being asked to sanction it, I decline to do so.’
The defendant having reduced its ‘clean hands’ claim to one of there being no evidence to contradict it, detailed disclosure remained unnecessary at this stage. The court also bore in mind that such a search might reveal criminal attempts to undermine the court order, and this would require consideration of the laws against requiring self-incrimination.
Eady considered the argument that the information was already in the public domain: ‘one reason why it can be important to distinguish between the was the law approaches public domain arguments in relation to commercial or state secrets, for example, and that which is appropriate to personal information. It also largely explains why it is the case that the truth of falsity of the allegations in question can often be irrelevant: see e.g. McKennitt v Ash [2008] QB 73 . . It is fairly obvious that wall-to-wall excoriation in national newspapers . . is likely to be significantly more intrusive and distressing for those concerned than the availability of information on the internet or in foreign journals to those, however many, who take the trouble to look it up. Moreover, with each exposure of personal information or allegations, whether by way of visual images or verbally, there is a new intrusion and occasion for distress or embarrassment . . For so long as the court is in a position to prevent some of that intrusion and distress, depending on individual circumstances, it may be appropriate to maintain that degree of protection. The analogy with King Canute to some extent, therefore, breaks down.’

Eady J
[2011] EWHC 1326 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Cobra Golf Inc and Another v Rata and Others ChD 11-Oct-1996
An Anton Piller order was wrongfully made where it was used in order to get information to found a later prosecution. The privilege against self incrimination is available under Section 14 of the 1968 Act in contempt proceedings despite the fact . .
Cited – Dendron Gmbh and others v Regents of University of California and Another PatC 23-Mar-2004
The claimants sought letters of request to obtain evidence to support applications they wished to make, including onme before the European Patents Office.
Held: The EPO when involved in opposition proceedings was not a domestic court, and . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
See Also – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (1) QBD 16-May-2011
A leading footballer had obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing his identity and allegations of sexual misconduct. The claimant said that she had demanded money not to go public.
Held: It had not been suggested that . .

Cited by:
Cited – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (3) QBD 23-May-2011
The defendant applied to be released from an injunction protecting the claimant’s privacy. It said that the claimant’s identity had been revealed on Twitter and now by a member of parliament in parliament.
Held: The application was refused. . .
Cited – Goodwin v NGN Ltd and VBN QBD 9-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction preventing publication of his name and that of his coworker with whom he had had an affair. After widespread publication of his name elsewhere, the defendant had secured the discharge of the order as regards . .
Cited – Hutcheson (Formerly Known As ‘KGM’) v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 19-Jul-2011
The claimant appealed against the refusal of a privacy order, protecting his identity in his claim.
Held: The appeal was refused. That Article 8 was ‘engaged’ was not conclusive of the question whether the claimant enjoyed a reasonable . .
Cited – In re A (A Minor) FD 8-Jul-2011
An application was made in care proceedings for an order restricting publication of information about the family after the deaths of two siblings of the child subject to the application. The Sun and a local newspaper had already published stories . .
Cited – PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd SC 19-May-2016
The appellants had applied for restrictions on the publication of stories about their extra marital affairs. The Court of Appeal had removed the restrictions on the basis that the story had been widely spread outside the jurisdiction both on the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.440085

CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (3): QBD 23 May 2011

The defendant applied to be released from an injunction protecting the claimant’s privacy. It said that the claimant’s identity had been revealed on Twitter and now by a member of parliament in parliament.
Held: The application was refused. The purposes of such a privacy order included also protecting the claimant and his family from harassment. Though some of the purpose of the order might have been lost, if ‘the purpose of this injunction were to preserve a secret, it would have failed in its purpose. But in so far as its purpose is to prevent intrusion or harassment, it has not failed. The fact that tens of thousands of people have named the claimant on the internet confirms that the claimant and his family need protection from intrusion into their private and family life. The fact that a question has been asked in Parliament seems to me to increase, and not to diminish the strength of his case that he and his family need that protection. The order has not protected the claimant and his family from taunting on the internet. It is still effective to protect them from taunting and other intrusion and harassment in the print media.’

Tugendhat J
[2011] EWHC 1334 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Thomas (2) QBD 23-May-2011
The claimant had obtained a privacy injunction, but the name of the claimant had nevertheless been widey distributed on the Internet. The defendant newspaper now sought to vary the terms. The second defendant did not oppose the injunction. . .
See Also – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (1) QBD 16-May-2011
A leading footballer had obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing his identity and allegations of sexual misconduct. The claimant said that she had demanded money not to go public.
Held: It had not been suggested that . .

Cited by:
Cited – PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd SC 19-May-2016
The appellants had applied for restrictions on the publication of stories about their extra marital affairs. The Court of Appeal had removed the restrictions on the basis that the story had been widely spread outside the jurisdiction both on the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.440195

Douglas, An Infant, and His Guardians, The Duchess Dowager of Douglas and Others v The Duke of Hamilton; Lord Douglas Hamilton, and Others: HL 13 Mar 1764

Title to Sue – Proof – Witness – Re-examination. – Held (1) that the respondents had sufficient title and interest to sue. (2) That it was competent to examine witnesses of new, who had been examined in Paris, in a process tournelle criminelle, in regard to the same matters. (3) That it was not necessary to make the cancellation of the witnesses’ previous testimony an absolute condition of their being examined of new; and, therefore, their evidence allowed to be taken, but to be sealed up, reserving all objections. (4) Copies or excerpts of documents, and proceedings had before a foreign court, were ordered to be produced in case the originals themselves could not be got, or delivered up.

[1764] UKHL 6 – Paton – 763, (1764) 6 Paton 763
Bailii
Scotland

Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560632

Anglia Research Services Ltd and Another v Finders Genealogists Ltd and Another: QBD 17 Feb 2016

The parties were competing companies. The claimant sought to usePre-action disclosure procedures after proceedings had already been issued.
Held: ‘the Claimants have made out a clear and strong case for the exercise of the Court’s discretion to order pre-action disclosure in their favour, and I so order.’

Moloney QC HHJ
[2016] EWHC 297 (QB)
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 31.16
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Defamation

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560329

Bilta (Uk) Ltd v Nazir and Others: ChD 24 Nov 2010

The company had been wound up by the Revenue on the basis that it had been used for a substantial VAT fraud. The liquidators now sued those said to have participated. A defendant denied the jurisdiction because of a disputed arbitration agreement. The claimant sought to have the defence struck out on the basis that documents had been destroyed by the defendant.
Held: The applications generally failed.

Lewison J
[2010] EWHC 3227 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Bilta (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Nazir and Others ChD 17-May-2010
The sixth defendant resisted a claim against it saying that matters between them were governed by a framework agreement which provided for matters to be resolved by arbitration. The claimant resisted, denying the arbitration agreement and saying . .
Cited – Logicrose Ltd v Southend United Football Club Ltd CA 5-Feb-1988
The agent required the contractual counterparty to pay a bribe of pounds 70,000 to an offshore account.
Held: The bribe was held to be recoverable by the principal whether the principal rescinded or affirmed the contract because it was a . .
Cited – Landaur Limited v Cummings and Co 4-May-1991
An inadvertent destruction of documents may have the same consequences visited on the party as a deliberate destruction. . .
Cited – Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others CA 22-Jun-2000
A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or . .
Cited – Woodhouse v Consignia Plc; Steliou v Compton CA 7-Mar-2002
The claimant continued an action brought in her late husband’s name. The action had begun under the former rules. After the new rules came into effect, the action was automatically stayed, since no progress had been made for over a year. Her . .
Cited – Douglas, Zeta-Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Ltd, Hola Sa, Junco, The Marquesa De Varela, Neneta Overseas Ltd, Ramey ChD 27-Jan-2003
The claimants sought an order striking out the defendants’ defence on the grounds that, by destroying documents, the possibility of a fair trial had been prejudiced.
Held: Refusing the order, save as to certain paragraphs of the defence, the . .

Cited by:
See Also – Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others ChD 30-Jul-2012
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates.
Held: The . .
At first instance (2) – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others CA 31-Jul-2013
Defendants appealed against refusal of their request for a summary striking out for lack of jurisdiction, of the claims against them arising from their management of the insolvency of the first defendant. . .
At first Instance (2) – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560327

Sheikh Abdulrahman Khalid Bin Mahfouz v Sheikh Sultan Bin Mahfouz and Another: ComC 25 May 2016

Where the defendant to a claim for money puts forward a defence which has a real prospect of success, he is entitled to have the merits of the claim and of that defence decided at a trial. Where, however, it is entirely plain on evidence before the court that the defence put forward is entirely without substance and is fanciful, it is unnecessary to have a trial of the proceedings and the claimant is entitled to summary judgment on his claim.

Leggatt J
[2016] EWHC 1380 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.565733

CMOC v Persons Unknown: ComC 23 Oct 2017

Application for worldwide freezing relief against persons unknown.

[2017] EWHC 3599 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – CMOC Sales and Marketing Ltd v Person(s) Unknown and Others ComC 17-Nov-2017
Continuation of existing injunctive relief . .
Cited – Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd SC 20-Feb-2019
The Court was asked in what circumstances is it permissible to sue an unnamed defendant? The respondent was injured when her car collided with another. The care was insured but by a driver giving a false name. The car owner refused to identify him. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.606386

Porter v Freudenberg: CA 1915

A British citizen or neutral who is voluntarily resident in the enemy country is to be treated as an alien enemy when the question is asked as to his entitlement to bring proceedings in England.
An order for substituted service, which is as effective to constitute the proceedings, though there has not been personal service, will, if properly effected according to the terms of the order for it, be deemed to be personal service if, when personal service is a ‘practical impossibility’, the method of service is ‘one which will in all reasonable probability, if not certainty, be effective to having knowledge of the writ . . to the defendant’

Lord Reading CJ
[1915] 1 KB 857, [1914-15] All ER 918
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Amin v Brown ChD 27-Jul-2005
The defendant raised as a preliminary point the question of whether the claimant, an Iraqi, was an enemy alien, and therefore debarred from bringing proceedings to recover.
Held: Under modern law it could not be a requirement that a state of . .
Cited – Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd SC 20-Feb-2019
The Court was asked in what circumstances is it permissible to sue an unnamed defendant? The respondent was injured when her car collided with another. The care was insured but by a driver giving a false name. The car owner refused to identify him. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.230002

Ewing v Crown Court Sitting at Cardiff and Newport and Others: Admn 8 Feb 2016

The court granted judicial review of a decision to prevent the applicant taking notes from the public gallery of the court. The general rule of openness must apply, and though particular exceptional circumstances might allow the making of such an order, no such circumstances applied in this case

Burnett LJ, Sweeney J
[2016] EWHC 183 (Admin), [2016] WLR(D) 62
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
Leave – Kirk, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff Crown Court and Others Admn 21-Jan-2015
Leave to bring judicial review was granted of a decision by a judge to ban a member of the public taking notes of open court proceedings in contravention of a direct order from the judge. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court, Administrative

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559673

Ogelegbanwei and 52 Others v President of The Federal Republic of Republic of Nigeria and Others: QBD 18 Jan 2016

Application by the claimants for registration of a judgment given in their favour on the 5th December 2013 by the Asaba Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria.

Holdroyde J
[2016] EWHC 8 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales

International, Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.558929

Various Claimants v Mcalpine and Others: QBD 15 Jan 2016

Reasons for rejection of application for reliance upon expert evidence.

Supperstone J, Lester M
[2016] EWHC 45 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Various Claimants v McAlpine and Others QBD 4-Dec-2015
Setting of costs budgets under a Group Litigation Order . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.558746

Behrens v Bartram Mill Circus: QBD 1957

Devlin J said that the ratio decidendi consists of the reason or reasons for a decision which the judge who gives it wishes to have the full authority of precedent.

Devlin J
1957] 2 QB 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Youngsam, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board Admn 7-Apr-2017
The claimant challenged being recalled to prison from licence after being found in an area from which he was excluded as a condition of his parole. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Constitutional

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.581638

Tecom Mican SL v Arias Doma-Nguez: ECJ 11 Nov 2015

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents – Concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ – Private documents – Cross-border implications – Functioning of the internal market

A Tizzano VP
C-223/14, [2015] EUECJ C-223/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:744
Bailii
European

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.554661

JSM Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Sep 2015

PROCEDURE – categorisation of appeals – application by Appellant for case to be re-allocated as a Complex case -rule 23(3) and (4) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 considered – application refused

[2015] UKFTT 474 (TC)
Bailii
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553147

AMEC Foster Wheeler Group Ltd v Morgan Sindall Professional Services Ltd and Others: TCC 29 Jun 2015

Part 8 proceedings, in which the claimant sought declarations against the defendants that they were bound to provide certain information and documentation arising out of two sets of arbitration proceedings in which the defendants were involved. AMEC also seek delivery up of the documents.

Coulson J
[2015] EWHC 2012 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550209

The London Taxi Corporation Ltd (T/A The London Taxi Company) v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd and Another: ChD 3 Jul 2015

Application by the Claimant for permission (a) to adduce in evidence the results of a pilot survey for the purposes of establishing its case on passing off, (b) to carry out a full survey in the form of that pilot survey and to adduce in evidence the results of that full survey for the same purposes, and (c) to rely upon evidence from respondents to both those surveys by adducing as their witness evidence the signed completed questionnaires of such respondents as the Claimant may identify to the Defendants suitably in advance of the trial.

Richard Spearman QC
[2015] EWHC 1840 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550040

Re X (Court of Protection Practice): CA 16 Jun 2015

This appeal concerns the practice and procedure to be adopted in applications to the Court of Protection in deprivation of liberty cases.

[2015] EWCA Civ 599, [2016] 1 FCR 65, [2015] COPLR 582, [2016] 1 WLR 227, [2015] WLR(D) 257, [2016] 1 All ER 533
Bailii
England and Wales

Health, Human Rights, Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.548999

Chodiev and Others v Stein: ComC 20 May 2015

A new action was brought to set aside an earlier judgment now said to have been brought about by fraud.
Held: The action could not proceed. The new evidence could have been available for the first action with appropriate diligence.

[2015] EWHC 1428 (Comm), [2015] WLR(D) 235
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546998

Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Su and Others: CA 14 May 2014

The claimant had obtained a freezing order in standard form against the defendant company. The Director of the company had similar sole positions in three other companies. The claimant obtained a similar order against the assets of the other companies, even though not directly parties to the action. The defendant appealed.
Held: The appeal failed. The assets of the company all of whose shares were owned by a defendant himself subject to a standard form freezing order might not be the assets of the defendant, for the purposes of the order, but the scope of such an order was to restrain him diminishing the value of any of his assets, which included his shareholding in such a company, and the order would therefore restrain him from procuring thosee companies making any disposition of assets likely to result in such a diminution.

Rimer, Tomlinson LJJ, Sir Bernard Rix
[2014] EWCA Civ 636, [2015] 1 WLR 291, [2014] WLR(D) 216, [2014] CP Rep 37, [2014] 1 CLC 688, [2014] 1 CLC 68
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su ComC 20-Mar-2014
. .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Nobu Su and Others ComC 13-Feb-2014
. .

Cited by:
Cited – JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov SC 21-Oct-2015
The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd and Others v Nobu Su/Hsin Chi Su (Aka Su Hsin Chi; Aka Nobu Morimoto) and Others ComC 5-Nov-2014
. .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Su CA 16-Sep-2019
Application for bail after committal for contempt on finding of guilt of numerous breaches of court orders relating to the case. . .
See Also – Lakatamia v Su CA 24-Sep-2019
Application for an extension of time for appeal against a committal order. The grounds for the committal were multiple breaches of freezing orders, orders requiring disclosure of assets and orders requiring the defendant not to leave the . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd and Others v Su and Others ComC 30-Jan-2020
Application for committal for contempt. . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su (Aka Su Hsin Chi; Aka Nobu Moritomo) and Others ComC 3-Apr-2020
. .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su and Others ComC 8-Apr-2020
. .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su and Others ComC 9-Nov-2020
Application by Lakatamia pursuant to CPR Part 31.22 to use documents obtained from the Respondent, Mr Su, in these proceedings pursuant to a search order made in related proceedings bearing the claim . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su and Others ComC 11-Dec-2020
Application by the claimant, Lakatamia, to re-amend its committal application notice to incorporate 11 additional alleged contempts on the part of the first defendant, . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Nobu Su and Others ComC 25-Jan-2021
Application to re-re-amend the Particulars of Claim and the second is an application for specific disclosure also made by the claimant, Lakatamia. . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su and Others ComC 15-Apr-2021
. .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Su and Others ChD 1-Jul-2021
Interpretation of the phrase ‘has had a place of residence’ in section 263I(2)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986. . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su and Others ComC 8-Jul-2021
Alleged cause of action in unlawful means conspiracy as to whether the Defendants including the Second Defendant Toshiko Morimoto (‘Madam Su’) conspired together to injure Lakatamia by unlawful means, namely by the dissipation of two assets of Madam . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd and Others v Su and Others CA 30-Jul-2021
Use of passport orders in enforcement of collection of judgment debt. . .
See Also – Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Su ComC 15-Sep-2021
Reasons for dismissal of appeal from maximum sentence of two years imprisonment for contempt. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.525631

Secretary of State for Health and Others v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others: ChD 12 Mar 2015

This judgment concerns the terms of the confidentiality order which the court should make when directing the defendants to give disclosure in the present proceedings of the decision adopted by the European Commission

Henderson J
[2015] EWHC 647 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, European

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.544267

JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank and Another v Pugachev: CA 27 Feb 2015

The defendant appealed form an order requiring disclosure of the assets of a discretionary trust. He was subject to an asset freezing order and a beneficiary of the trust.

Arden, Lewison, Christopher Clarke LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 139, [2015] 1 CLC 238, [2016] 1 WLR 160, [2015] WLR(D) 94, [2015] 2 P and CR DG4, [2015] WTLR 991, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 816
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank and Another v Pugachev ChD 19-Dec-2014
Application by the defendant, Mr Pugachev, to discharge a world-wide freezing order . .

Cited by:
Cited – JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov SC 21-Oct-2015
The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543877

JSC BTA Bank v Mukhtar Ablyazov and Others: QBD 16 Oct 2009

Application by the claimants for an order that the first defendant attend for cross-examination upon his affidavits as to assets and as to his answers to questions posed.

Teare J
[2009] EWHC 2833 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – House of Spring Gardens v Waite CA 1991
The principle of abuse of process is capable of applying where the relevant earlier proceedings have taken place before a foreign court (Ireland). In this case the defendants argued that the judgment obtained in Ireland had been obtained . .
Cited – Yukong Lines v Rendsburg Investment Corporation CA 17-Oct-1996
An order for cross examination in an application for a Mareva order is exceptional, but permissible if it is just and convenient that such an order should be made. In applying the test of whether it would be ‘just and convenient’ to make the order, . .
Cited – Den Norske Bank ASA v Antonatos and Another CA 7-Apr-1998
The defendants appealed orders requiring them to attend court and provide evidence under cross-examination. They claimed a prvilege against self-incrimination.
Waller LJ said: ‘A witness is entitled to claim the privilege in relation to any . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.541927

Club Hotel Loutraki Ae and Othrs v Commission: ECFI 8 Jan 2015

ECJ State aid – Operation of Video Lottery Terminals – Grant by the Hellenic Republic of an exclusive licence – Decision finding no State aid – Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure – Serious difficulties – Procedural rights of the interested parties – Obligation to state reasons – Right to effective judicial protection – Advantage – Joint assessment of the notified measures

T-58/13, [2015] EUECJ T-58/13
Bailii
European

Litigation Practice, Administrative

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.540503

Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Limited: QBD 27 Nov 2014

[2014] EWHC 4014 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 1-Aug-2013
The defamation claimant sought relief from sanctions imposed after a failure to comply with orders requiring him to discuss budgets and budgetary assumptions.
Held: The claimant had failed to deliver the required costs budget in time, and any . .
See Also – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very . .
See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 27-Mar-2014
Application for discovery of documents held by a third party, the Police Complaints Commission) in a defamation action. . .
See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 11-Jun-2014
. .
See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 28-Jul-2014
The claimant MP had a bad tempered altercation with police officers outside Downing Street. He sued the defendant newspaper in defamation saying that they had falsely accused him of calling te officers ‘plebs’. One officer now sued the MP saying . .
See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 31-Oct-2014
The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant. In the second action, the policeman claimant alleged defamation by the first claimant. The court heard applications as to the admission of expert evidence, and as to the inclusion or otherwise of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539374

Wearn (T/A Jonathan Wearn Productions) v HNH International Holdings Ltd: ChD 29 Oct 2014

An application was made to strike out the claim when the action had begun nearly 14 years before, but had not yet concluded. The defendant argued that the delay amouned to an abuse of process. Additionally the parties disputed the admission of expert evidence. The defendant argued that the claimant’s expert had gone beyond his proper role.

Barling J
[2014] EWHC 3542 (Ch)
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 3.4
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.538680

Teekay Tankers Ltd v STX Offshore and Shipping Co: ComC 6 Nov 2014

Proceedings could be served on a company at a registered office in the UK even though the matter arose elsewhere.

Hamblen J
[2014] EWHC 3612 (Comm), [2015] Bus LR 731, [2014] WLR(D) 492, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 263, [2015] 2 BCLC 210
Bailii, WLRD
Overseas Companies Regulations 2009
England and Wales

Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.538339

Foakes v Beer: HL 16 May 1884

Mrs Beer had obtained judgment against Dr Foakes for pounds 2,090 19s. He asked for time to pay and they agreed with him, acknowledging the debt, and paying part immediately and undertaking to pay the balance over a period of time. In consideration of the part payment and Dr Foakes’s undertaking to pay the balance in instalments Mrs Beer agreed not to take any proceedings on the judgment. After the whole sum had been paid, however, she sought to take proceedings on the judgment to recover interest.
Held: A promise to pay part of a debt is not good consideration in law. The House applied the rule in Pinnel’s Case that since the obligations undertaken by Dr Foakes under the agreement added nothing to his existing obligation under the judgment, he had provided no consideration for Mrs Beer’s promise not to take action on the judgment which was therefore unenforceable.
Lord Blackburn argued for the abolition of the rule in Pinnel’s case: ‘What principally weighs with me in thinking that Lord Coke made a mistake of fact is my conviction that all men of business, whether merchants or tradesmen, do every day recognize and act on the ground that prompt payment of a part of their demand may be more beneficial to them than it would be to insist on their rights and enforce payment of the whole. Even where the debtor is perfectly solvent, and sure to pay at last, this often is so. Where the credit of the debtor is doubtful it must be more so.’

Lord Blackburn
(1884) 9 App Cas 605, [1884] UKHL 1
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Pinnel’s Case, Penny v Core CCP 1602
Payment of Lesser Sum Not Satisfaction
(Court of Common Pleas) The payment of a lesser sum on the day in satisfaction of a greater, cannot be any satisfaction for the whole. The gift of a horse, hawk, robe, etc., in satisfaction, is good. Payment of part before the day and acceptance may . .

Cited by:
Cited – Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid HL 12-Jul-2006
Disapplication of Without Prejudice Rules
The House was asked whether a letter sent during without prejudice negotiations which acknowledged a debt was admissible to restart the limitation period. An advice centre, acting for the borrower had written, in answer to a claim by the lender for . .
Cited – Collier v P and M J Wright (Holdings) Ltd CA 14-Dec-2007
Agreement for payment by joint debtor not contract
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order to set aside a statutory demand. He said that he had compromised a claim by the creditors. He argued for an extension to the Rule in Pinnel’s case, so that where a debtor agrees to pay part of a . .
Applied – In Re Selectmove Ltd CA 21-Dec-1993
Promisse to Pay Tax due is not Consideration
The company appealed against an order for its winding up, saying that the debt was disputed, an accomodation having been reached with the Revenue.
Held: The court declined to regard a promise to the Revenue by a company to pay its existing . .
Cited – Hirachand Punamchand v Temple CA 1911
The defendant, a British army officer in India, had given a promissory note to the plaintiff moneylenders. Unable to pay, he suggested they apply to his father, Sir Richard Temple. In reply, Sir Richard Temple’s solicitors wrote saying they were . .
For Examination later – Rock Advertising Ltd v MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd SC 16-May-2018
The parties disputed whether a contract (licence to occupy an office) had been varied by an oral agreement, where the terms prohibited such.
Held: The ‘no oral variation’ clause applied. Such clauses were in common commercial use and served a . .
Cited – Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd CA 23-Nov-1989
The defendant subcontracted some of its work under a building contract to the plaintiff at a price which left him in financial difficulty and there was a risk that the work would not be completed by the plaintiff. The defendant agreed to make . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contract

Leading Case

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.243134