Credit Hire – Defendant Entitled To Summary Judgment When Claimant Could Not Establish Need – Zenith PI Blog

‘HHJ Armstrong refused the Claimant’s application for permission to appeal the decision of District Judge Read that the Defendant was entitled to summary judgment when the Claimant could not establish need in relation to a vehicle he had hired.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 27th April 2016

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Credit Hire – Defendant Entitled To Summary Judgment When Claimant Could Not Establish Need – Zenith PI Blog

Claim against MIB does not have protection of QOCS, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

‘A claim against the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) by the victim of an accident in France does not have the protection of qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS), the High Court has ruled.

Full story

Litigation Futures, 26th April 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Claim against MIB does not have protection of QOCS, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Replacing carpets owned by landlord was not breach of repair clause, says Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

Posted April 25th, 2016 in appeals, damages, interpretation, landlord & tenant, leases, news, repairs by sally

‘A commercial property tenant did not breach repair covenants set out in the lease when it replaced carpet tiles in the property with strip carpeting, the Court of Appeal has ruled, overturning the High Court’s decision.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st April 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Replacing carpets owned by landlord was not breach of repair clause, says Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

Councils to take battle over planning policies and housing to Supreme Court – Local Government Lawyer

‘Cheshire East and Suffolk Coastal Councils are looking to take a key case over what are ‘relevant policies for the supply of housing’ to the Supreme Court.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 18th April 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Councils to take battle over planning policies and housing to Supreme Court – Local Government Lawyer

Appeal court: judge wrong to interfere with exclusion clause when wording sufficiently clear – OUT-LAW.com

‘A High Court judge was wrong to override an exclusion clause in a complex contract for the hire of an offshore drilling rig, as the parties were commercial equals and the wording of the clause was sufficiently clear, the appeal court has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 15th April 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Appeal court: judge wrong to interfere with exclusion clause when wording sufficiently clear – OUT-LAW.com

Commercial Landlord & Tenant Law – New Square Chambers

‘In 2011, Marks and Spencer plc (“M&S”) operated a “break clause” in commercial leases of office premises. Following determination, M&S sought to recover from the landlord advance quarterly rent that it had paid for the period after the successful break. M&S relied, in part, on an implied term claim that post-break rent should be returned to it. The landlord denied the claim and litigation ensued. Morgan J in the High Court gave judgment for M&S on the claim. The Court of Appeal unanimously reversed the judgment. The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed M&S’ appeal and re-stated the principles for the implication of contract terms: Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd[2015] UKSC 72, [2015] 3 WLR 1843.’

Full story

New Square Chambers, 11th April 2016

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Commercial Landlord & Tenant Law – New Square Chambers

Council wins judicial review over advice given to Greggs under Primary Authority – Local Government Lawyer

Posted April 13th, 2016 in interpretation, judicial review, news by sally

‘A High Court judge has upheld Hull City Council’s judicial review claim over advice given by Newcastle City Council to Greggs under the ‘Primary Authority’ scheme.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 12th April 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Council wins judicial review over advice given to Greggs under Primary Authority – Local Government Lawyer

Finance & Divorce Update, April 2016 – Family Law Week

‘Edward Heaton, Principal Associate and Jane Booth, Associate, both of Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the news and case law relating to financial remedies and divorce during March 2016.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 8th April 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Finance & Divorce Update, April 2016 – Family Law Week

Bromley London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another – WLR Daily

Bromley London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another [2016] EWHC 595 (Admin)

‘A developer sought planning permission for a development on Green Belt land comprising nine residential houses and a barn and associated dwellings for a livery business. The proposal involved redevelopment of previously developed land at a livery, the business of which was partly retained. The local planning authority refused planning permission. On the developer’s appeal, an inspector appointed by the Secretary of State considered that the proposal comprising new buildings was appropriate development and concluded that, applying the requirements of the sixth exception in para 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework (“NPPF”), the new buildings would not impact adversely either on the openness of the Green Belt or the purposes for designation of the Green Belt. He accordingly allowed the developer’s appeal. The local planning authority applied under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to quash the inspector’s decision, contending, inter alia, that para 89, which listed six exceptions to the general policy that new buildings were inappropriate development in the Green Belt, should be interpreted to mean that development which was not only operational development for new buildings but also involved a material change in use for those buildings did not fall within the categories of appropriate development, and that therefore the inspector had erred in law in treating the proposal as appropriate development, since the construction of the new houses also involved a material change of use to residential or mixed residential and equestrian use.’

WLR Daily, 15th February 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Bromley London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another – WLR Daily

Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others- WLR Daily

Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others [2016] EWCA Crim 71

‘In each of the 13 applications before the court, the applicants applied for an extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against sentences of imprisonment or detention for public protection (“IPP”)), imposed between 2005 and 2008 under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Before the sentence of IPP was amended by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, the court was required to make the assumption that an offender was dangerous if he had been convicted on an earlier occasion of a specified offence, unless it was unreasonable to do so. Where he was found to be dangerous, and over 18, the court was required to pass a sentence of IPP or life imprisonment; the 2003 Act removed all discretion from the court once it was found that the offender was dangerous. All the applicants had either been detained in custody long after the expiry of the minimum term or had been recalled for breach of licence. The applicants submitted (1) that whatever might have been the position at the time the sentences of IPP were passed, the Court of Appeal had power under section 11 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 to pass sentences that, in the light of what had happened over the intervening years, now would be the proper sentence; (2) the Court of Appeal should reconsider the assessments made by sentencing judges in the light of R v Lang [2005] EWCA Crim 2864; [2006] 1 WLR 2509, and (3) a time could and had been reached when the length of the imprisonment was so excessive and disproportionate compared to the index criminal offence that it could amount to inhuman treatment under article 3 or arbitrary detention under article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. That was because the detention no longer had any meaningful link to the index offence. A much delayed review of a sentencing decision could therefore be a mechanism the court could employ to avoid a breach of those Convention Rights. As the period now served by each of the applicants was so much longer than any conceivable determinate sentence would have required, the continued detention amounted to preventative detention and was therefore arbitrary. ‘

WLR Daily, 18th March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others- WLR Daily

Defendants lose out as judges insist on strict interpretation of part 36 – Litigation Futures

Posted March 17th, 2016 in civil procedure rules, costs, interpretation, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘Defendants have failed in two separate recent attempts to persuade courts to interpret the part 36 costs rules in a way that suited them.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 16th March 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Defendants lose out as judges insist on strict interpretation of part 36 – Litigation Futures

Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted March 7th, 2016 in interpretation, judicial review, law reports, local government, planning by tracey

Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council: [2016] EWHC 448 (Admin)

‘The claimant submitted two separate planning applications to the defendant: one for the installation of a mezzanine floor at its property; and the other for external works to the property, which created no additional floor space. The defendant granted planning permission for both applications, informing the claimant that the mezzanine installation was development liable to a community infrastructure levy (“CIL”). The defendant’s view was that the development proposals fell within the scope of the meaning of development for CIL purposes due to the direct link between the two applications for the mezzanine and external alterations. The defendant, as the relevant CIL collecting authority, subsequently issued a CIL liability notice under regulation 65 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 in relation to the installation of a mezzanine floor and external alterations at the claimant’s property, and a demand notice under regulation 69 of the 2010 Regulations in respect of the same development. By a judicial review claim the claimant challenged the lawfulness of the defendant’s act in issuing the two notices on the grounds that the mezzanine planning permission fell within the exemption created by regulation 6(1)(c) and that the external planning permission created no floor space and so was not liable to a CIL.’

WLR daily, 3rd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council – WLR Daily

Part 36 Trumps Fixed Costs (and no Donald in Sight): Broadhurst and Taylor v Tan and Smith [2016] EWCA Civ 94 – Zenith PI Blog

‘In a claim which starts under the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims (in this case the RTA Protocol), what happens when a Claimant obtains a judgment against a defendant which is at least as advantageous to them as the proposals contained in a Part 36 offer – does the Claimant recover fixed costs only, as per the regime, or does the Claimant recover costs on an indemnity basis?’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 1st March 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Part 36 Trumps Fixed Costs (and no Donald in Sight): Broadhurst and Taylor v Tan and Smith [2016] EWCA Civ 94 – Zenith PI Blog

Sharing the Spoils – Tanfield Chambers

Posted February 24th, 2016 in covenants, insurance, interpretation, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘It is not uncommon for a lease to impose an obligation on one party or another to insure the subject property against the usual insured risks. But difficult questions can arise when the party placing the insurance is not the party in occupation. When and to what extent can the proceeds be shared? And what impact does such an arrangement have on damage caused by the occupier’s negligence?’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 9th February 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Sharing the Spoils – Tanfield Chambers

On Flooding and Abstraction – Falcon Chambers

Posted February 23rd, 2016 in drafting, interpretation, news, water by sally

‘It is reassuring to know that someone, somewhere, has taken the time and effort to apply precision and ingenuity of parliamentary draftsmanship in order to define, at least for the purposes of the FWMA 2010 if no other, what is meant by a flood (and what is not).’

Full story

Falcon Chambers, 26th January 2016

Source: www.falcon-chambers.com

Comments Off on On Flooding and Abstraction – Falcon Chambers

Mother hopes joint enterprise verdict will overturn son’s murder conviction – The Guardian

Posted February 22nd, 2016 in appeals, interpretation, joint enterprise, murder, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The mother of one of the teenage boys convicted of murdering Garry Newlove has said she hopes a supreme court ruling against the so-called joint enterprise law will bolster the case for her son’s conviction to be thrown out.’

Full story

The Guardian, 20th February 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Mother hopes joint enterprise verdict will overturn son’s murder conviction – The Guardian

Dolton Powell murder: Joint enterprise ruling causes charge rethink – BBC News

Posted February 22nd, 2016 in appeals, gangs, homicide, interpretation, joint enterprise, murder, news, racism, Supreme Court by sally

‘Prosecutors are reconsidering murder charges in the trial of eight people following a Supreme Court ruling on the joint enterprise law.’

Full story

BBC News, 19th February 2016

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off on Dolton Powell murder: Joint enterprise ruling causes charge rethink – BBC News

Publications must be taken as a whole when determining meaning, rules High Court – OUT-LAW.com

Posted February 19th, 2016 in defamation, interpretation, media, news by sally

‘In order to determine the meaning of a publication in defamation, what matters is the publication taken as a whole, a High Court judge has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 19th February 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Publications must be taken as a whole when determining meaning, rules High Court – OUT-LAW.com

Joint enterprise law wrongly interpreted for 30 years, court rules – The Guardian

Posted February 18th, 2016 in appeals, evidence, interpretation, joint enterprise, judgments, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘A key test imposed by judges in assessing guilt in so-called joint enterprise killings has been wrongly interpreted for the past 30 years, the supreme court has ruled.’

Full story

The Guardian, 18th February 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Joint enterprise law wrongly interpreted for 30 years, court rules – The Guardian

Who Guards the Guardians? – Family Law Week

‘The Association of Lawyers for Children and the National Association of Guardians ad Litem and Reporting Officers respond to recent guidance given in the Central Family Court on the need for guardians to justify their attendance at care hearings save in specified circumstances.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 31st January 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Who Guards the Guardians? – Family Law Week