CS v ACS and another – WLR Daily

CS v ACS and another [2015] EWHC 1005 (Fam); [2015] WLR (D) 171

‘The final sentence in paragraph 14.1 of Practice Direction 30A supplementing FPR Pt 30, stating that a consent order made by a district judge could be challenged only by way of an appeal, encroached on the right of a litigant in certain circumstances to apply to the court without first obtaining permission and was therefore ultra vires and should be treated as a nullity.’

WLR Daily, 16th April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on CS v ACS and another – WLR Daily

Al-Saadoon and others v Secretary of State for Defence – WLR Daily

Al-Saadoon and others v Secretary of State for Defence [2015] EWHC 715 (Admin); [2015] WLR (D) 168

‘Individuals in certain test cases who had been shot by British forces in Iraq were within the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction, for the purposes of article 1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, because they had been shot in the course of security operations in which British forces were exercising public powers normally exercised by the Iraqi government and because shooting someone involved the exercise of physical power over that person.

WLR Daily, 17th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Al-Saadoon and others v Secretary of State for Defence – WLR Daily

Christofi v National Bank of Greece (Cyprus) Ltd – WLR Daily

Christofi v National Bank of Greece (Cyprus) Ltd [2015] EWHC 986 (QB); [2015] WLR (D) 170

‘There was no general power to extend the mandatory two-month time limit for an appeal against the registration of a settlement order by a party not domiciled within the jurisdiction under article 43(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.’

WLR Daily, 14th April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Christofi v National Bank of Greece (Cyprus) Ltd – WLR Daily

Birdseye and another v Roythorne & Co and others – WLR Daily

Birdseye and another v Roythorne & Co and others [2015] EWHC 1003 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 169

‘It remained the case that a person had to establish as a prima facie case that he was a beneficiary before there could be any question of the court requiring a trustee or executor to disclose documents which would be protected by privilege if the applicant were not a beneficiary.’

WLR Daily, 15th April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Birdseye and another v Roythorne & Co and others – WLR Daily

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted April 17th, 2015 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Continue Reading »

Comments Off on BAILII: Recent Decisions

R (on the application of Evans) and another (Respondents) v Attorney General (Appellant) – Supreme Court

R (on the application of Evans) and another (Respondents) v Attorney General (Appellant) [2015] UKSC 21 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 26th March 2015

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off on R (on the application of Evans) and another (Respondents) v Attorney General (Appellant) – Supreme Court

In the matter of S (A Child) – Supreme Court

Posted April 14th, 2015 in appeals, care orders, costs, law reports, local government, Supreme Court by sally

In the matter of S (A Child) [2015] UKSC 20 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 25th April 2015

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off on In the matter of S (A Child) – Supreme Court

Pham (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) – Supreme Court

Pham (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2015] UKSC 19 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 25th March 2015

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off on Pham (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) – Supreme Court

R (on the application of SG and others ) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions – Supreme Court

R (on the application of SG and others ) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKSC 16 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 18th March 2015

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off on R (on the application of SG and others ) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions – Supreme Court

Vidal-Hall v Google Inc (Information Commissioner intervening) – WLR Daily

Vidal-Hall v Google Inc (Information Commissioner intervening) [2015] EWCA Civ 311; [2015] WLR (D) 156

‘A claim for misuse of private information should be categorised as a tort for the purposes of service of proceedings out of the jurisdiction.’

WLR Daily, 18th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Vidal-Hall v Google Inc (Information Commissioner intervening) – WLR Daily

Tower Hamlets London Borough Council v M and others – WLR Daily

Tower Hamlets London Borough Council v M and others [2015] EWHC 869 (Fam); [2015] WLR (D) 155

‘Since the removal of a passport, even on a temporary basis, was a very significant incursion into an individual’s freedom and personal autonomy such an order should not be made lightly and required the fullest unpartisan information to be put before the court. It had never to be forgotten that the court required a very high degree of candour on the part of all of those involved.’

WLR Daily, 27th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Tower Hamlets London Borough Council v M and others – WLR Daily

Regina (Coll) v Secretary of State for Justice – WLR Daily

Regina (Coll) v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWCA Civ 328; [2015] WLR (D) 157

‘In providing approved premises for women released from prison on licence, the Secretary of State for Justice had not discriminated directly under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 or indirectly under section 19.’

WLR Daily, 31st March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Regina (Coll) v Secretary of State for Justice – WLR Daily

Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Society Justice Initiative intervening) – WLR Daily

Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Society Justice Initiative intervening) [2015] UKSC 19; [2015] WLR (D) 166

‘The question whether a person was not considered as a national by a state under the operation of its law, with the effect that he would be stateless if deprived of British citizenship, was not necessarily to be decided solely by reference to the text of the nationality legislation of the state in question, and reference might also be made to the practice of the government, even if not subject to effective challenge in the courts.’

WLR Daily, 25th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Society Justice Initiative intervening) – WLR Daily

In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others – WLR Daily

Posted April 8th, 2015 in administrators, company directors, insolvency, law reports by sally

In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others [2015] EWHC 621 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 162

‘Rule 7.55 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 had no application in circumstances where a meeting of the board of directors of the company purporting to place the company into administration out of court pursuant to paragraph 22(2) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 was inquorate and accordingly the resolution to appoint an administrator was invalid.’

WLR Daily, 10th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others – WLR Daily

Clarke and another v Cognita Schools Ltd (trading as Hydesville Tower School) – WLR Daily

Clarke and another v Cognita Schools Ltd (trading as Hydesville Tower School) [2015] EWHC 932 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 164

‘CPR r 3.3(5) did not apply to orders made under rule 6.5(1) of the Insolvency Rules 1986. Therefore an order under rule 6.5(1) did not have to state that the debtor could apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed.’

WLR Daily, 1st April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Clarke and another v Cognita Schools Ltd (trading as Hydesville Tower School) – WLR Daily

Nzolameso v Westminster City Council (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another intervening) – WLR Daily

Nzolameso v Westminster City Council (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another intervening) [2015] UKSC 22; [2015] WLR (D) 165

‘A local housing authority, in carrying out its duties under the Housing Act 1996, was obliged to accommodate a homeless person in suitable accommodation within its district if it was reasonably practicable to do so. The authority was to determine the suitability of the proposed accommodation by reference to the needs of the individual homeless person and each member of her household and to its location. Where accommodation was offered outside the authority’s district, the placement was to be as close as possible to where the members of the household had previously lived. In reaching its decision, the authority was required to take account of the Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2012 (SI 2012/2601) and the guidance issued by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. It was also required, by section 11(2) of the Children Act 2004, to have regard to the need to safeguard and to promote the welfare of the children concerned.’

WLR Daily, 2nd April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Nzolameso v Westminster City Council (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another intervening) – WLR Daily

In re S (A Child) (Access to Justice Foundation intervening) – WLR Daily

In re S (A Child) (Access to Justice Foundation intervening) [2015] UKSC 20; [2015] WLR (D) 163

‘The principle that orders for costs were not normally made in cases about children applied in cases involving local authorities, whether in relation to first instance proceedings or on appeal. A costs order would only be made where a party had acted reprehensibly in relation to the child or had taken an unreasonable stance in the proceedings, or if it were otherwise appropriate and just, as where the child’s welfare might be put at risk if a costs order were not made.’

WLR Daily, 25th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re S (A Child) (Access to Justice Foundation intervening) – WLR Daily

Regina v ABC and others; Regina v Sabey – WLR Daily

Regina v ABC and others; Regina v Sabey [2015] EWCA Crim 539; [2015] WLR (D) 146

‘In a prosecution for misconduct in public office it was necessary for the judge to make clear that the necessary conduct was not simply a breach of duty or a breach of trust and that the level was one where the conduct was calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment, the threshold of conduct being so serious that it amounted to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder, and being a high threshold. In relation to aiding and abetting the offence it was not necessary to establish that the office holder intended to cross the threshold: means of knowledge available to the defendant to make the necessary assessment of the seriousness of the principal’s conduct was sufficient. In relation to conspiracy to commit the offence it was not necessary that a defendant knew or intended that the misconduct concerned would meet the requisite threshold of seriousness.’

WLR Daily, 26th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Regina v ABC and others; Regina v Sabey – WLR Daily

In re International Game Technology plc and another – WLR Daily

Posted March 31st, 2015 in company law, law reports, mergers, regulations by sally

In re International Game Technology plc and another [2015] EWHC 717 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 148

‘The court had jurisdiction under regulation 16 of the Companies (Cross-Border Mergers) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/2974) to make an order approving a cross-border merger subject to conditions and that conditionality was merely a factor for the court to take into account in exercising its discretion unless the court was satisfied that a conditional order would be futile.’

WLR Daily, 19th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re International Game Technology plc and another – WLR Daily

PF (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

PF (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 251; [2015] WLR (D) 149

‘Where a decision of the First-tier or Upper Tribunal was not unanimous and the votes of the tribunal members were equally divided, the power conferred on the presiding member of the tribunal to provide the casting vote was not to be exercised irrespective of the nature and extent of the disagreement between the tribunal members. Disagreement as to the applicable law might in general justify the exercise of the casting vote, but not disagreement on fundamental primary factual issues.’

WLR Daily, 25th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on PF (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily