Lodge, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 987 (18 June 2013)

ZN, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 989 (18 June 2013)

Hussain, R. v (unauthorised disclosure of a draft judgment) (Rev 1) [2013] EWCA Crim 990 (10 May 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Cronin v The Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 668 (18 June 2013)

Emptage v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 729 (18 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

B v B [2013] EWHC 1232 (Fam) (21 May 2013)

A (A Child) (Vulnerable Witness), Re [2013] EWHC 1694 (Fam) (17 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

White Digital Media Ltd v Weaver & Anor [2013] EWHC 1681 (QB) (18 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Barden v Commodities Research Unit & Ors [2013] EWHC 1633 (Ch) (18 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Mengesha v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2013] EWHC 1695 (Admin) (18 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“If a person was under an existing legal obligation or liability, or subject to an existing legal restriction, which he deliberately evaded or the enforcement he deliberately frustrated by interposing a company under his control, the court could “pierce the corporate veil” but only for the purpose of depriving the company or its controller of the advantage which they would otherwise have obtained by the company’s separate legal personality.”

WLR Daily, 12th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Kohli v Lit & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 667 (17 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Avon Estates Ltd v Evans & Anor [2013] EWHC 1635 (Ch) (13 June 2013)

Derek Hodd Ltd v Climate Change Capital Ltd [2013] EWHC 1665 (Ch) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

L and M (Children), Re [2013] EWHC 1569 (Fam) (04 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Hartleyburn Parish Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2013] EWHC 1650 (Admin) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Bate v Aviva Insurance UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 1687 (Comm) (17 June 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Hills Contractors & Construction Ltd v Struth & Anor [2013] EWHC 1693 (TCC) (17 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“The court had an inherent jurisdiction to give such directions as would enable the administrators of a regulated investment firm, holding client money under rules imposing a statutory trust, to put in place a client money distribution procedure for dealing with rejected claims and unknown claims which could provide a degree of certainty and protection and ensure a timely return of client money.”

WLR Daily, 14th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Where a tenant had paid a deposit under an assured shorthold tenancy for a fixed term which began before, but ended after, the commencement of section 213 of the Housing Act 2004, the landlord was obliged to deal with the deposit in accordance with an authorised scheme within 14 days of the coming into being of a new statutory periodic tenancy upon expiry of the fixed term; and by virtue of section 215(1) of the 2004 Act, non-compliance with that obligation precluded service by the landlord of a valid notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988.”

WLR Daily, 14th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“The provision in section 15(4) of the Commons Act 2006, allowing an application for registration of land as a town or village green to be made up to five years after a cessation of qualifying user predating the commencement of section 15, was not incompatible with the landowner’s right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”

WLR Daily, 14th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“A contract whereby (without establishing co-operation between the contracting public entities with a view to carrying out a public service task that both of them had to perform)—one public entity had assigned to another the task of cleaning certain public buildings, while reserving a supervisory power, in return for payment for the costs incurred, the second entity being authorised to use the services of third parties which might be capable of competing on the market for the accomplishment of that task—constituted a public service contract within the meaning of article 1(2)(d) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC.”

WLR Daily, 13th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“The English court had a long-standing and well-established jurisdiction to grant an injunction restraining the commencement or continuation of foreign proceedings brought in breach of an arbitration clause, even when neither party had commenced, nor intended to commence, arbitration proceedings in the agreed forum. The Arbitration Act 1996 did not affect the court’s power under that jurisdiction or under s 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.”

WLR Daily, 12th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“The right to a trial within a reasonable time under article 6.1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was a separate right from the right to a fair trial under that article. Consequently the time when a person was ‘charged’ with an offence for the purposes of time starting to run under the reasonable time guarantee might be different from the time when he should have had access to a lawyer for the purposes of ensuring a fair trial under article 6.1 read with article 6.3(c).”

WLR Daily, 13th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Pursuant to article 6 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 creating a European order for payment procedure, read in conjunction with article 17, a statement of opposition to a European order for payment that did not contain any challenge to the jurisdiction of the court of the member state of origin did not constitute ‘the entering of an appearance’ within the meaning of article 24 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, and the fact that the defendant had, in the statement of opposition lodged, put forward arguments relating to the substance of the case was irrelevant.”

WLR Daily, 13th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Newhaven Port & Properties Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs [2013] EWCA Civ 673 (14 June 2013)

Okotoks Ld & Anor v Fine & Country Ltd & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 672 (14 June 2013)

Lumos Skincare Ltd v Sweet Squared Ltd. & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 671 (14 June 2013)

Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues [2013] EWCA Civ 669 (14 June 2013)

Birch v Ministry of Defence [2013] EWCA Civ 676 (14 June 2013)

Ireland v David Lloyd Leisure Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 665 (14 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Tchenguiz & Ors v The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) [2013] EWHC 1578 (QB) (14 June 2013)

Roger Ward Associates Ltd & Ors v Britannia Assets (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 1653 (QB) (14 June 2013)

Mehjoo v Harben Barker (a firm) & Anor [2013] EWHC 1669 (QB) (14 June 2013)

Lombard North Central Plc v Nugent & Ors [2013] EWHC 1588 (QB) (06 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Peel Land and Property (Ports No.3) Ltd v TS Sheerness Steel Ltd [2013] EWHC 1658 (Ch) (14 June 2013)

MF Global UK Ltd (in special administration), Re [2013] EWHC 1655 (Ch) (14 June 2013)

Revenue & Customs v SED Essex Ltd [2013] EWHC 1583 (Ch) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

CM v The Executor of the Estate of EJ & Ors [2013] EWHC 1680 (Fam) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Borough of Telford and Wrekin & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 1638 (Admin) (14 June 2013)

Arranz v Spanish Judicial Authority [2013] EWHC 1662 (Admin) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Tullow Uganda Ltd v Heritage Oil and Gas Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1656 (Comm) (14 June 2013)

Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC 1666 (Comm) (14 June 2013)

Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC 1667 (Comm) (14 June 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Elvanite Full Circle Ltd. v Amec Earth & Environmental (UK) Ltd. [2013] EWHC 1643 (TCC) (14 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 37 (13 June 2013)

O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 36 (13 June 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

H-L (A Child), Re [2013] EWCA Civ 655 (13 June 2013)

Virk & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 652 (12 June 2013)

NN (South Africa) & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 653 (12 June 2013)

Howard v Howard -Lawson [2013] EWCA Civ 654 (12 June 2013)

Willford, R (on the application of) v Financial Services Authority (FSA) [2013] EWCA Civ 677 (13 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Garner v Salford City Council & Anor [2013] EWHC 1573 (QB) (13 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

JW Spear & Sons Ltd & Ors v Zynga Inc [2013] EWHC 1640 (Ch) (13 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

LCG v RL [2013] EWHC 1383 (Fam) (23 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Afework, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Camden [2013] EWHC 1637 (Admin) (13 June 2013)

Bayliss v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2013] EWHC 1612 (Admin) (13 June 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Development Com. v Al Refai & Ors [2013] EWHC 1630 (Comm) (12 June 2013)

High Court (Patents Court)

Destra Software Ltd v Comada (UK) LLP & Ors [2013] EWHC 1575 (Pat) (11 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“The tort of malicious prosecution extended to civil as well as criminal proceedings.”

WLR Daily, 13th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Supreme Court, 13th June 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

“The phrase ‘members of his family forming part of his household’ in section 20(1)(b) of the State Immunity Act 1978 should not be given a wider meaning in relation to heads of state than it had in relation to diplomats. Thus a head of state’s ‘household’ was restricted to spouses, civil partners, dependent children and relatives.”

WLR Daily, 11th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Determinations by the judge that the statutory threshold criteria were crossed for the making of a care order under section 31(2) of the Children Act 1989 and that such an order should be made were evaluative judgments with which the appellate court, exercising a review jurisdiction, should only interfere if it were satisfied that the judgments were wrong.”

WLR Daily, 12th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“The court must exercise its discretion when considering an application for an extension of time for compliance with a deadline stipulated in a court order by simply having regard to the overriding objective of the court to deal with cases justly pursuant to CPR r 1.1(1), notwithstanding that CPR r 1.1(2) had been amended to include the enforcement of compliance with court orders.”

WLR Daily, 7th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“A company which had a sole director, who also owned all its shares, did not hold or control its assets in accordance with that sole director and shareholder’s ‘direct or indirect instructions’ within the meaning of paragraph 6 of the standard form freezing order in the Civil Procedure Rules.”

WLR Daily, 6th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“A bare right to appeal was not property within the meaning of section 436 of the Insolvency Act 1986.”

WLR Daily, 4th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“When determining whether a possession order should be made under section 84 of the Housing Act 1985, the expression ‘suitable accommodation’ in section 84(2)(b) and (c) and Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985 was broad enough to encompass accommodation identified by reference to its essential characteristics and did not require the identification of a specific property.”

WLR Daily, 7th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

A shipowner was entitled (1) to refuse to deliver up cargo covered by a bill of lading to the consignee under that bill, in exercise of its lien for general average contribution for that cargo, notwithstanding receipt of an unlimited guarantee from the insurers of the cargo undertaking in consideration of delivery to pay any general average contribution due in respect of the cargo; and (2) to recover storage and other expenses incurred by it in exercising its lien after the cargo was discharged from the vessel.

WLR Daily, 7th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Supreme Court, 12th June 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Supreme Court, 12th June 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Ust -Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC v AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP [2013] UKSC 35 (12 June 2013)

B (a Child), Re [2013] UKSC 30 (12 June 2013)

Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd & Ors [2013] UKSC 34 (12 June 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Freeland, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 928 (11 June 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Atlantic Electronics Ltd.v Revenue and Customs [2013] EWCA Civ 651 (12 June 2013)

Al Saud & Anor v Apex Global Management Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 642 (11 June 2013)

JB (Jamaica), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 666 (12 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Euromark Ltd v Smash Enterprises Pty Ltd [2013] EWHC 1627 (QB) (06 June 2013)

Euromoney Institutional Investor Plc v Aviation News Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1505 (QB) (12 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Hart & Anor v Burbidge & Ors [2013] EWHC 1628 (Ch) (12 June 2013)

Interflora Inc & Anor v Marks and Spencer Plc & Anor [2013] EWHC 1484 (Ch) (12 June 2013)

Royal Mail Group Ltd v Evans & Ors [2013] EWHC 1572 (Ch) (11 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

RK, R (on the application of) v South Yorkshire Police & Anor [2013] EWHC 1555 (Admin) (10 June 2013)

AHK & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1426 (Admin) (07 June 2013)

Holder, R (on the application of) v Gedling Borough Council [2013] EWHC 1611 (Admin) (12 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“On the true construction of a collective agreement incorporated into the claimants’ contracts all who performed the role of a market porter, whether registered or unregistered, were entitled to share equally in ‘porterage’ charges made by the employer to customers for the movement of goods.”

WLR Daily, 26th April 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Oddity of personality did not of itself diminish the value of one’s good character and, therefore, a judge had erred in reducing a plaintiff’s damages for malicious prosecution on the basis that his reputation and social standing did not amount to much because he had chosen to withdraw from society and live as a recluse.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

de Ferranti & Anor v Execuzen Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 592 (10 June 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

X Ltd, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 818 (23 May 2013)

Hobson v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 819 (23 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Bancoult, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs [2013] EWHC 1502 (Admin) (11 June 2013)

Warnborough College Ltd., R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1510 (Admin) (10 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

A Council v M & Ors (Judgment 4: Foreign Adoption: Refusal of Recognition) [2013] EWHC 1501 (Fam) (06 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Harris & Anor v Charalambous [2013] EWHC 1317 (QB) (07 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“Where a national authority had failed to inform an EU citizen precisely and in full of the public security grounds, and the related evidence, upon which it had made a decision under article 27 of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC refusing the citizen entry, the national court was required, pursuant to articles 30(2) and 31 of the Directive and article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, to ensure that that failure was limited to that which was strictly necessary. The court had to ensure, in any event, that the citizen was informed of the essence of the grounds in a manner which took due account of the necessary confidentiality of the evidence.”

WLR Daily, 4th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“On the proper interpretation of the second paragraph of article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003, where an unaccompanied minor, who had no family member within the European Union, had made applications for asylum in more than one member state, the member state responsible for examining that application was that in which the minor was present at the time, after having lodged an asylum application there.”

WLR Daily, 6th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Ilott v Williams & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 645 (07 June 2013)

Holt v Reading Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 641 (07 June 2013)

SK (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 650 (30 April 2013)

CIMC Raffles Offshore (Singapore) Ltd & Anor v Schahin Holding SA [2013] EWCA Civ 644 (07 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

McMillan v Airedale NHS Foundation Trust [2013] EWHC 1504 (QB) (05 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Atrium Training Services Ltd & Connor Williams Ltd, Re [2013] EWHC 1562 (Ch) (07 June 2013)

Group Seven Ltd v Allied Investment Corporation Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 1509 (Ch) (06 June 2013)

Morse v Eaglemoss Publications Ltd [2013] EWHC 1507 (Ch) (07 June 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

R (Mother) v C (Father) & Anor [2013] EWHC 1295 (Fam) (17 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Stratton, R (on the application of) v Thames Valley Police [2013] EWHC 1561 (Admin) (07 June 2013)

Rostami, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1494 (Admin) (07 June 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Bank of New York Mellon v Sterling Biotech Ltd [2013] EWHC 1478 (Comm) (12 April 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Olympic Airlines SA Pension & Life Insurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines SA [2013] EWCA Civ 643 (06 June 2013)

Lumos Skincare Ltd v Sweet Squared Ltd & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 590 (06 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Kola, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1434 (Admin) (06 June 2013)

Aslam, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1495 (Admin) (06 June 2013)

High Court Family Division)

A Council v M & Ors (Judgment 4: Foreign Adoption: Refusal of Recognition) [2013] EWHC 1501 (Fam) (06 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“Where damage notices relating to subsidence said to have been caused by coal mining contained ostensibly inaccurate particulars, the effect of the failure to comply strictly with the applicable statutory requirements had to be considered by construing the statutory or contractual requirement in question and then asking whether strict or adequate compliance was required, bearing in mind that even non-compliance with a requirement might not be fatal to the notice’s validity.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Where specimen counts were charged but complainants described in their evidence particular incidents, the trial judge should direct the jury of the necessity to be sure that the offence had been committed on the same occasion, either on an occasion in the course of the unspecified pattern of offending, or on one of the particular occasions identified in the evidence.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003, establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the member states by a third-country national, permitted a member state, which was not indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of the Regulation, to examine an application for asylum even though no circumstances existed which established the applicability of the humanitarian clause in article 15 of the Regulation. That possibility was not conditional on the member state responsible under those criteria having failed to respond to a request to take back the asylum seeker concerned. The member state in which the asylum seeker was present was not obliged, during the process of determining the member state responsible, to request the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to present its views where it was apparent from the documents of that office that the member state indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of Regulation No 343/2003 was in breach of the rules of European Union law on asylum.”

WLR Daily, 30th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“An investment service was offered as part of a financial product within the meaning of article 19(9) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/39/EC of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments only when it formed an integral part thereof at the time when that financial product was offered to the client.”

WLR Daily, 30th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“For the purposes of regulations protecting consumers from unfair trading, the term ‘commercial practices’ could cover isolated acts as well as repeated behaviour; it depended on the circumstances. The concept was concerned with systems rather than individual transactions.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Shoreline Housing Partnership Ltd v Mears Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 639 (05 June 2013)

Berney v Saul (t/a Thomas Saul & Co (Solicitors)) [2013] EWCA Civ 640 (05 June 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1427 (QB) (05 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

MacDermid Offshore Solutions Llc v Niche Products Ltd [2013] EWHC 1493 (Ch) (05 June 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) v Azam & Ors [2013] EWHC 1480 (QB) (03 June 2013)

Harrods Ltd & Ors v McNally & Ors [2013] EWHC 1479 (QB) (03 June 2013)

Fox v Boulter [2013] EWHC 1435 (QB) (04 June 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Williams v Glover & Anor [2013] EWHC 1447 (Ch) (04 June 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

IA, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Council (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC 1273 (Admin) (20 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“A construction contract did not contain an implied term that a party to the contract, unsuccessful in adjudication, was entitled to have a final and binding resolution of the dispute determined by litigation.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“There was a statutory obligation on the defence to give notice to the prosecution of the name, address and date of birth of any witness whom the defendant believed was able to give evidence in support of his alibi. If there was a practice of advising that the names and addresses of alibi witnesses should not be disclosed unless and until they had provided signed proofs of evidence, that practice was misguided and wrong.”

WLR Daily, 21st May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“There was no mandatory duty to take the confiscation order made under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 into account when deciding on a compensation order, but the question of compensation might have been relevant to disproportion, if compensation meant that money restored to the loser would have been counted again in the confiscation order, so it was necessary to consider both issues together.”

WLR Daily, 3rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Despite the removal of his name from a ‘terrorist watch list’, established by Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, to which his name had been added by Council Regulation (EC) 1330/2008, the applicant retained an interest in having the courts of the European Union recognise that he should never have been included on the list since the removal of his name did not dispose of his constitutional claims.”

WLR Daily, 28th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Section 9(2) of the Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 1964 had no application to a right of pre-emption, so long as it had not matured into an option.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“There was no rule in European trade mark law that the use of a sign in context was deemed to convey a single meaning in law even if it was in fact understood by different people in different ways.”

WLR Daily, 21st May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“It was open to the court to entertain an application under section 320(2)(c) to vest a dwelling in its occupants notwithstanding that the applicant occupied only part of the disclaimed property as his dwelling house and it was open to the court, on such an application, to make an order relating to only a part of the disclaimed property.”

WLR Daily, 8th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“The court ought not to record a separate conviction under section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 where a person had been found guilty of an offence under section 4 and the neglect proved under section 9 was no wider than the conduct which caused the unnecessary suffering for which there was guilt under section 4.”

WLR Daily, 12th March 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Turner v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 642 (09 May 2013)

Brinkley, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 760 (19 April 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Abbar & Anor v Saudi Economic & Development Company (Sedco) Real Estate Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 1414 (Ch) (24 May 2013)

High Court (Patents Court)

Novartis Ag v Hospira UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 1285 (Pat) (14 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Lewis & Ors v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 776 (23 May 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

B2 v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 616 (24 May 2013)

Ker v Optima Community Association [2013] EWCA Civ 579 (24 May 2013)

Gavin & Anor v Community Housing Association Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 580 (24 May 2013)

Hemming (t/a Simply Pleasure Ltd) & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster [2013] EWCA Civ 591 (24 May 2013)

SS (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 550 (22 May 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Rehman & Anor v Jones Lang Lasalle Ltd [2013] EWHC 1339 (QB) (22 May 2013)

McAlpine v Bercow [2013] EWHC 1342 (QB) (24 May 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Turner v Chief Land Registrar [2013] EWHC 1382 (Ch) (24 May 2013)

Walden v Atkins [2013] EWHC 1387 (Ch) (23 May 2013)

London & Medway Ltd v Sunley Holdings Plc [2013] EWHC 1420 (Ch) (24 May 2013)

Creasey & Anor v Sole & Ors [2013] EWHC 1410 (Ch) (24 May 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

Z & Ors v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Ors (Judgment 1) [2013] EWHC 1150 (Fam) (07 May 2013)

Z & Ors v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Ors (Judgment 2) [2013] EWHC 1371 (Fam) (21 May 2013)

AB v CD [2013] EWHC 1418 (Fam) (24 May 2013)

J v G [2013] EWHC 1432 (Fam) (26 March 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Sunderland City Council v Stirling Investment Properties LLP [2013] EWHC 1413 (Admin) (24 May 2013)

Kheirollahi-Ahmadroghani v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1314 (Admin) (22 May 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Elvanite Full Circle Ltd v AMEC Earth & Environmental (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 1191 (TCC) (24 May 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Mauritius Commercial Bank Ltd v Hestia Holdings Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1328 (Comm) (24 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

“Since the coming into force of the Provision of Services Regulations 2009 a local authority was not permitted, when determining the reasonable licence fee for sex establishments, to reflect in the fee which it determined the cost of enforcing the licensing system against unlicensed operators.”

WLR Daily, 24th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“In determining whether a breach of a contract had been repudiatory an important factor to be taken into account was whether, although serious, the breach had been remedied before the injured party had purported to exercise a right of termination of the contract. Likewise, if there had been delay in performance of an ongoing obligation, it might be possible for the delay to be made up by faster performance. The court had to consider the position as at the date when the injured party purported to terminate. In the absence of time being of the essence, delay would only become a repudiatory breach if it were so prolonged as to frustrate the contract.”

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk