When an unsafe structure does not trigger the landlord’s duty to repair – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The reach of the Defective Premises Act and what ‘defective’ means within the context of the Act, was the subject of detailed consideration in the QBD recently, in Dodd v Raebarn Estates [2016].’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 8th March 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off on When an unsafe structure does not trigger the landlord’s duty to repair – Hardwicke Chambers

Shergill and others v Khaira and others (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted April 13th, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, law reports, striking out, Supreme Court by sally

Shergill and others v Khaira and others (No 2) [2016] EWHC 628 (Ch)

‘The judge dismissed the defendants’ application to strike out the claimants’ claim, a decision which was later reversed by the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court allowed the claimants’ appeal from that decision and ordered that the defendants pay the claimants’ costs in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. The costs judge subsequently refused the defendants’ application to stay the immediate detailed assessment of those costs. The defendants appealed from that decision on the ground that, by CPR r 47.1, the costs of proceedings could not be subject to detailed assessment until the proceedings were concluded, unless the appellate court had expressly ordered the costs to be assessed immediately, which it had not.’

WLR Daily, 23rd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Shergill and others v Khaira and others (No 2) – WLR Daily

Estrada v Al-Juffali (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs intervening) – WLR Daily

Estrada v Al-Juffali (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs intervening) [2016] EWCA Civ 176

‘The parties were married in September 2001 and had one daughter born in October 2002. The husband, a Saudi national, was a businessman of substantial means who married again in 2012 when the parties’ marriage broke down. On their divorce the wife applied for financial relief under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. The husband applied to strike out the wife’s application , claiming immunity from suit as the permanent representative of St Lucia to the International Maritime Organisation (“IMO”), a post to which he had been appointed on 1 April 2014. The United Kingdom was required, as a matter of international law, to grant privileges and immunities to personal representatives of member states to the IMO in accordance with the Specialised Agencies Convention and the Headquarters Agreement. A permanent representative was entitled to the same immunity from suit and legal process as the head of a diplomatic mission, except that, by article 15 of the International Maritime Organisation (Immunities and Privileges) Order 2002), a permanent representative who was permanently resident in the United Kingdom was only entitled to immunities and privileges in respect of his official acts. The Foreign Secretary certified that the Foreign Office had been informed by the IMO of the husband’s appointment as permanent representative of St Lucia, of his arrival date and had not been notified that his diplomatic functions had terminated. Although on the face of it that certificate was conclusive evidence of the husband’s appointment by virtue of section 8 of the International Organisations Act 1968, the judge balanced the husband’s claim to immunity against the wife’s rights to access to the courts under article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. He concluded that the husband had not undertaken any duties or performed any functions as permanent representative, that the appointment was an artificial construct to defeat the wife’s claims on the breakdown of the marriage and that, since the husband was permanently resident in the United Kingdom, he was entitled to immunity only in respect of official acts performed in the exercise of his functions. In consequence the judge refused to strike out the wife’s claim.’

WLR Daily, 22nd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Estrada v Al-Juffali (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs intervening) – WLR Daily

Same Accident, Same Defendant, Two Separate CNFs (One Claiming Vehicle Damage and Credit Hire; the Other PI) Proceed as Separate Claims at all Times, One Settles After Issue, the Other Does Not and is Issued – Abuse of Process or Not? – Zenith PI Blog

Posted March 22nd, 2016 in abuse of process, accidents, costs, news, personal injuries, striking out by sally

‘Last week I went off to the County Court at Newcastle to defend a strike out application made by the Defendant alleging abuse of process. I suspect this won’t be the first time that this factual scenario has arisen where defendants have sought to strike out a claim and where they have been successful, but here the claim was allowed to proceed because it was found that there was no abuse.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st March 2016

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Same Accident, Same Defendant, Two Separate CNFs (One Claiming Vehicle Damage and Credit Hire; the Other PI) Proceed as Separate Claims at all Times, One Settles After Issue, the Other Does Not and is Issued – Abuse of Process or Not? – Zenith PI Blog

Boys win appeal over striking out of claim against council over harassment on estate – Local Government Lawyer

‘A High Court judge has ruled that the claims of two boys against a council for negligence in failing to protect them from harassment from neighbours on the estate where they lived were wrongly struck out.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 18th March 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Boys win appeal over striking out of claim against council over harassment on estate – Local Government Lawyer

High Court rejects Clifford’s attempt to slash costs through “inadequate” Calderbank offer – Litigation Futures

Posted March 21st, 2016 in costs, damages, news, part 36 offers, privacy, proportionality, striking out by tracey

‘The High Court has rejected jailed publicist Max Clifford’s attempt to limit his costs to only £5,000 in a privacy claim by making an “inadequate” Calderbank offer.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 21st March 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on High Court rejects Clifford’s attempt to slash costs through “inadequate” Calderbank offer – Litigation Futures

Domain names you can bank on – Technology Law Update

Posted January 26th, 2016 in domain names, internet, news, striking out by sally

‘Disputes over domain names tend to be dealt with outside of the normal court system, in panels run by dispute resolution service providers accredited by ICANN. So a decision of the UK court over as series of domain names including RBS group brands makes interesting reading.’

Full story

Technology Law Update, 22nd January 2016

Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk

Comments Off on Domain names you can bank on – Technology Law Update

Cook v Virgin Media Ltd; McNeil v Tesco plc – WLR Daily

Cook v Virgin Media Ltd; McNeil v Tesco plc [2015] EWCA Civ 1287; [2015] WLR (D) 538

‘The English court had power to apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens in a purely domestic context, exercising the court’s wide general case management powers in CPR rr 3.1(2)(m) and 3.3, and therefore could strike out or stay proceedings brought in England where Scotland was the natural and more appropriate forum.’

WLR Daily, 14th December 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Cook v Virgin Media Ltd; McNeil v Tesco plc – WLR Daily

Abdulle and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis – WLR Daily

Abdulle and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] EWCA Civ 1260; [2015] WLR (D) 513

‘The Court of Appeal would not lightly interfere with a case management decision and would support robust and fair case management decisions by first instance judges to strike out, or to decline to strike out, claims under CPR r 3.4(2)(c). In a case in which the balance was a “fine” one, an appellate court should respect the balance struck by the first instance judge.’

WLR Daily, 8th December 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Abdulle and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis – WLR Daily

Serbian Forum Shopper in Breach of his Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure has his Privacy and Libel Action Struck Out – RPC Data and Privacy Law

‘On 23 November 2015 Sir Michael Tugendhat set aside an order for service out of the jurisdiction of proceedings for the misuse of private information and libel which had been made by Master Roberts on 31 March 2015 in respect of an article in Politika, a Serbian language newspaper circulating in Serbia and neighbouring countries in hard copy and available in this country only on the internet. Sir Michael held that the Claimant was in breach of his duty of full and frank disclosure and the case is a significant reminder of the duty of candour that rests upon a claimant when seeking permission to serve outside the jurisdiction under CPR 6.36 and of the perils of over-enthusiastic attempts to squeeze foreign claims into this jurisdiction. The case is also important on the question of how section 9(2) Defamation Act 2013 requiring evidence that England and Wales is “clearly the most appropriate place in which to bring an action in respect of the statement” is to be interpreted and the burden it places on a Claimant which the judge decided had not been discharged in this case.’

Full story

RPC Data and Privacy Law, 7th December 2015

Source: www.rpc.co.uk

Comments Off on Serbian Forum Shopper in Breach of his Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure has his Privacy and Libel Action Struck Out – RPC Data and Privacy Law

Who got the dogs out? – Nearly Legal

Posted November 19th, 2015 in animals, housing, mortgages, news, restraining orders, striking out by tracey

‘Moosun, & Ors v HSBC Bank Plc (t/a First Direct) [2015] EWHC 3308 (Ch). This was a part – surely now the end part – of a long running saga of a mortgage possession and sale. The novel (if unsurprising) point of law concerned the “Ors” in this claim. You will have to read on – or skip to the end of the post, for that.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 18th November 2015

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/

Comments Off on Who got the dogs out? – Nearly Legal

“I don’t see how a dog could give instructions,” says judge as he throws out case – Litigation Futures

Posted November 17th, 2015 in animals, litigants in person, news, restraining orders, striking out by tracey

‘A litigant in person’s bid to sue HSBC and their solicitors Shoosmiths on behalf of two dogs has led the High Court to describe her as “one of those very rare litigants” against whom a two-year general civil restraint order had to be made.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 16th November 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on “I don’t see how a dog could give instructions,” says judge as he throws out case – Litigation Futures

Air freight damages claim struck out as “irresponsible” and lacking in authority – Zenith Chambers

Posted November 12th, 2015 in abuse of process, airlines, class actions, damages, news, striking out by sally

‘The High Court has struck out claims against British Airways for damages allegedly arising from the air freight cartel on the basis of lack of authority. The claim was issued on behalf of 64,697 claimants, all members of the Chinese Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC), an organisation that issues certificates of origin when goods are exported from China.’

Full story

Zenith Chambers, 2nd November 2015

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Air freight damages claim struck out as “irresponsible” and lacking in authority – Zenith Chambers

High Court throws out 65,000 ‘highly irresponsible’ price-fixing claims – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted October 29th, 2015 in abuse of process, airlines, appeals, class actions, news, price fixing, striking out by sally

‘The High Court has thrown out almost 65,000 claims brought on behalf of Chinese businesses after finding the firm acting had no authority to do so.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 27th October 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off on High Court throws out 65,000 ‘highly irresponsible’ price-fixing claims – Law Society’s Gazette

Thresholds for strike-out – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted October 19th, 2015 in abuse of process, civil procedure rules, costs, fraud, law firms, news, striking out by sally

‘The Court of Appeal in Alpha Rocks Solicitors v Benjamin Oluwadare Alade [2015] EWCA Civ 685 dealt with the issue of when it was appropriate to strike out a claim on the grounds that the claimant has abused the process of the court.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 19th October 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off on Thresholds for strike-out – Law Society’s Gazette

Solicitor expelled from profession for lying about ‘progress’ of cases that had actually been struck out – Legal Futures

‘A solicitor who deceived his firm and his clients for 13 months into thinking that he was pursuing their group employment tribunal (ET) claims, when in fact they had been struck out because of his inactivity, has been removed from the profession.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 14th October 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Solicitor expelled from profession for lying about ‘progress’ of cases that had actually been struck out – Legal Futures

Appeal judges overturn Blakemores negligence claim strike-out and £635,000 costs judgment – Legal Futures

Posted October 9th, 2015 in appeals, costs, land registration, law firms, mistake, negligence, news, striking out by tracey

‘The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision striking out a negligence claim against Birmingham law firm Blakemores, now in administration, and also set aside a default judgment obtained by the firm for £635,500 in costs.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 8th October 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Appeal judges overturn Blakemores negligence claim strike-out and £635,000 costs judgment – Legal Futures

Ukulele Wars: The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain v Clausen – NIPC Law

Posted August 6th, 2015 in EC law, intellectual property, news, striking out, trade marks by sally

‘Although Judge Hacon’s decision in The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain v Clausen and Another [2015] EWHC 1772 (IPEC) was reported as a “victory” in the Independent (The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain wins duel with German ‘copycat’ 3 July 2015) it was somewhat of the pyrrhic kind. The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain sued The United Kingdom Ukulele Orchestra for trade mark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off and applied to strike out the defence on the grounds of abuse of process less than two weeks before the trial. The claim succeeded on passing off but failed on all other counts. The claimants lost their Community trade mark and the judge saw no merit in the strike out application whatever.’

Full story

NIPC Law, 5th August 2015

Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

Comments Off on Ukulele Wars: The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain v Clausen – NIPC Law

Two-partner firm succeeds in striking out £8m professional negligence claim – Legal Futures

‘A two-partner central London law firm has succeeded in striking out a professional negligence claim for over £8m.’
Full story

Legal Futures, 3rd August 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Two-partner firm succeeds in striking out £8m professional negligence claim – Legal Futures

Setting Aside Notices of Discontinuance and QOCS – Kite v The Phoenix Pub Group – Zenith PI Blog

Posted July 30th, 2015 in adjournment, news, setting aside, striking out by sally

‘The Claimant brought a claim in damages for injuries sustained in November 2014 when he fell into an uncovered man hole in the car park of a pub. Whilst the Defendant company operates a number of pubs it alleged that at the time of the accident the pub was owned, operated and occupied by a different company. The Defendant was asserting that it was not the correct company to pursue.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 27th July 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Setting Aside Notices of Discontinuance and QOCS – Kite v The Phoenix Pub Group – Zenith PI Blog