Category: cross-claims

Payment notices: what genuine belief is needed to make a payment notice valid? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted October 25th, 2021 in construction industry, cross-claims, dispute resolution, news by tracey

‘The genuine article? Does a valid payment notice need to set out the sum the payer genuinely considers due? The requirement that a valid payment notice must set out “the sum the payer considers due” is often at the centre of payment disputes. The recent decision in Downs Road Development LLP v Laxmanbhai Construction (UK) Ltd, provides a necessary clarification around what this actually means, confirming that a valid payment notice must set out the sum the payer genuinely considers due.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 20th October 2021

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Resolving the rules of insolvency – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted July 28th, 2015 in appeals, consent, costs, cross-claims, insolvency, liquidators, news, winding up by sally

‘Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: In what ways has Re Kingstons Investments Ltd shed light on longstanding ambiguities in the Insolvency Rules 1986? Jamie Riley, commercial litigator at 11 Stone Buildings, explores the case and explains why the final decision will be so important for insolvency lawyers.’

Full story

11 Stone Buildings, June 2015

Source: www.11sb.com

Aarhus, the A-G, and why the rules on interim remedies need to change – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted September 30th, 2013 in attorney general, costs, cross-claims, damages, EC law, environmental protection, injunctions, judicial review, news by sally

“I did an initial post here summarising this opinion from the A-G to the CJEU saying that the UK was in breach of two EU Directives about environmental assessment and pollution control – the breaches concerned our system for litigation costs. It struck me that there was a lot in the opinion, and after some re-reads, I continue to think so. So I will deal in this post with one aspect, namely the finding that the UK is in breach, in requiring an undertaking as to damages by the claimant to back up the claimant’s interim injunction – in the jargon, a cross-undertaking.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 27th September 2013

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Joint Administrators of Heritable Bank plc (Respondent) v The Winding-Up Board of Landsbanki Islands HF (Appellant) (Scotland) – Supreme Court

Posted February 28th, 2013 in appeals, banking, cross-claims, insolvency, law reports, Scotland, Supreme Court by sally

Joint Administrators of Heritable Bank plc (Respondent) v The Winding-Up Board of Landsbanki Islands HF (Appellant) (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 13 | UKSC 2011/0234 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 27th February 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Gale and another – WLR Daily

Posted July 16th, 2010 in appeals, assets recovery, costs, cross-claims, law reports, proceeds of crime by sally

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Gale and another [2010] EWCA Civ 759; [2010] WLR (D) 179

“The costs incurred by an enforcement authority, such as the Serious Organised Crime Agency, in paying an interim receiver to investigate the defendant’s finances and assemble that material as the basis for civil recovery proceedings constituted costs of the litigation.”

WLR Daily, 13th July 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Bolsover District Council v Dennis Rye Ltd – Times Law Reports

Posted May 19th, 2009 in cross-claims, insolvency, law reports, winding up by sally

Bolsover District Council v Dennis Rye Ltd

Court of Appeal

“A judge hearing a winding-up petition against a company, when faced with a cross-claim by the company against the petitioner, had to consider only whether the evidence before him was sufficient to satisfy him that the company’s cross-claim was not merely arguable but was genuine and serious, and not whether the company should have previously taken action on the cross-claim unless it had a good reason for not doing so.”

The Times, 19th May 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Bolsover District council v Dennis Rye Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted May 8th, 2009 in cross-claims, insolvency, law reports, winding up by sally

Bolsover District council v Dennis Rye Ltd; [2009] EWCA Civ 372; [2009] WLR (D) 147

“Where a company served with a winding-up petition contended that it had a cross-claim against the petitioner, the issue for the judge was whether the evidence before him was sufficient to satisfy him that the company’s cross claim was not merely arguable but was genuine and serious, and not whether the company should have previously asserted, litigated or issued proceedings for the cross-claim unless it had a good excuse for not doing so.”

WLR Daily, 7th May 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.