Tchenguiz and another v Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Deutsche Bank AG, third party); Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA and others v Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Deutsche Bank AG, third party) – WLR Daily

Tchenguiz and another v Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Deutsche Bank AG, third party); Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA and others v Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Deutsche Bank AG, third party) [2013] EWHC 2128 (QB); [2013] WLR (D) 302

“The Criminal Justice Act 1987 did not prevent the Serious Fraud Office from disclosing, pursuant to a court order in civil proceedings, documents which in the course of an investigation had been provided to it by third parties in response to notices under section 2 of the Act.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In the matter of the Nortel Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies No 2 – Supreme Court

Posted July 29th, 2013 in administrators, contribution, debts, expenses, insolvency, law reports, pensions by sally

In the matter of the Nortel Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies No 2 [2013] UKSC 52 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 24th July 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

R (on the application of Modaresi) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent) – Supreme Court

R (on the application of Modaresi) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent) [2013] UKSC 53 | UKSC 2012/0069 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 24th July 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 26th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal  (Civil Division)

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2013] EWCA Civ 928 (25 July 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Infederation Ltd v Google Inc & Ors [2013] EWHC 2295 (Ch) (26 July 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

SC DG Petrol SRL v Vitol Broking Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 2176 (Comm) (25 July 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

Sekhri v Ray [2013] EWHC 2290 (Fam) (23 July 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Tchenguiz & Anor v Serious Fraud Office & Ors [2013] EWHC 2297 (QB) (26 July 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 25th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Nortel Companies & Ors, Re [2013] UKSC 52 (24 July 2013)

Modaresi, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health [2013] UKSC 53 (24 July 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Great Elephant Corp v Trafigura Beheer BV & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 905 (25 July 2013)

Lupofresh Ltd v Sapporo Breweries Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 948 (25 July 2013)

Tulane Education Fund, Re [2013] EWCA Civ 890 (24 July 2013)

X, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2013] EWCA Civ 904 (24 July 2013)

Dass v The College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 884 (24 July 2013)

HS2 Action Alliance Ltd & Ors v Secretary of State for Transport [2013] EWCA Civ 920 (24 July 2013)

Neumans LLP (A Firm) v Andronikou & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 916 (24 July 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Sale R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 1306 (25 July 2013)

IA & Ors, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 1308 (25 July 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Police Superintendents Association of England and Wales & Ors v The Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police [2013] EWHC 2173 (Admin) (25 July 2013)

Save Britain’s Heritage, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 2268 (Admin) (25 July 2013)

DD, R (on the application of) v Independent Appeal Panel of the London Borough of Islington & Anor [2013] EWHC 2262 (Admin) (25 July 2013)

TD, R (on the application of) v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis & Anor [2013] EWHC 2231 (Admin) (25 July 2013)

Mirza, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2207 (Admin) (24 July 2013)

Khan v The General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 2187 (Admin) (24 July 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Boxing Brands Ltd v Sports Direct International Plc & Ors [2013] EWHC 2200 (Ch) (25 July 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Marex Financial Ltd v Creative Finance Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 2155 (Comm) (25 July 2013)

Pagel & Anor v Farman [2013] EWHC 2210 (Comm) (24 July 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Gary Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWHC 2182 (QB) (25 July 2013)

Vava & Ors v Anglo American South Africa Ltd [2013] EWHC 2131 (QB) (24 July 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Hammersmatch Properties (Welwyn) Ltd v Saint-Gobain Ceramics and Plastics Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 2227 (TCC) (24 July 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

 

In re Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd (in liquidation); Neumans LLP (a firm) v Andronikou and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 25th, 2013 in appeals, expenses, fees, insolvency, law firms, law reports, sport by sally

In re Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd (in liquidation); Neumans LLP (a firm) v Andronikou and others: [2013] EWCA Civ 916; [2013] WLR (D) 301

“Where solicitors had acted for a company in connection with its opposition to a winding up petition but had ceased to act for the company by the time the company went into out of court administration, the court had no power under the Insolvency Rules 1986 or under the inherent jurisdiction of the court to direct that fees which the company owed to the solicitors were an expense of the administration.”

WLR Daily, 24th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re Nortel GmbH (in administration) and related companies; In re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) and related companies (Nos 1 and 2) – WLR Daily

Posted July 25th, 2013 in expenses, insolvency, law reports, pensions by sally

In re Nortel GmbH (in administration) and related companies; In re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) and related companies (Nos 1 and 2): [2013] UKSC 52; [2013] WLR (D) 300

“A company’s liabilities arising from financial support directions or contribution notices issued by the Pensions Regulator under the Pensions Act 2004 after the company had gone into administration, which required the company to put in place financial support for an occupational pension scheme, did not rank as an expense of the administration under rule 2.67(1)(f) of the Insolvency Rules 1986. However, where by the date on which the company went into administration it had for the preceding two years been vulnerable to a liability under a pension scheme, that liability was an obligation which ranked in the administration as a provable debt of the company.”

WLR Daily, 24th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 24th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

CW (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 915 (23 July 2013)

V (Children), Re [2013] EWCA Civ 913 (23 July 2013)

Ardagh Group SA v Pillar Property Group Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 900 (23 July 2013)

Duffy v George [2013] EWCA Civ 908 (23 July 2013)

ITV Services Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs [2013] EWCA Civ 867 (23 July 2013)

Pendragon Plc & Ors v HM Revenue and Customs [2013] EWCA Civ 868 (23 July 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Morgan, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 1307 (23 July 2013)

Oyebola, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 1052 (23 July 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Blackside Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2087 (Admin) (23 July 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Caldero Trading Ltd v Beppler & Jacobson Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 2191 (Ch) (23 July 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Nowak v The Nursing and Midwifery Council & Anor (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC 1932 (QB) (23 July 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Regina (CN) v Lewisham London Borough Council: Regina (ZH) v Newham London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Regina (CN) v Lewisham London Borough Council: Regina (ZH) v Newham London Borough Council: [2013] EWCA Civ 804; [2013] WLR (D) 297

“A housing authority was not required to issue court proceedings before evicting the occupier of accommodation made available on a licence by a housing authority pursuant to its interim duty under sections 188(1) or 190(2)(a) of the Housing Act 1996.”

WLR Daily, 11th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (Government Actuary’s Department) v Pensions Ombudsman – WLR Daily

Regina (Government Actuary’s Department) v Pensions Ombudsman: [2013] EWCA Civ 901; [2013] WLR (D) 298

“The Government Actuary’s Department performed an important proactive role, by producing and from time to time revising the actuarial tables, which was central to the administration and proper operation of the firefighters’ public sector pension scheme, and as such was ‘concerned with the … administration of … the scheme’, within the meaning of section 146(4)(b) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993, as substituted.”

WLR Daily, 22nd July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Deutsche Umwelthilfe eV v Federal Republic of Germany – WLR Daily

Deutsche Umwelthilfe eV v Federal Republic of Germany: (Case C-515/11); [2013] WLR (D) 291

“Pursuant to the first sentence of the second subparagraph of article 2(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2003/4/EC of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information, the option given to member states by that provision of not regarding ‘bodies or institutions acting in a … legislative capacity’ as public authorities, required to allow access to the environmental information which they held, could not be applied to ministries when they prepared and adopted normative regulations which were of a lower rank than a law.”

WLR Daily 18th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 23rd, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Arnold v Britton & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 902 (22 July 2013)

The Government Actuary’s Department, R (on the application of) v The Pensions Ombudsman [2013] EWCA Civ 901 (22 July 2013)

Fairstar Heavy Transport NV v Adkins & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 886 (19 July 2013)

Trustees of the Coventry School Foundation v Whitehouse & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 885 (18 July 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Bestel & Ors v R [2013] EWCA Crim 1305 (19 July 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Attfield, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Barnet [2013] EWHC 2089 (Admin) (22 July 2013)

Extreme Oyster & Anor v Guildford Borough Council [2013] EWHC 2174 (Admin) (22 July 2013)

Webb v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2013] EWHC 2078 (Admin) (19 July 2013)

Shinwari, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2148 (Admin) (19 July 2013)

UK Coal Mining Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2013] EWHC 2142 (Admin) (19 July 2013)

Newark & Sherwood District Council & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2013] EWHC 2162 (Admin) (19 July 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Ghassemian v Tigris Industries Inc [2013] EWHC 2170 (Ch) (22 July 2013)

Masters v Barclays Bank Plc [2013] EWHC 2166 (Ch) (19 July 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Sea Glory Maritime Co & Anor v Al Sagr National Insurance Co & Anor [2013] EWHC 2116 (Comm) (17 July 2013)

Energy Venture Partners Ltd v Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd [2013] EWHC 2118 (Comm) (17 July 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Newbury v Sun Microsystems [2013] EWHC 2180 (QB) (22 July 2013)

AP (UK) Ltd v West Midland Fire & Civil Defence Authority [2013] EWHC 385 (QB) (22 July 2013)

Charles Stanley & Co Ltd v Adams [2013] EWHC 2137 (QB) (19 July 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Corelogic Ltd v Bristol City Council [2013] EWHC 2088 (TCC) (18 July 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Regina (New London College Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Migrants’ Rights Network and another intervening); Regina (West London Vocational Training College) v Same – WLR Daily

Regina (New London College Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Migrants’ Rights Network and another intervening): Regina (West London Vocational Training College) v Same: [2013] UKSC 51;   [2013] WLR (D)  294

“The requirement, laid down under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971, that rules affecting immigrants be laid before Parliament before they became lawful applied to rules which a migrant had to fulfil as a condition of his obtaining leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom and did not apply to rules which an educational establishment had to fulfil before it was entitled to sponsor students from outside the European Economic Area.”

WLR Daily, 17th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Green—Swan Pharmaceuticals CR, as v Státni zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce, ústředni inspektorát (Case C-299/12) – WLR Daily

Posted July 23rd, 2013 in advertising, consumer protection, EC law, food, law reports by sally

Green—Swan Pharmaceuticals CR, as v Státni zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce, ústředni inspektorát: (Case C-299/12) ;  [2013] WLR (D)  292

“In order to be considered a prohibited ‘reduction in disease’ claim within the meaning of article 2(2)(6) of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods (OJ 2006 L404, p 9) as amended, there was no requirement that the claim expressly state that the consumption of a category of food, a food or one of its constituents “significantly” reduced a risk factor in the development of a human disease. Moreover, pursuant to the transitional measures in article 28(2) of the Regulation, a commercial communication appearing on the packaging of a food could constitute a trade mark or brand name thereby attracting the protection afforded by the transitional provisions, provided that it was protected, as a mark or name, by the applicable legislation, that question being for the national court to determine. The benefit of article 28(2) applied only to foods bearing a trade mark or brand name which fell to be considered a nutrition or health claim within the meaning of the Regulation and which, in that form, existed before 1 January 2005.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (Barclay and another) v Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice and others (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted July 23rd, 2013 in human rights, judicial review, law reports, remuneration, Sark, trials by sally

Regina (Barclay and another) v Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice and others (No 2)

“Where remedy could be sought in the courts of the Bailiwick of Guernsey and of the Island of Sark, there was great force in the argument that judicial review of advice given by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice to the Committee for the Affairs of Sark as to the compliance of legislative proposals for Sark with the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms should take place in those courts rather than in the High Court in London but where, as in the present case, the review was a further stage in a sequence of review which had entailed an earlier concession permitting review in the High Court, it would be wrong for the High Court to decline jurisdiction.”

WLR Daily, 9th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Bestel; Regina v Raza; Regina v Bashir – WLR Daily

Posted July 23rd, 2013 in appeals, confiscation, law reports, sentencing, time limits by sally

Regina v Bestel;  Regina v Raza;  Regina v Bashir [2013] EWCA Crim 1305 ; [2013] WLR (D) 296

“A change in the law since the date of conviction or plea of guilty was not regarded as good reason for granting an extension of time in which to appeal unless substantial injustice would follow from application of the principle of finality. In cases in which the benefit from criminal conduct had been assessed on a basis which was, if considered in the light of a change in the law, disproportionate, substantial injustice would not be established if an application to the Crown Court for rescission of the confiscation order would ameliorate the stringency of the application of the finality principle.”

WLR Daily, 19th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (Minter) v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary – WLR Daily

Regina (Minter) v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary [2013] EWCA Civ 697; [2013] WLR (D) 289

“A convicted sex offender on whom an extended sentence was passed pursuant to section 85(2) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 became subject to the notification requirements of Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for an indefinite period under section 82(1) of the 2003 Act, if the aggregate of the custodial term and the extension period was 30 months or more, even if the custodial term was less than 30 months.”

WLR Daily, 1st May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Alemo-Herron v Parkwood Leisure Ltd – WLR Daily

Alemo-Herron v Parkwood Leisure Ltd (Case C-426/11); [2013] WLR (D) 288

“Article 3 of Council Directive 2001/23/EC precluded a member state from providing, in the event of a transfer of an undertaking, that dynamic clauses referring to collective agreements negotiated and adopted after the date of transfer were enforceable against the transferee, where that transferee did not have the possibility of participating in the negotiation process of such collective agreements concluded after the date of the transfer.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and others v Asda Stores Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2013 in appeals, EC law, law reports, trade marks by sally

Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and others v Asda Stores Ltd (Case C-252/12); [2013] WLR (D) 287

“‘Genuine use’ within the meaning of article 15(1) and article 51(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 could be fulfilled where a Community figurative mark was used only in conjunction with a Community word mark which was superimposed over it, and the combination of those two marks was, furthermore, itself registered as a Community trade mark, to the extent that the differences between the form in which that trade mark was used and that in which it was registered did not change the distinctive character of that trade mark as registered. Where a Community trade mark was not registered in colour, but the proprietor had used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it had become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party used in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark were relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage pursuant to article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009. The fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringed the registered trade mark was itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it used for the representation of that sign was relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Benedetti v Sawiris and others – WLR Daily

Benedetti v Sawiris and others [2013] UKSC 50; [2013] WLR (D) 286

“A restitutionary award made on the basis of unjust enrichment where the benefit was in the form of services was normally to be assessed by reference to the objective market value of the services, tested by the price which a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have had to pay for the services, and taking into account conditions which increased or decreased the objective value of the benefit to any reasonable person in that position.”

WLR Daily, 17th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk