Teal Assurance Company Limited (Appellant) v W R Berkley Insurance (Europe) Limited and another (Respondents) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 31st July 2013
Category: law reports
R v Hughes (Appellant) – Supreme Court
R v Hughes (Appellant) [2013] UKSC 56 UKSC 2011/0240 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 31st July 2013
Vernon Knight Associates v Cornwall County Council – WLR Daily
Vernon Knight Associates v Cornwall County Council [2013] EWCA Civ 950; [2013] WLR (D) 329
“A landowner owed a measured duty in both negligence and nuisance to take reasonable steps to prevent natural occurrences on his land from causing damage to neighbouring properties. In determining the content of that duty, the court had to consider what was fair, just and reasonable as between the neighbouring parties, having regard to all the circumstances including the extent of the foreseeable risk, the available preventive measures, the costs of such measures and the parties’ resources.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Hobbs v Financial Conduct Authority (formerly Financial Services Authority) – WLR Daily
“A decision by the Financial Services Authority to take no further action against the addressee of a warning notice or decision notice did not become irrevocable or take effect as a discontinuance of proceedings unless it had been communicated to that individual by a notice in accordance with section 389 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Serious Organised Crime Agency v Azam – WLR Daily
Serious Organised Crime Agency v Azam [2013] EWCA Civ 970; [2013] WLR (D) 327
“Where a person who was the subject of a property freezing order made under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 applied for the order to be varied so as to permit him to apply some of his assets which were the subject of the order in paying for his legal expenses, he was under no specific burden of proof requiring him to prove that there were no other available assets which could be used for the relevant purpose, such that if he did not discharge the burden his application must fail.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (MA and others) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Equality and Human Rights Commission and another intervening) – WLR Daily
“The refusal of the Secretary of State to exclude some disabled persons from the changes introduced into the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 by the Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2012, and the provision made by way of access to discretionary housing payments, constituted a proportionate approach to difficulties which those persons faced.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
BAILII: Recent Decisions
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Bennett v Southwell [2013] EWHC 2382 (QB) (01 August 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Jones & Anor v First Greater Western Ltd [2013] EWHC 1485 (Ch) (25 April 2013)
Fenty & Ors v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd (t/a Topshop) & Anor [2013] EWHC 2310 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
Hemsley & Anor v Graham & Ors [2013] EWHC 2232 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
Sharab v HRH Al-Saud [2013] EWHC 2324 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
Bestrustees Plc v Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Ltd [2013] EWHC 2407 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
Pickenham Romford Ltd v Deville [2013] EWHC 2330 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
Carman v Bucci [2013] EWHC 2371 (Ch) (31 July 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
DN (A Child), Re [2013] EWHC 2401 (Fam) (12 July 2013)
C (A Child), Re [2013] EWHC 2408 (Fam) (19 July 2013)
E (A Child), Re [2013] EWHC 2400 (Fam) (30 July 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Amlin Corporate Member Ltd & Ors v Oriental Assurance Corp [2013] EWHC 2380 (Comm) (31 July 2013)
Alpstream AG & Ors v PK Airfinance Sarl & Anor [2013] EWHC 2370 (Comm) (31 July 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Source: www.bailii.org
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Supreme Court
Hughes, R. v [2013] UKSC 56 (31 July 2013)
Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd [2013] UKSC 59 (31 July 2013)
McGraddie v McGraddie & Anor (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 58 (31 July 2013)
Teal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd [2013] UKSC 57 (31 July 2013)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
O’Leary v R [2013] EWCA Crim 1371 (31 July 2013)
Ahmed v R [2013] EWCA Crim 1393 (31 July 2013)
Banfield & Anor, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 1394 (31 July 2013)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Park Cakes Ltd v Shumba & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 974 (31 July 2013)
MacKay & Anor v Ashwood Enterprises Ltd & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 959 (31 July 2013)
Kebede & Anor, R (on the application of) v Newcastle City Council [2013] EWCA Civ 960 (31 July 2013)
PM v MB & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 969 (31 July 2013)
Price & Anor v Nunn [2013] EWCA Civ 1002 (31 July 2013)
Jetivia SA & Anor v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 968 (31 July 2013)
The Serious Organised Crime Agency v Azam [2013] EWCA Civ 970 (31 July 2013)
Fox v British Airways Plc [2013] EWCA Civ 972 (31 July 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Tamiz v Guardian News & Media Ltd [2013] EWHC 2339 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Parkin & Ors v Alba Proteins Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 2036 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Navaratnam v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2383 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 2298 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Mama Group Ltd & Anor v Sinclair & Anor [2013] EWHC 2374 (QB) (30 July 2013)
Nicholas v Ministry of Defence [2013] EWHC 2351 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Bennett v Southwell [2013] EWHC 2382 (QB) (01 August 2013)
Cooper v Bright Horizons Family Solutions Ltd [2013] EWHC 2349 (QB) (31 July 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
Regina v Hughes – WLR Daily
Regina v Hughes [2013] UKSC 56; [2013] WLR (D) 324
“When a defendant who was uninsured, unlicensed or disqualified was driving his vehicle on a road and it was involved in a collision which resulted in the death of another person, the defendant could not be found guilty of the offence under section 3ZB of the Road Traffic Act 1988, as inserted, of causing the death by driving while committing such offences unless the prosecution proved that there had been some act or omission in the defendant’s driving which amounted to fault his part and which had contributed to the death. If the defendant’s driving had been faultless he could not be found guilty of the offence merely because his vehicle was on the road and was involved in a fatal accident when he was driving without insurance or a driving licence.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
McGraddie v McGraddie and another – WLR Daily
McGraddie v McGraddie and another [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] WLR (D) 323
“An appellate court should not interfere with the trial judge’s conclusions on primary facts unless it was satisfied that he was plainly wrong.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Kebede and another) v Newcastle City Council – WLR Daily
Regina (Kebede and another) v Newcastle City Council [2013] EWCA Civ 960; [2013] WLR (D) 322
“A local authority had a duty to a former relevant child going on to higher education to make a grant to meet expenses connected with his education, including the major expense of tuition fees.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd – WLR Daily
Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd [2013] UKSC 59; [2013] WLR (D) 321
“For the purposes of a prosecution under regulation 44(1)(d) of the Food Labelling Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/1499) it was sufficient for the prosecutor to prove that a defendant had food in its possession for the purposes of sale which was the subject of a label showing a “use by” date which had passed.”
WLR Daily, 31st July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Sud v Ealing London Borough Council – WLR Daily
Sud v Ealing London Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 949; [2013] WLR (D) 320
“Although an award of costs against a paying party in the employment tribunal was an exceptional event, the tribunal should focus principally on the criteria established in rule 40 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004. Where the tribunal concluded that the party’s conduct of the proceedings had been unreasonable it was necessary for the court to identify the particular unreasonable conduct, along with its effect. That was not a process that entailed a detailed or minute assessment, but instead the court should adopt a broad brush approach, against the background of the totality of the relevant circumstances.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Bedfordshire Police Constabulary v RU and another – WLR Daily
Bedfordshire Police Constabulary v RU and another [2013] EWHC 2350 (Fam); [2013] WLR (D) 319
“There was no power whereby a police force could apply for a person to be committed to prison for contempt of court for breach of a forced marriage protection order where the police themselves were not the applicants who had obtained the order. The relevant departments of state should give urgent consideration to improving the effectiveness of forced marriage protection orders and the means of enforcement.”
WLR Daily, 26th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Chapman – WLR Daily
Regina v Chapman [2013] EWCA Crim 1370; [2013] WLR (D) 318
“Once an appeal had been constituted by filing a notice of appeal in time or by obtaining an extension of time from the court, the order of the court below was subject to review and not final and the court could not justify refusing to allow the defendant to take advantage of a change in the law which occurred between the filing of the notice of appeal and the hearing itself.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Lloyd v Lewisham London Borough Council and another – WLR Daily
Lloyd v Lewisham London Borough Council and another [2013] EWCA Civ 923; [2013] WLR (D) 317
“Paragraph 14(1)(e) of Schedule 5 to the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 and paragraph 15(1)(e) of Schedule 4 to the Council Tax Benefit Regulations 2006, both of which set out the items of income to be disregarded when calculating a claimant’s income and capital for the purposes of determining entitlement to the relevant benefit, only excluded sums paid under agreements which were made after the injury occurred, not an income loss award paid exclusively for loss of income pursuant to a pre-injury agreement.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Generics (UK) Ltd (trading as Mylan) v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd and another (No 2) – WLR Daily
“Where a patent specification made a technical effect “plausible” it was open to a party to mount a challenge to the existence of that effect by the use of later evidence. There was no principled objection to the admission of evidence as to the true nature of the advance made by the invention in connection with an objection of lack of inventive step.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
In re Tulane Education Fund; Tulane Education Fund v Comptroller General of Patents – WLR DAily
“Paragraph 5 of Schedule 4A of the Patents Act 1977, rule 116 of the Patents Rules 2007 and rule 6 of the Patents (Fees) Rules 2007 imposed a regime for the payment of annual fees in accordance with article 12 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 and Council Regulation (EC) No 469/2009. The reference to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 in section 128B of the 1977 Act could be construed as a reference to the Council Regulation (EC) No 469/2009.”
WLR Daily, 24th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others – WLR Daily
Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others [2013] EWHC 2119 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 314
“The well established requirement for disclosure under Norwich Pharmacal principles for a party from whom disclosure was sought to be “involved” in or to have “facilitated” wrongdoing was too narrow and the court should ask itself whether the party was a mere witness or whether its engagement with the wrongdoing was sufficient to make it more than a mere witness and susceptible to the court’s jurisdiction to order disclosure.”
WLR Daily, 12th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Evans) v Her Majesty’s Attorney General – WLR Daily
Regina (Evans) v Her Majesty’s Attorney General [2013] EWHC 1960 (Admin); [2013] WLR (D) 313
“Section 53(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 required the existence of reasonable grounds before a certificate could be given by an accountable person and if reasonable grounds did not exist the certificate was invalid and of no effect. Further, a certificate under section 53(2) could validly be issued with regard to environmental information.”
WLR Daily, 9th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
