Category: law reports

Novartis AG v Hospira UK Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted May 22nd, 2013 in appeals, injunctions, law reports, patents by sally

Novartis AG v Hospira UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 1285 (Pat); [2013] WLR (D) 184

“When considering an application for an interim injunction pending an appeal, the court must not mechanically equate the existence of a real prospect of success on an appeal by a losing party with that of a good arguable case on the merits at the outset of proceedings prior to trial so that the granting of an interim injunction at the outset of proceedings before the parties’ rights had been decided would automatically justify an interim injunction pending an appeal.”

WLR Daily, 14th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc and another – WLR Daily

Posted May 21st, 2013 in civil procedure rules, evidence, law reports, reports by sally

Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc and another [2013] EWHC 936 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 183

“CPR Pt 35 controlled the giving of evidence by experts as so defined and did not control the admission of other types of evidence which might be described as expert evidence.”

WLR Daily, 15th April 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 21st, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 554 (20 May 2013)

Trail Riders Fellowship & Anor, R (on the application of) v Dorset County Council & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 553 (20 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v The Police Medical Appeal Board [2013] EWHC 1203 (Admin) (17 May 2013)

Rehman, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State of the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1280 (Admin) (17 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Joyce v O’Brien and another – WLR Daily

Posted May 20th, 2013 in causation, ex turpi causa, joint enterprise, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by sally

Joyce v O’Brien and another [2013] EWCA Civ 546; [2013] WLR (D) 182

“Where the character of a joint criminal enterprise was such that it was foreseeable that a party or parties might be subject to unusual or increased risks of harm as a consequence of the activities of the parties in pursuance of their criminal objectives, and the risk materialised, the harm could properly be said to have been caused by the criminal act of the party suffering it even if it resulted from the negligent or intentional act of another party to the criminal enterprise. Therefore, in such circumstances the principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio would provide the negligent party with a defence to a claim for negligence by the injured party.”

WLR Daily, 17th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and others – WLR Daily

Posted May 20th, 2013 in appeals, charities, environmental protection, fisheries, joint liability, law reports by sally

Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and others [2013] EWCA Civ 544; [2013] WLR (D) 181

“In order for a party to be liable as a joint tortfeasor by virtue of doing acts in furtherance of a common design to do acts that were tortious, it was not a requirement that the party’s acts had been an essential part of or of real significance to the commission of the tort.”

WLR Daily, 16th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted May 20th, 2013 in appeals, homelessness, housing, law reports, local government by sally

Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 515; [2013] WLR (D) 180

“When assessing an applicant’s priority need for accommodation under section 189(1)(c) of the Housing Act 1996 the local housing authority was entitled to consider evidence of personal support and assistance provided by a family member which would continue should the applicant become street homeless. The weight to be given to the evidence was a separate and important consideration. The reviewing officer was required to assess the vulnerability of the applicant as it would be when he was made homeless.”

WLR Daily, 15th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 20th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Willock & Ors v Corus UK Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 519 (17 May 2013)

Birmingham City Council v James & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 552 (17 May 2013)

Joyce v O’Brien & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 546 (17 May 2013)

A (a child), Re (a child) [2013] EWCA Civ 543 (16 May 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

MR (A Child) [2013] EWHC 1156 (Fam) (07 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Azaroal, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1248 (Admin) (17 May 2013)

UK Uncut Legal Action Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2013] EWHC 1283 (Admin) (16 May 2013)

EO & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1236 (Admin) (17 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Preston (formerly Moore) v President of the Methodist Conference – WLR Daily

Posted May 17th, 2013 in Christianity, employment, law reports, Supreme Court, unfair dismissal by sally

Preston (formerly Moore) v President of the Methodist Conference [2013 UKSC 29; [2013] WLR (D) 179

“The basis for the rights and duties of an ordained minister of the Methodist Church were to be found in the constitutional provisions of the church and not in any arrangement of a kind which could amount to a contract. Therefore a Methodist minister was not an ’employee’ of the church for the purposes of section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and was not entitled to bring proceedings for unfair dismissal against the church.”

WLR Daily, 15th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 16th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

R. v Kallakis & Anor [2013] EWCA Crim 709 (16 May 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Environment Agency v Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd & Anor, R. (On the application of) [2013] EWCA Civ 542 (16 May 2013)

D & G Cars Ltd v Essex Police Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 514 (16 May 2013)

Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 544 (16 May 2013)

Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) v O’Docherty & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 518 (16 May 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Thames Chambers Solicitors v Miah (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC 1245 (QB) (16 May 2013)

Cussens v Realreed Ltd [2013] EWHC 1229 (QB) (15 May 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Marks and Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1279 (Ch) (16 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Soor & Anor v London Borough of Redbridge [2013] EWHC 1239 (Admin) (16 May 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Humpuss Intermoda Transportasi Tbk Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1240 (Comm) (16 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Regina (F) v Director of Public Prosecutions – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in consent, Crown Prosecution Service, law reports, prosecutions, rape by sally

Regina (F) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 945 (Admin); [2013] WLR (D) 178

“For the purposes of an offence of rape contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003, choice was crucial to the issue of ‘consent’ to sexual intercourse. Evidence relating to ‘choice’ and the ‘freedom’ to make any particular choice had to be approached in a broad common sense way. Where a man deliberately ignored the basis of his partner’s consent to penetration as a manifestation of his control over her consent to penetration could be vitiated and give rise to a conviction for rape.”

WLR Daily, 24th April 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (A) v Lowestoft Magistrates’ Court – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in children, law reports, local government, reporting restrictions by sally

Regina (A) v Lowestoft Magistrates’ Court [2013] EWHC 659 (Admin); [2013] WLR (D) 177

“The child specifically referred to in any charge under section 2(1) of the Licensing Act 1902 was a subject of criminal proceedings which were taken ‘in respect of’, and thus “concerned”, that child for the purposes of the court’s power to impose reporting restrictions under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.”

WLR Daily, 26th March 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

PC ( by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) and another v City of York Council – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in appeals, cohabitation, law reports, learning difficulties, local government, mental health by sally

PC (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) and another v City of York Council [2013] EWCA Civ 478; [2013] WLR (D) 176

“The test for whether a person had capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to decide was specific to the decision in question in its particular factual matrix and context.”

WLR Daily, 1st May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Johal – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in appeals, confiscation, criminal procedure, delay, law reports by sally

Regina v Johal [2013] EWCA Crim 647; [2013] WLR (D) 175

“When a court postponed confiscation proceedings the omission of a ‘specified period’ of postponement was plainly a procedural rather than a substantive error so that a court would not be deprived of its duty to make a confiscation order where such a breach did not prejudice the defendant in any way. Alternatively, if such a failure was indeed procedural it would fall within the ambit of section 14(11) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 which stipulated that such a failure should not be the basis for quashing an otherwise valid confiscation order.”

WLR Daily, 19th April 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (William Hill Organization Ltd) v Horserace Betting Levy Board and others – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in appeals, gambling, horse racing, law reports by sally

Regina (William Hill Organization Ltd) v Horserace Betting Levy Board and others [2013] EWCA Civ 487; [2013] WLR (D) 174

“A customer which as part of its business did betting on a betting exchange did not receive or negotiate bets so was not a bookmaker for the purposes of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 and was not liable to pay the horserace betting levy.”

WLR Daily, 3rd May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Loveridge v Lambeth London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted May 16th, 2013 in appeals, damages, harassment, landlord & tenant, law reports, local government, repossession, valuation by sally

Loveridge v Lambeth London Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 494; [2013] WLR (D) 173

“The valuation required by section 28(1) of the Housing Act 1988, in respect of damages for unlawful eviction under section 27, required that the propensity for the rights of a tenant of a local authority to change from those of a secure tenant to those of an assured tenant on a sale of the reversion to a private landlord was to be factored into the hypothetical valuation of the landlord’s interest subject to the tenant’s rights.”

WLR Daily, 10th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

The President of the Methodist Conference (Appellant) v Preston (Respondent) – Supreme Court

Posted May 16th, 2013 in Christianity, employment, law reports, Supreme Court, unfair dismissal by sally

The President of the Methodist Conference (Appellant) v Preston (Respondent) [2013] UKSC 29 | UKSC 2012/0015 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 15th May 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 16th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Methodist Conference v Preston (Rev 1) [2013] UKSC 29 (15 May 2013)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Odegbune & Ors v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 711 (15 May 2013)

Norris v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 712 (15 May 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Doy v Gunn [2013] EWCA Civ 547 (08 May 2013)

Hotak v London Borough of Southwark (Rev 1) [2013] EWCA Civ 515 (15 May 2013)

Watson, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames [2013] EWCA Civ 513 (15 May 2013)

United Marine Aggregates Ltd. v GM Welding & Engineering Ltd & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 516 (14 May 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Fons HF v Corporal Ltd [2013] EWHC 1278 (Ch) (09 May 2013)

Kemsley v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2013] EWHC 1274 (Ch) (15 May 2013)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Hammersmatch Properties (Welwyn) Ltd v Saint -Gobain Ceramics and Plastics Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1161 (TCC) (14 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 15th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Mellor & Ors v Partridge & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 477 (03 May 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

IH (A Child) (Permission to Apply for Adoption) [2013] EWHC 1235 (Fam) (14 May 2013)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Public Safety Charitable Trust v Milton Keynes Council [2013] EWHC 1237 (Admin) (14 May 2013)

High Court (Patents Court)

Swarovski-Optik KG v Leica Camera AG & Anor [2013] EWHC 1227 (Pat) (10 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted May 14th, 2013 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Dossett, R v [2013] EWCA Crim 710 (14 May 2013)

Turnbull, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 676 (18 April 2013)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Hamid (t/a Hamid Properties) v Francis Bradshaw Partnership [2013] EWCA Civ 470 (02 May 2013)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

The Serious Organised Crime Agency v Namli & Ors [2013] EWHC 1200 (QB) (10 May 2013)

ABK v KDT & Anor [2013] EWHC 1192 (QB) (13 May 2013)

Ashcourt Rowan Financial Planning Ltd v Hall [2013] EWHC 1185 (QB) (10 May 2013)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Golstein v Bishop [2013] EWHC 881 (Ch) (02 May 2013)

High Court (Family Division)

DR v GR & Ors (Financial Remedy: Variation of Overseas Trust) [2013] EWHC 1196 (Fam) (10 May 2013)

High Court (Commercial Court)

West Is West Distribution Ltd v Icon Film Distribution Ltd [2013] EWHC 1181 (Comm) (10 May 2013)

Source: www.bailii.org

Pitt and another v Holt and another; Futter and another v Futter and others – WLR Daily

Posted May 14th, 2013 in financial advice, law reports, mistake, Supreme Court, taxation, trusts by sally

Pitt and another v Holt and another; Futter and another v Futter and others [2013] UKSC 26; [2013] WLR (D) 172

“The court’s jurisdiction to intervene in a decision made by trustees who were acting within their power arose only if they could be shown to have acted in breach of duty. Trustees who wished to exercise a discretion which was within their powers and sought and acted on the advice of apparently competent professional advisers not in breach of duty merely because the professional advice turned out to be incorrect.”

WLR Daily, May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk