Uprichard (Appellant) v Scottish Ministers and another – Supreme Court
Uprichard (Appellant) v Scottish Ministers and another [2013] UKSC 21 | UKSC 2012/0034 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 24th April 2013
Category: law reports
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Supreme Court
Salvesen and Riddell & Anor v. The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 22 (24 April 2013)
Uprichard v Scottish Ministers & Anor (Scotland) [2013] UKSC 21 (24 April 2013)
Barts and the London NHS Trust v Verma [2013] UKSC 20 (24 April 2013)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Court)
Foye v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 475 (24 April 2013)
JFJ, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 569 (24 April 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Source: www.bailii.org
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Eco 3 Capital Ltd & Ors v Ludsin Overseas Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 413 (23 April 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Bateson & Anor v Savills Private Finance Ltd [2013] EWHC 719 (QB) (09 April 2013)
Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council v Burton & Ors [2013] EWHC 971 (QB) (26 March 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Chuah v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2013] EWHC 894 (Admin) (23 April 2013)
Iqbal v Wandsworth County Council [2013] EWHC 875 (Admin) (23 April 2013)
Ewing v London Borough of Camden [2013] EWHC 961 (Admin) (22 April 2013)
Patel v Government of India & Anor [2013] EWHC 819 (Admin) (18 April 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Singh & Anor v Sanghera & Ors [2013] EWHC 956 (Ch) (22 April 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
MO v Ro & Anor [2013] EWHC 392 (Fam) (01 March 2013)
Devon County Council v EB & Ors (Minors) [2013] EWHC 968 (Fam) (22 February 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Morris Homes (West Midlands) Ltd v Keay & Anor [2013] EWHC 932 (TCC) (18 April 2013)
RWE Npower Renewables Ltd v J N Bentley Ltd [2013] EWHC 978 (TCC) (22 April 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
HSBC Bank plc v Tambrook Jersey Ltd – WLR Daily
HSBC Bank plc v Tambrook Jersey Ltd [2013] EWHC 866 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 146
“The English court could not “assist” a foreign insolvency court for the purposes of section 426(4) of the Insolvency Act 1986 where there were no existing insolvency proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction or any intention to commence such proceedings.”
WLR Daily, 12th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
F, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 424 (14 March 2013)
Hursthouse, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 517 (15 March 2013)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Shop Direct Group & Ors v HM Revenue and Customs [2013] EWHC 942 (Ch) (19 April 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
L, R (on the application of) v Cumbria Constabulary [2013] EWHC 869 (Admin) (19 April 2013)
Ashton v The General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 943 (Admin) (19 April 2013)
High Court (Commercial Court)
(Granton Action) JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Ors [2013] EWHC 867 (Comm) (19 April 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Roche Diagnostics Ltd v The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2013] EWHC 933 (TCC) (19 April 2013)
High Court (Patents Court)
Nestec SA & Ors v Dualit Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 923 (Pat) (22 April 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
Boardman v Governing Body of Clarence High School and another – WLR Daily
“It was axiomatic that the Employment Appeal Tribunal could only interfere with the decision of an employment tribunal if it identified an error of law. In relation to unfair dismissal the appeal tribunal had to address the issue of whether the employment tribunal had found that the employer had satisfied the reasonable responses test and any criticisms of the employment tribunal were to be directed at that issue.”
WLR Daily, 15th March 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
George v Ministry of Justice – WLR Daily
George v Ministry of Justice [2013] EWCA Civ 324; [2013] WLR (D) 144
“A provision in a collective agreement allowing for time off in lieu within a specified period where a prison officer was requested to work extra hours was not contractual.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Colloseum Holding AG v Levi Strauss & Co – WLR Daily
Colloseum Holding AG v Levi Strauss & Co (Case C–12/12); [2013] WLR (D) 143
“The condition of ‘genuine use’ of a trade mark, within the meaning of article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark, was satisfied where a registered trade mark, which had become distinctive as a result of the use of another composite mark of which it constituted one of the elements, was used only through that other composite mark, or where it was used only in conjunction with another mark, and the combination of those two marks was, furthermore, itself registered as a trade mark.”
WLR Daily, 18th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Burridge v Breckland District Council & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 228 (19 April 2013)
Merck Canada Inc & Ors v Sigma Pharmaceuticals Plc [2013] EWCA Civ 326 (18 April 2013)
Wilkin -Shaw v Fuller & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 410 (18 April 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Dowland v The Architects Registration Board [2013] EWHC 893 (Admin) (19 April 2013)
Patel v Government of India & Anor [2013] EWHC 819 (Admin) (18 April 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Loose v Lynn Shellfish Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 901 (Ch) (18 April 2013)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Kuwait Rocks Co v AMN Bulkcarriers Inc [2013] EWHC 865 (Comm) (18 April 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Accentuate Ltd v Asigra Inc [2013] EWHC 889 (QB) (18 April 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Morris Homes (West Midlands) Ltd v Keay & Anor [2013] EWHC 932 (TCC) (18 April 2013)
Regina (Jones) v First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) – WLR Daily
“Where a tribunal found that a person who had committed suicide had been reckless as to whether his action would also cause injury to some other person, and it had in fact done so an offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 had been committed which was a ‘crime of violence’ entitling that other person to claim under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. However, the question as to what the offender had actually foreseen was for the First-tier Tribunal to answer, not an appellate court, which should not readily intervene in issues best left for determination by specialist appellate tribunals by classifying them as issues of law.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Reeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop – WLR Daily
Reeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop: [2013] EWCA Civ 362; [2013] WLR (D) 141
“In determining whether occupation of a houseboat was rateable the Valuation Tribunal had fallen into error by failing to treat duration of occupation as an important factor in its assessment.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Morris (Daryl) – WLR Daily
Regina v Morris (Daryl): [2013] WLR (D) 140
“Where a defendant raised the defence of using reasonable force in the prevention of crime, under section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967, it would be necessary for the jury to focus first on what the defendant honestly believed were the facts before using their conclusions as to that belief to go on to decide whether the defendant had reasonable grounds for suspecting an offence was being committed and whether the force he used to prevent that crime had been reasonable.”
WLR Daily, 16th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Jones (by Caldwell) (Respondent) v First Tier Tribunal (Respondent) and Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (Appellant) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 17th April 2013
Public Relations Consultants Association Limited (Appellant) v The Newspaper Licensing Agency Limited and others (Respondents) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 17th April 2013
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Supreme Court
Jones v First Tier Tribunal & Anor (Rev 1) [2013] UKSC 19 (17 April 2013)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Dixon v R [2013] EWCA Crim 465 (17 April 2013)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Woolway (Valuation Officer) v Mazars LLP [2013] EWCA Civ 368 (17 April 2013)
Olympic Airlines SA v ACG Acquisition XX LLC [2013] EWCA Civ 369 (17 April 2013)
Reeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop [2013] EWCA Civ 362 (17 April 2013)
George v The Ministry of Justice [2013] EWCA Civ 324 (17 April 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Banwaitt v Dewji [2013] EWHC 879 (QB) (17 April 2013)
Renpower Investments Ltd v Clark Willmott LLP & Anor [2013] EWHC 800 (QB) (17 April 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
High Court (Family Division)
A and S (Children) v Lancashire County Council [2013] EWHC 851 (Fam) (17 April 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Cosford & Ors v R [2013] EWCA Crim 466 (16 April 2013)
Cairns v R [2013] EWCA Crim 467 (16 April 2013)
Morris v R [2013] EWCA Crim 436 (16 April 2013)
Khan & Ors v R [2013] EWCA Crim 468 (16 April 2013)
Foran v R [2013] EWCA Crim 437 (16 April 2013)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Obiorah v London Borough of Lewisham [2013] EWCA Civ 325 (12 April 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Smith v Dha [2013] EWHC 838 (QB) (12 April 2013)
Ecclestone v Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2013] EWHC 790 (QB) (12 April 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
CF v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 843 (Admin) (12 April 2013)
Dr EY v General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 860 (Admin) (15 April 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
HSBC Bank v Tambrook Jersey Ltd [2013] EWHC 866 (Ch) (12 April 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
FT and NT (Children), Re [2013] EWHC 850 (Fam) (11 April 2013)
DW (A Minor) & Anor v SG [2013] EWHC 854 (Fam) (12 April 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Murray & Anor v Neil Dowlman Architecture Ltd [2013] EWHC 872 (TCC) (16 April 2013)
West & Anor v Ian Finlay & Associates (A Firm) [2013] EWHC 868 (TCC) (16 April 2013)
Lazari v London & Newcastle (Camden) Ltd [2013] EWHC 812 (TCC) (15 April 2013)
Manolete Partners Plc v Hastings Borough Council [20131 EWHC 842 (TCC) (12 April 2013)
High Court (Commercial Court)
FXCM Securities v Digby [2013] EWHC 762 (Comm) (15 February 2013)
High Court (Patents Court)
Resolution Chemicals Ltd v H. Lundbeck A/S [2013] EWHC 739 (Pat) (12 April 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
Regina (Bibi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (Ali) v Same(Liberty and Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants intervening) – WLR Daily
“The requirement that a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or person settled in the United Kingdom produce a test certificate of knowledge of the English language to a prescribed standard prior to entering the United Kingdom was proportionate.”
WLR Daily, 12th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Flatman v Germany(Law Society intervening); Weddall v Barchester Health Care Ltd (Same intervening) – WLR Daily
“The funding of a client’s disbursements by a solicitor did not, without more, justify the making of an adverse costs order against that solicitor.”
WLR Daily, 10th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
HK Danmark (acting on behalf of Ring) v Dansk almennyttigt Boligselskab; HK Danmark (acting on behalf of Skouboe Werge) v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening (acting on behalf of Pro Display A/S (in liquidation)) – WLR Daily
“The concept of ‘disability’ in Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation included a condition caused by an illness medically diagnosed as curable or incurable where that illness entailed a limitation which resulted in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments which in interaction with various barriers might hinder the full and effective participation of the person concerned in professional life on an equal basis with other workers, and where the limitation was a long term one.”
WLR Daily, 11th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Edwards and another) v Environment Agency and others (No 2) – WLR Daily
Regina (Edwards and another) v Environment Agency and others (No 2) (C-260/11); [2013] WLR (D) 136
“The requirement pursuant to article 10a of Council Directive 85/337/EEC and article 15a of Council Directive 96/61/EC that the review by members of the public of the legality of environmental decisions by public law bodies should not be “prohibitively expensive” meant that the members of the public covered by those provisions should not be prevented from seeking or pursuing a claim for judicial review by reason of the financial burden that might arise.”
WLR Daily, 11th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
