law reports – Page 172 – Current Awareness

“There was no such thing in English law as a ‘remedial constructive contract’ and the courts had no jurisdiction to subject parties to contractual obligations under a contract to which neither they, not the only undisputed parties to the contract had ever agreed or intended they should be subject. The Court of Appeal was bound to uphold the principle that it was appropriate to pierce the corporate veil only where special circumstances existed indicating that it was only a façade concealing the true facts. The veil-piercing principle had been developed pragmatically for the purpose of providing a practical solution in particular factual circumstances and could not be invoked wherever it was necessary to do so in the interests of justice and no unconnected third party was involved.”

WLR Daily, 20th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys v Registrar of Trade Marks – WLR Daily

Posted June 22nd, 2012 in EC law, law reports, patents by sally

Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys v Registrar of Trade Marks: Case C-307/10; [2012] WLR (D) 180

“It was a requirement of Parliament and Council Directive 2008/95/EC on trade marks that the goods and services for which the protection of the trade mark was sought should be identified by the applicant with sufficient clarity and precision to enable the competent authorities and economic operators, on that basis alone, to determine the extent of the protection conferred by the trade mark.”

WLR Daily, 19th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 21st, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

I, R & T, R. v [2012] EWCA Crim 1288 (21 June 2012)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Giles v Tarry & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 837 (21 June 2012)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Paton & Anor v Todd [2012] EWHC 1696 (Ch) (21 June 2012)

Helmsley Acceptances Ltd v Ali & Anor [2012] EWHC 1591 (Ch) (14 June 2012)

Healthcare Management Services Ltd v Caremark Properties Ltd [2012] EWHC 1693 (Ch) (29 May 2012)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Lamari, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 1630 (Admin) (18 June 2012)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Aveng (Africa) Ltd v Gabonese Republic & Anor [2012] EWHC 1687 (Comm) (18 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA – WLR Daily

Posted June 21st, 2012 in appeals, charterparties, delay, industrial action, law reports by sally

Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA [2012] EWCA Civ 838; [2012] WLR (D) 179

“The strike clause in a berth charter had the effect of transferring the liability for delay on discharging the cargo caused by strikes at the port from the charterer to the owner, whether the delay occurred at the quayside during cargo handling operations or while the vessel was at the port waiting to berth.”

WLR Daily, 19th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

Posted June 21st, 2012 in appeals, asylum, crimes against humanity, immigration, law reports, refugees, treaties by sally

SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 807; [2012] WLR (D) 178

“The Secretary of State was entitled to refuse asylum to a woman who had participated in two farm evictions in Zimbabwe on the grounds that her participation in the evictions was a crime against humanity under article 1F(a) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The refusal was lawful even though the Secretary of State accepted that she would face a real risk of being subject to serious ill-treatment if returned to Zimbabwe, sufficient to breach her rights under article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”

WLR Daily, 19th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 21st, 2012 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa [2012] UKSC 25 (20 June 2012)

BH & Anor v The Lord Advocate & Anor (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 24 (20 June 2012)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Fadairo v R [2012] EWCA Crim 1292 (20 June 2012)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 808 (20 June 2012)

Kell v Durham Police Authority [2012] EWCA Civ 809 (20 June 2012)

London Borough of Camden v Stafford [2012] EWCA Civ 839 (20 June 2012)

Hutton v First Tier Tribunal (Criminal Injuries Compensation) & Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority [2012] EWCA Civ 806 (14 June 2012)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Nicolaou, R (on the application of) v Redbridge Magistrates’ Court & Anor [2012] EWHC 1647 (Admin) (20 June 2012)

JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association & Ors v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office & Anor [2012] EWHC 1674 (Admin) (20 June 2012)

Sullivan v The Government of the United States of America & Anor [2012] EWHC 1680 (Admin) (20 June 2012)

High Court (Family Division)

Tower Hamlets v MK & Ors [2012] EWHC 426 (Fam) (02 March 2012)

X v X [2012] EWHC 538 (Fam) (16 March 2012)

A Local Authority v A Mother & Ors [2012] EWHC 1637 (Fam) (15 June 2012)

HSE Ireland v SF (A Minor) [2012] EWHC 1640 (Fam) (15 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

XX (Ethiopia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JUSTICE intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted June 20th, 2012 in appeals, deportation, evidence, human rights, law reports, terrorism, torture by sally

XX (Ethiopia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JUSTICE intervening) [2012] EWCA Civ 742; [2012] WLR (D) 177

“The rule on the exclusion of evidence obtained by torture was exceptional. It was not an abuse of process to admit evidence from security service officers obtained in secret detention facilities.”

WLR Daily, 15th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Hutton and others v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority – WLR Daily

Posted June 20th, 2012 in appeals, criminal injuries compensation, homicide, law reports, time limits by sally

Hutton and others v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority [2012] EWCA Civ 806; [2012] WLR (D) 176

“‘Particular circumstances’ in para 18 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2001, which provided that a claims officer could waive the two-year time limit within which claims for compensation in respect of criminal injury should be brought pursuant to the scheme, meant the actual or distinct circumstances of the individual case, not special circumstances in the sense of being unusual or extraordinary circumstances.”

WLR Daily, 14th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 20th, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

SK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 807 (19 June 2012)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Price & Anor v Nunn [2012] EWHC 1605 (Ch) (13 June 2012)

High Court (Admiralty Court)

Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd & Anor [2012] EWHC 1612 (Admlty) (15 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 19th, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA [2012] EWCA Civ 838 (19 June 2012)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Entrust Pension Ltd v Prospect Hospice Ltd & Anor [2012] EWHC 1666 (Ch) (18 June 2012)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Mhlanga, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 1587 (Admin) (12 June 2012)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Moloobhoy v Moloobhoy [2012] EWHC 1670 (Comm) (19 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

Interim payments: the Eeles fallout – Cloisters

Posted June 19th, 2012 in damages, law reports, news, periodical payments, personal injuries by sally

“The Court of Appeal’s decision in Eeles v Cobham Hire Services Ltd [2010] 1 WLR 409 has profoundly affected the ability of claimants to secure adequate accommodation prior to a quantum trial or settlement. This aim of this talk is to consider how Eeles has been applied in subsequent first instance cases, and the lessons to be learned from them in preparing, evidencing and arguing heavy interim payment applications.”

Full story

Cloisters, 13th June 2012

Source: www.cloisters.com

Auto 24 SARL v Jaguar Land Rover France SAS – WLR Daily

Posted June 18th, 2012 in competition, EC law, law reports by sally

Auto 24 SARL v Jaguar Land Rover France SAS (Case C-158/11); [2012] WLR (D) 175

“It had to be possible to verify the precise content of ‘specified criteria’ upon which a quantitative selective distribution system in the motor vehicle sector was granted pursuant to article 1(1)(f) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of 31 July 2002 on the application of article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector (OJ 2002 L203, p 30).”

WLR Daily, 14th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

There is a democratic deficit in the courts… here’s how to fill it – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted June 18th, 2012 in disclosure, elections, internet, judiciary, law reports, news, parliament by sally

“The current Government often complains about a ‘democratic deficit’ in the courts. It seems that ‘unelected judges’ are making important decisions on social policy without any kind of democratic mandate, particularly in controversial human rights cases.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 17th June 2012

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 18th, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Page & Anor v Hewetts Solicitors & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 805 (15 June 2012)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Mabanga v Ophir Energy Plc & Anor [2012] EWHC 1589 (QB) (15 June 2012)

London Borough of Southwark v Ofogba [2012] EWHC 1620 (QB) (15 June 2012)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Dalriada Trustees Ltd v Woodward & Ors [2012] EWHC 21626 (Ch) (15 June 2012)

High Court (Family Division)

The X Primary Care Trust v XB & Anor [2012] EWHC 1390 (Fam) (01 May 2012)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Gurung & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 1629 (Admin) (15 June 2012)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Unaoil Ltd v Amona Ranhill Consortium Sdn Bhd [2012] EWHC 1595 (Comm) (13 June 2012)

Coles & Ors v Hetherton & Ors [2012] EWHC 1599 (Comm) (15 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 15th, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Napoli v R. [2012] EWCA Crim 1129 (25 May 2012)

High Court (Commercial Court)

BP Oil International Ltd v Target Shipping Ltd [2012] EWHC 1590 (Comm) (14 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 14th, 2012 in law reports by sally

High Court (Chancery Division)

Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) (25 May 2012)

High Court (Patents Court)

Smith & Nephew Plc v Convatec Technologies Inc [2012] EWHC 1602 (Pat) (13 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted June 13th, 2012 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Fitzhugh v Fitzhugh [2012] EWCA Civ 694 (01 June 2012)

Cathie & Anor v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2012] EWCA Civ 739 (01 June 2012)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Hampshire Constabulary & Anor v Bullale [2012] EWHC 1549 (QB) (12 June 2012)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Goldspan Ltd v Patel [2012] EWHC 1447 (Ch) (01 June 2012)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Elliott & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2012] EWHC 1574 (Admin) (12 June 2012)

Hemming (t/a Simply Pleasure Ltd) & Ors v Westminster City Council [2012] EWHC 1582 (Admin) (12 June 2012)

Source: www.bailii.org

Patel and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

Posted June 12th, 2012 in appeals, immigration, law reports, removal directions by sally

Patel and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 741; [2012] WLR (D) 174

“The decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to refuse an extension of leave to remain in the United Kingdom was not invalidated by the fact that she had made no removal direction in respect of the applicant at the same time as or shortly after the refusal of the extension application.”

WLR Daily, 1st June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk