Category: law reports

Cusack v Harrow London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted December 9th, 2011 in footpaths, injunctions, law reports, road safety, roads by sally

Cusack v Harrow London Borough Council: [2011] EWCA Civ 1514;  [2011] WLR (D)  357

“A highway authority had power under section 66(2) of the Highways Act 1980, but not under section 80, to erect posts so as to prevent vehicular access to a frontager’s forecourt in order to safeguard users of the highway. If the highway authority exercised that power the frontager would become entitled to compensation under section 66(8) of the 1980 Act.”

WLR Daily, 7th December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Russell and others v Transocean International Rescources Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted December 9th, 2011 in EC law, holiday pay, law reports, offshore installations, working time by sally

Russell and others v Transocean International Rescources Ltd and others: [2011] UKSC 57;  [2011] WLR (D)  356

“Employees working on oil and gas installations in the North Sea whose contract of employment provided for a repeating shift pattern of two weeks’ work on the rig, followed by two weeks onshore on non-working ‘field break’, were not entitled to take their statutory holiday entitlement during time when they had been scheduled to work offshore.”

WLR Daily, 7th December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Islington London Borough Council v Boyle and another – WLR Daily

Posted December 9th, 2011 in housing, law reports, local government, repossession by sally

Islington London Borough Council v Boyle and another: [2011] EWCA Civ 1450;  [2011] WLR (D)  355

“Guidance on the principles to be applied when determining whether a tenant occupied a dwelling-house as his only or principal home within section 81 of the Housing Act 1985.”

WLR Daily, 6th December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Revenue and Customs Comrs v PA Holdings Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted December 8th, 2011 in appeals, dividends, income tax, law reports by sally

Revenue and Customs Comrs v PA Holdings Ltd: [2011] EWCA Civ 1414;  [2011] WLR (D)  354

“Once it was established that payments awarded to employees in the form of shares and dividends were income received from employment the payments were liable to be charged under Schedule E and could not be charged under any other Schedule.”

WLR Daily, 30th November 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Elmi – WLR Daily

Posted December 8th, 2011 in appeals, benefits, law reports by sally

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Elmi: [2011] EWCA Civ 1403;  [2011] WLR (D)  353

“A person from abroad who had ticked a form at a job centre to confirm she was seeking work and then applied for income support satisfied the requirement in article 7(3)(c) of the Citizens Direction that she was registered as a job seeker and was entitled to income support.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted December 8th, 2011 in appeals, insurance, law reports, warranties by sally

In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others: [2011] EWCA Civ 1413;  [2011] WLR (D)  352

“A contract for repair or replacement only in the event of breakdown or malfunction which did not oblige the insurer to indemnify the insured for costs which the insured himself incurred fell within paragraph (b) of class 16 Schedule I to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001.”

WLR Daily, 29th November 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted December 8th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Ministry of Defence v Cartner [2011] EWCA Civ 1516 (08 December 2011)

Country Style Foods Ltd v Bouzir [2011] EWCA Civ 1519 (08 December 2011)

Cusack v London Borough of Harrow [2011] EWCA Civ 1514 (07 December 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

MO, & Ors, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2854 (08 December 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Bates, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] EWHC 3236 (Admin) (08 December 2011)

RP, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Brent [2011] EWHC 3251 (Admin) (07 December 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Wharton v Bancroft & Ors [2011] EWHC 3250 (Ch) (08 December 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

RGI International Ltd & Anor v Synergy Classic Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 3166 (Comm) (02 December 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Lord Chancellor v Ian Henery Solicitors Ltd [2011] EWHC 3246 (QB) (08 December 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (No 2) [2011] EWHC 3253 (TCC) (08 December 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org.uk

 

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted December 7th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Russell & Ors v Transocean International Resources Ltd & Ors (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 57 (7 December 2011)

Aberdeen City Council v Stewart Milne Group Ltd (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 56 (7 December 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

London Borough of Islington v Boyle & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1450 (06 December 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

McKeown v Attheraces Ltd [2011] EWHC 3232 (QB) (07 December 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

ABC (A Minor) (Afghanistan), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 2937 (Admin) (06 December 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Withers LLP v Langbar International Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted December 7th, 2011 in client accounts, costs, debts, interest, law reports, news, solicitors by sally

Withers LLP v Langbar International Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1419; [2011] WLR (D) 351

“In asking whether money placed in the client account of a solicitor’s client were subject to a lien in favour of the solicitor the key question was whether the money had been placed in the account for general purposes or for a particular purpose which was incompatible with a lien arising.”

WLR Daily, 5th December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Realchemie Nederland BV v Bayer CropScience AG (Case C-406/09) – WLR Daily

Posted December 7th, 2011 in conflict of laws, EC law, intellectual property, law reports, news by sally

Realchemie Nederland BV v Bayer CropScience AG (Case C-406/09); [2011] WLR (D) 350

“Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p1) applied to the recognition and enforcement of a decision of a court or tribunal that contained an order to pay a fine in order to ensure compliance with a judgment given in a civil and commercial matter. The costs relating to an exequatur (enforcement) procedure brought in one member state, in the course of which the recognition and enforcement was sought of a judgment given in another member state in proceedings seeking to enforce an intellectual property right, fell within article 14 of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/48/EC of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ 2004 L 157, p 45).”

WLR Daily, 18th December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted December 6th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

R v A Local Authority & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1451 (06 December 2011)

Leeds Group Plc v Leeds City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1447 (02 December 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Farnon v Devonshires Solicitors (a firm) [2011] EWHC 3167 (QB) (06 December 2011)

McKay (t/a Mckay Law Solicitors And Advocates) v Centurion Credit Resources LLC [2011] EWHC 3198 (QB) (06 December 2011)

High Court (Family Division)

X And Y (Children), Re [2011] EWHC 3147 (Fam) (06 December 2011)

H v S [2011] EWHC B23 (Fam) (18 November 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Sprunt Ltd v London Borough of Camden [2011] EWHC 3191 (TCC) (06 December 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Co Ltd and others; Nokia Corpn v Revenue and Customs Comrs (Internationak Trademark Association intervening) (Joined Cases C-446/09 and C-495/09) – WLR Daily

Posted December 6th, 2011 in copyright, counterfeiting, EC law, law reports, sale of goods by sally

Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Co Ltd and others; Nokia Corpn v Revenue and Customs Comrs (Internationak Trademark Association intervening) (Joined Cases C-446/09 and C-495/09); [2011] WLR (D) 349

“Goods coming from a non-EU state which were imitations of goods protected in the European Union by a trade mark or copies of goods protected in the EU by copyright could not be classified as “counterfeit goods” within the meaning of Council Regulation 3295/94/EC (as amended) merely on the basis that they had been brought into the customs territory of the EU under suspensive procedure. However, if it was proved that those goods were intended to be put on sale in the EU, they were classified as ‘counterfeit’.”

WLR Daily, 1st December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Rodríguez and Others v Air France SA (Case C-83/10) – WLR Daily

Posted December 6th, 2011 in aircraft, airlines, compensation, EC law, interpretation, law reports by sally

Rodríguez and Others v Air France SA (Case C-83/10); [2011] WLR (D) 348

“‘Cancellation’, in article 2(1) of Parliament and Council Regulation 261/2004/EC was not limited to the situation in which an aeroplane failed to take off at all, but also covered the case in which it took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers were transferred to other flights. ‘Further compensation’ in article 12 of the Regulation allowed the national court to award compensation under the Montreal Convention for damage arising from breach of the contract of carriage by air. However that meaning was not the legal basis for the national court to order an air carrier to reimburse to passengers whose flight had been delayed or cancelled the expenses the latter had incurred because of the failure of that carrier to fulfil its obligations to assist and provide care under articles 8 and 9 of the Regulation.”

WLR Daily, 13th October 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Leeds Group plc v Leeds City Council (No 2) Regina (Leeds Group plc) v Leeds City Council (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted December 6th, 2011 in appeals, commons, land registration, law reports, local government, retrospectivity by sally

Leeds Group plc v Leeds City Council (No 2); Regina (Leeds Group plc) v Leeds City Council (No 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 1447; [2011] WLR (D) 347

“Sections 98 and 103(2) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which inserted subsection (1A) into section 22 of the Commons Registration Act 1965, thereby amending the definition of town or village green, were clear and unambiguous and the new policy in subsection (1A) applied in its entirety to all applications to register land as a town or village green made on or after 30 January 2001. If the impact of the new policy as a whole was considered it had been prospective, not retrospective, in its effect when enacted on 30 November 2000.”

WLR Daily, 2nd December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re A (Children) (Judgment: Adequacy of Trial Judge’s Reasoning) – WLR Daily

Posted December 5th, 2011 in family courts, judgments, law reports, news, reasons by sally

In re A (Children) (Judgment: Adequacy of Trial Judge’s Reasoning) [2011] EWCA Civ 1205; [2011] WLR (D) 346

“The Court of Appeal gave guidance as to the practice to be adopted where there was concern about the adequacy of a trial judge’s reasoning, when adjourning, part heard, an appeal by the mother of two children, A and L, against the decision of Judge Compston, sitting as a judge of the Family Division on 27 May 2011, as to the adequacy of his judgment on a fact finding hearing in ongoing care proceedings relating to the children, and inviting the judge to provide such further reasons on particular matters as he might think appropriate by way of elucidation, clarification, elaboration or otherwise of his judgment.”

WLR Daily, 27th October 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Lyons – WLR Daily

Posted December 5th, 2011 in armed forces, conscientious objection, human rights, law reports by sally

Regina v Lyons [2011] EWCA Crim 2808; [2011] WLR (D) 345

“A person who, having voluntarily entered military service, sought to be discharged from further service on the ground of conscientious objection was subject to the requirements of military service and military discipline until his claim had been established. The giving of notice of appeal did not justify a refusal to obey a lawful command pending the determination of the appeal.”

WLR Daily, 1st December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Gill; Regina v Eccles; Regina v Abu-Neigh (formerly Wallace) – WLR Daily

Posted December 5th, 2011 in appeals, law reports, sentencing by sally

Regina v Gill; Regina v Eccles; Regina v Abu-Neigh (formerly Wallace) [2011] EWCA Crim 2795; [2011] WLR (D) 344

“Where a defendant was sentenced to a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment and the minimum term was to be determined pursuant to paragraphs 3 or 6 of Schedule 22 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (which related to transitional cases) a reduction in the length of the minimum term could take account of exceptional progress made by the defendant whilst in prison. However, possible reductions for exceptional progress in prison did not form part of any appeal process for sentences imposed after 18 December 2003.”

WLR Daily, 1st December 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted December 2nd, 2011 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 54 (23 November 2011)

Jude v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Scotland) (Rev 1) [2011] UKSC 55 (23 November 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Samarenko v Dawn Hill House Ltd [2011] EWCA civ 1445 (01 December 2011)

Oso v Newham University Hospital NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 1423 (01 December 2011)

Francis v London Borough of Southwark [2011] EWCA Civ 1418 (01 December 2011)

Proactive Sports Management Ltd v Rooney & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1444 (01 December 2011)

MA & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 1446 (01 December 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Aslam v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 2797 (01 December 2011)

Brown, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2796 (01 December 2011)

Gill, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2795 (01 December 2011)

Lyons v R [2011] EWCA Crim 2808 (01 December 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Preston, R (on the application of) v Wandsworth Borough Council & Anor [2011] EWHC 3174 (Admin) (01 December 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

K/S Victoria Street (A Danish Partnership) v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 3179 (Ch) (01 December 2011)

High Court (Patents Court)

ITV Broadcasting Ltd & Ors v TVcatchup Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 2977 (Pat) (14 November 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

 

 

Legal Services Commission v Henthorn – WLR Daily

Posted December 2nd, 2011 in barristers, fees, law reports, legal aid, limitations, repayment by sally

Legal Services Commission v Henthorn: [2011] EWCA Civ 1415;  [2011] WLR (D)  343

” A claim for recoupment of alleged overpayment of money paid on account to counsel, in respect of work done under a civil legal aid certificate, was governed by regulation 100(8) of the Civil Legal Aid Regulations 1989, and the cause of action accrued from the date of the ‘assessment’ there referred to, and time did not start to run until that date, not when the work was completed by counsel.”

WLR Daily, 30th November 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Abdulla and others v Birmingham City Council – WLR Daily

Posted December 2nd, 2011 in choice of forum, employment tribunals, law reports, limitations, sex discrimination by sally

Abdulla and others v Birmingham City Council: [2011] EWCA Civ 1412;  [2011] WLR (D)  342

“Where an equal pay claim under the Equal Pay Act 1970 was brought in an ordinary court within the six-year limitation period for bringing contract claims, the claim could not be struck out under section 2(3) of the 1970 Act on the grounds that it could be ‘more conveniently disposed of’ by an employment tribunal in circumstances where it was known to the court that the tribunal would have to decline jurisdiction to deal with the claim on the basis that it had been brought outside the six-month time limit for presenting an unequal pay complaint to the tribunal.”

WLR Daily, 29th November 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk