Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
KB (A Child) v Borough Council & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 1254 (25 November 2009)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
KS, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 2377 (17 November 2009)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Metro Construction Ltd. v London Borough of Barnet [2009] EWHC 2956 (Admin) (25 November 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Source: www.bailii.org
Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National plc and others [2009] UKSC 6; [2009] WLR (D) 341
“Charges levied by banks in respect of unauthorised overdrafts were part of a ‘package’ of services and consideration and their fairness was exempt from review under reg 6(2)(b) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.”
WLR Daily, 25th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National plc and Others
Supreme Court
“Charges levied by banks on personal current account customers in respect of unauthorised overdrafts were part of a package of consideration for the package of banking services provided and accordingly their fairness was exempt from review by the Office of Fair Trading.”
The Times, 26th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
McDonnell & Anor v Walker [2009] EWCA Civ 1257 (24 November 2009)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Source: www.bailii.org
Thomas v Director of Public Prosecutions
Queen’s Bench Divisional Court
“Vulnerable homeless persons in rooms in local authority hostels with a licence to occupy for a day a bedroom with a lock, were as entitled to the protection of the law as anyone else and could exclude trespassers.”
The Times, 25th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
“A judge should not continue to try a case alone after discharging the jury because of jury tampering where an informed objective bystander might legitimately conclude that there was a real possibility of bias by the judge.”
The Times, 25th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Pacan & Ors, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 2436 (16 October 2009)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Transview Properties Ltd v City Site Properties Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1255 (24 November 2009)
Widlake v BAA Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1256 (23 November 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
The Lord Chancellor v Michael J Reed Ltd [2009] EWHC 2981 (QB) (23 November 2009)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Stratford On Avon District Council v Dyde [2009] EWHC 3011 (Admin) (04 November 2009)
Goldsmith v Director of Public Prosecutions [2009] EWHC 3010 (Admin) (04 November 2009)
Bhatti & Ors v Croydon Magistrates Court & Ors [2009] EWHC 3004 (Admin) (06 November 2009)
High Court (Commercial Court)
SK Shipping (S) Pte Ltd v Petroexport Ltd [2009] EWHC 2974 (Comm) (24 November 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
B v N (A and S, Third Parties) [2009] EWHC 2884 (Admin); [2009] WLR (D) 340
“The court’s power under s 80(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (now repealed) to order ‘any person having possession of realisable property’ to give possession to a receiver did not empower the court to make such an order against tenants protected by contract and/or statute whose interests had not been determine by a court order.”
WLR Daily, 23rd November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Patel and another v Keles and another [2009] EWCA Civ 1187; [2009] WLR (D) 339
“Where a landlord opposed an application for renewal of a business tenancy by asserting an intention to occupy the premises for the proposes of his own business, but it was shown that he was highly likely to sell, the landlord did not have the requisite intention to defeat the application for renewal.”
WLR Daily, 23rd November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Al Rawi and Others v Security Service and Others
Queen’s Bench Division
“Closed material procedure, as was used in criminal proceedings, sitting in camera and using special advocates who were not allowed to disclose secret evidence to their clients, could be used in a civil claim for damages.”
The Times, 24th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Louca v Public Prosecutor, Bielefeld, Germany
Supreme Court
“For a European arrest warrant to be valid it needed to make reference only to the domestic warrant, issued in the requesting state, on which it was based. It was not required to make reference to any previous European arrest warrant, based on the same domestic warrant, which might have been issued and subsequently withdrawn.”
The Times, 24th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“Airline passengers whose flights were delayed by more than three hours were entitled to compensation.”
WLR Daily, 20th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Louca v Public Prosecutor, Bielefeld [2009] UKSC 4; [2009] WLR (D) 337
“To satisfy the requirements of s 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 a European arrest warrant only had to make reference to the requesting state’s domestic arrest warrant on which it was based and not to any previous European arrest warrant, based on the same domestic warrant, which had previously been issued and superseded.”
WLR Daily, 20th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Neary v Governing Body of St Albans Girls’ School and Another
Court of Appeal
“An over-rigid approach was not required when an employment tribunal was considering an application for relief from sanction, for example, a strike-out founded on breach of an unless order.”
The Times, 23rd November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
In re B (a Child) (Residence order)
Supreme Court
“When considering an application for a residence order for a child there was no presumption in favour of a biological parent. The advantage of being brought up by a parent only assumed significance as part of an examination of what was in the child’s best interests.”
The Times, 23rd November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Omaboe, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 2355 (30 October 2009)
Attorney-General’s Reference No 64 & 65 Of 2009 [2009] EWCA Crim 2322 (27 October 2009)
Boakye & Ors, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 2343 (27 October 2009)
Turner, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 2219 (15 October 2009)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
T (A Child) [2009] EWCA Civ 1208 (20 November 2009)
Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc v Allen [2009] EWCA Civ 1213 (20 November 2009)
Thompson v Bee & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 1212 (20 November 2009)
The Ministry of Justice (Sued As the Home Office) v Scott [2009] EWCA Civ 1215 (20 November 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench)
Kris Motor Spares Ltd v Fox Williams LLP [2009] EWHC 2813 (QB) (13 November 2009)
Johnston v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2009] EWHC 2969 (QB) (20 November 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
BLV Realty Organization Ltd & Anor v Batten & Ors [2009] EWHC 2994 (Ch) (20 November 2009)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Brittain v Noskova [2009] EWHC 2884 (Admin) (13 November 2009)
Davis v Criminal Cases Review Commission & Anor [2009] EWHC 2926 (Admin) (04 November 2009)
Michaels v Highbury Corner Magistrates Court & Anor [2009] EWHC 2928 (Admin) (03 November 2009)
High Court (Patents Court)
Teva UK Ltd v Merck & Co, Inc [2009] EWHC 2952 (Pat) (20 November 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
Supreme Court
Louca v A German Judicial Authority [2009] UKSC 4 (19 November 2009)
B (A Child), Re [2009] UKSC 5 (19 November 2009)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1211 (19 November 2009)
Tekdata Interconnections Ltd v Amphenol Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1209 (19 November 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
HSBC Bank Plc v Dyche & Anor [2009] EWHC 2954 (Ch) (18 November 2009)
Williams v Hull [2009] EWHC 2844 (Ch) (19 November 2009)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Southern Electric v Mead Realisations [2009] EWHC 2947 (TCC) (04 November 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
In re B (A Child) [2009] UKSC 5; [2009] WLR (D) 336
“When the court was considering a residence order application in respect of a child under s 8 of the Children Act 1989 there was no presumption in favour of a biological parent. The advantage of being brought up by a parent only assumed significance as part of an examination of what was in the child’s best interests.”
WLR Daily, 19th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others [2009] EWHC 2959 (QB); [2009] WLR (D) 335
It could be lawful and proper for a court to order that a closed material procedure (avoiding disclosure of material contrary to the public interest otherwise than to special advocates) be adopted in a civil claim for damages.
WLR Daily, 19th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Southern Pacific Mortgage Ltd v Heath
Court of Appeal
“A consumer credit agreement which provided for the redemption of an existing smaller mortgage loan and left the remainder as credit, comprised one agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.”
The Times, 20th November 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2026