BCL Old Co Ltd and Others v BASF SE and Others
Court of Appeal
“The two-year time limit for bringing a claim for loss resulting from an infringement of EC or UK competition rules could be postponed where there was an appeal against the infringement itself. The time limit continued to run, however, where there was an appeal against the penalty imposed.”
The Times, 9th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Hartlepool Borough Council v Llewellyn and Others
Employment Appeal Tribunal
“Male colleagues of female equal pay claimants were entitled to bring ‘piggyback’ claims using the female claimants as comparators and were able to recover sums equivalent to those awarded to successful comparators by way of arrears.”
The Times, 9th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“The failure to endorse an order amending an indictment would amount to a fundamental error if the court had failed positively to exercise its discretion to make such an order.”
WLR Daily, 8th July 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.
“Wheelclampers are acting illegally by imposing exorbitant charges for the release of cars parked on private land, the RAC said today. The concept of one citizen ‘punishing’ another is alien in English law, according to barrister and engineer Dr Chris Elliott, whose review of private-property parking regulations was published today by the RAC.”
The Independent, 9th July 2009
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Heffernan v London Borough of Hackney [2009] EWCA Civ 665 (07 July 2009)
Foster Wheeler Ltd v Hanley & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 651 (08 July 2009)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Sofroniou v R [2009] EWCA Crim 1360 (07 July 2009)
Pepperell, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 1327 (07 July 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Clarke & Anor v Corless & Anor [2009] EWHC 1636 (Ch) (08 July 2009)
High Court (Patents Court)
Cranway Ltd v Playtech Ltd & Ors [2009] EWHC 1588 (Pat) (07 July 2009)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Fitzroy Robinson Ltd v Mentmore Towers Ltd [2009] EWHC 1552 (TCC) (07 July 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
Regina (E) v Governing Body of JFS and Others; Regina (E) v Schools Adjudicator and Others
Court of Appeal
“A Jewish school which restricted its intake to Jews, as defined by the Office of the Chief Rabbi, while making no requirement of practice or faith, discriminated racially against applicants who were not Jewish by descent or orthodox conversion.”
The Times, 8th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
R (P) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] EWCA Civ 701; [2009] WLR (D) 234
“Where it was contended, pursuant to art 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998, that the state should investigate the treatment accorded to a self-harming young offender while he was in detention, a ‘real and immediate’ risk to life was a prerequisite.”
WLR Daily, 7th July 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.
R v Downer [2009] EWCA Crim 1361; [2009] WLR (D) 233
“The offence of aggravated burglary under s 10 (1) of the Theft Act 1968 was not to be regarded as an indivisible offence and, in order to find out what constituted a burglary, it was essential to have regard to the two types of burglary described in (a) and (b) of s 9(1) of the Act.”
WLR Daily, 7th July 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.
“In determining whether a decision by a local authority to seek possession of land where there were unauthorised occupiers was reasonable, the county court could look at a series of decisions taken by the authority including any decision to continue with the proceedings taken at the time of the hearing. Any one of the series could be challenged if shown to be unreasonable. The court should go beyond a pure rationality test and look at facts concerning the personal circumstances of the occupiers known to the local authority at the time of the relevant decision.”
WLR Daily, 3rd July 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.
Masood and others v Zahoor and others [2009] EWCA 650; [2009] WLR (D) 231
“Where a claimant relied on a forged document he forfeited the right to have an adjudication of his claim, and it was irrelevant that the defendant also relied on forged documents. There was no weighing or balancing exercise to be carried out.”
WLR Daily, 7th July 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.
Regina (Aweys and Others) v Birmingham City Council; Moran v Manchester City Council
House of Lords
“A local housing authority had been entitled to decide that overcrowded families were homeless but to leave them there in the short term; it was a question of fact what term was too long.”
The Times, 7th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“The ‘centre of main interests’ for the purposes of the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 must be identified by reference to factors which were both objective and ascertainable by third parties. What was ascertainable by a third party was what was in the public domain and what a typical third party would learn as a result of dealing with the company.”
WLR Daily, 6th July 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.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
P, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] EWCA Civ 701 (06 July 2009)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Downer, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 1361 (06 July 2009)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Home Office & Anor v The Information Commissioner [2009] EWHC 1611 (Admin) (06 July 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Clift v Slough Borough Council & Anor [2009] EWHC 1550 (QB) (06 July 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org.
GISDA Cyf v Barratt [2009] EWCA Civ 648; [2009] WLR (D) 229
“The ‘effective date of termination of employment’ within section 97(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not necessarily the date yielded by contractual analysis. When determining the relevant time limit for making an unfair dismissal claim, an employment tribunal had not erred in concluding that the effective date of termination of employment was when the employee read the letter of summary dismissal and not the date when the letter reached the employee’s home address when she was away.”
WLR Daily, 3rd July 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.
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Holland and another [2009] EWCA Civ 625; [2009] WLR (D) 228
“A human director of a corporate director could in certain circumstances be regarded as a de facto director of the subject company but he would not automatically be so regarded.”
WLR Daily, 3rd July 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.
Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2009] EWCA Civ 649; [2009] WLR (D) 227
“A judge should give due weight to the marital property regime into which a couple entered so as to legitimately exercise the very wide discretion conferred on judges to achieve fairness between the parties to ancillary relief proceedings.”
WLR Daily, 3rd July 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.
Court of Appeal
“However comprehensive legislation relating to sentences might seek to be, it could not cover all the many different facets of human criminal behaviour which sentencing judges had to take into account.”
The Times, 6th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Boyle v SCA Packaging Ltd, Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening
House of Lords
“In determining whether a person was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1975 by reason of having an impairment which, although capable of being controlled by measures taken to treat it, would be likely to have substantial adverse effects but for those measures, the word ‘likely’ did not mean ‘probable’ but ‘could well happen’.”
The Times, 6th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd v Enron Coal Services Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 647 (01 July 2009)
Zahoor & Ors v Masood & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 650 (03 July 2009)
Sagal (t/a Bunz Uk) v Atelier Bunz GmbH [2009] EWCA Civ 700 (03 July 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Berry v Laytons & Anor [2009] EWHC 1591 (QB) (03 July 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Stanford International Bank Ltd & Ors, Re [2009] EWHC 1441 (Ch) (03 July 2009)
High Court (Family Division)
DS v RS [2009] EWHC 1594 (Fam) (03 July 2009)
SS v KS [2009] EWHC 1575 (Fam) (03 July 2009)
London Borough of Brent v S [2009] EWHC 1593 (Fam) (03 July 2009)
High Court (Administrative Division)
BM v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWHC 1572 (Admin) (03 July 2009)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2009] EWHC 1603 (TCC) (25 June 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Radmacher v Granatino [2009] EWCA Civ 649 (02 July 2009)
Walkden v Walkden [2009] EWCA Civ 627 (25 June 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench)
C v Dixon [2009] EWHC 708 (QB) (25 June 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Woolf [2009] EWHC B15 (Ch) (19 June 2009)
Lindop v Agus & Ors [2009] EWHC B14 (Ch) (03 July 2009)
High Court (Administrative Division)
Nicholas v Chester Magistrates Court [2009] EWHC 1504 (Admin) (11 June 2009)
Nadour v Chester Magistrates Court [2009] EWHC 1505 (Admin) (11 June 2009)
Director of Public Prosecutions v Agyemang [2009] EWHC 1542 (Admin) (24 June 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
© Inner Temple Library 2026