Brian Philip Telchadder (Appellant) v Wickland Holdings Limited (Respondent) – Supreme Court
Brian Philip Telchadder (Appellant) v Wickland Holdings Limited (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 57 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 5th November 2014
Brian Philip Telchadder (Appellant) v Wickland Holdings Limited (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 57 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 5th November 2014
Supreme Court, 5th November 2014
AIB Group (UK) Plc (Appellant) v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 58 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 5th November 2014
High Court (Administrative Court)
Fletcher & Ors v Governor of HMP Whatton & Anor [2014] EWHC 3586 (Admin) (03 November 2014)
Moussaoui v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 3596 (Admin) (03 November 2014)
Eze (Ezeugo) & Anor v Health and Safety Executive [2014] EWHC 3474 (Admin) (31 October 2014)
Jasinarachchi v General Medical Council [2014] EWHC 3570 (Admin) (31 October 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
G (A Minor) [2014] EWHC 3541 (Fam) (24 October 2014)
Chai v Peng [2014] EWHC 3518 (Fam) (17 October 2014)
London Borough of Lambeth v JO & Ors [2014] EWHC 3597 (Fam) (31 October 2014)
Family Court Decisions (High Court Judges)
D (A Child) [2014] EWFC 39 (31 October 2014)
London Borough of Islington v R [2014] EWFC 41 (Fam) (29 October 2014)
A And B (Children: Brussels II Revised: Article 15) V [2014] EWFC 40 (23 October 2014)
H (A Child – Breach of Convention Rights – Damages) [2014] EWFC 38 (29 October 2014)
V (Children – Identification of Perpetrator) [2014] EWFC B145 (28 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Dart & Ors v R [2014] EWCA Crim 2158 (31 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Francis & Anor v Phillips & Anor & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1395 (31 October 2014)[
Platt v BRB (Residuary) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1401 (31 October 2014)
Tchenguiz v Director of the Serious Fraud Office & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1409 (31 October 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
National Crime Agency v Azam & Ors (No. 2) [2014] EWHC 3573 (QB) (30 October 2014)
Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Judge [2014] EWHC 3556 (QB) (31 October 2014)
Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2014] EWHC 3590 (QB) (31 October 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Bacciottini & Anor v Goldsmith [2014] EWHC 3527 (Ch) (24 October 2014)
Edwards & Anor v Business Environment Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 3540 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Supreme Court, 29th October 2014
Supreme Court, 29th October 2014
Les Laboratoires Servier and another v Apotex Inc and others [2014] UKSC 55; [2014] WLR (D) 452
‘Although acts which constituted “turpitude” for the purposes of giving rise to the defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio were not confined to criminal acts but included quasi criminal acts which engaged the public interest, civil wrongs which offended against private and not public interests did not give rise to the defence. Infringements of patent gave rise to private rights of a character no different from rights under contract or tort and there was no public policy which would give rise to a defence of ex turpi causa.’
WLR Daily, 29th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408; [2014] WLR (D) 451
‘An application under CPR r 3.1(2)(a) for an extension of time in which to file a respondent’s notice was by analogy subject to the robust approach to compliance with rules set down by the Court of Appeal in relation to applications for relief from sanction under CPR r 3.9.’
WLR Daily, 29th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Kerrigan; Regina v Walker (Nicholas) [2014] WLR (D) 450
‘There was no automatic deduction for time spent in custody by a defendant who, following arrest, was recalled to prison, on revocation of licence, to continue serving a previous sentence.’
WLR Daily, 28th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Routier and another v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2014] EWHC 3010 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 449
‘For a transfer under a will to be exempt from inheritance tax because it was to be “held on trust for charitable purposes” within the meaning of section 23(6) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 the relevant trust had to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts.’
WLR Daily, 18th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Supreme Court
Moseley, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Haringey [2014] UKSC 56 (29 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Hall & Ors, R. v [2014] EWCA Crim 2046 (07 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Vocalspruce Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2014] EWCA Civ 1302 (30 October 2014)
Belhaj & Anor v Straw & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1394 (30 October 2014)
Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (t/a LexisNexis) & Anor v Bewry [2014] EWCA Civ 1411 (30 October 2014)
Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No. 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408 (29 October 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Sirhowy Investments Ltd v Henderson & Anor [2014] EWHC 3562 (Ch) (30 October 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Trushin v National Crime Agency [2014] EWHC 3551 (Admin) (29 October 2014)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Arcadia Group Brands Ltd & Ors v Visa Inc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3561 (Comm) (30 October 2014)
Ted Baker Plc & Anor v Axa Insurance UK Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3548 (Comm) (30 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Halawi v WDFG UK Ltd (t/a World Duty Free) [2014] EWCA Civ 1387 (28 October 2014)
Chalfont St Peter Parish Council v Chiltern District Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1393 (28 October 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Mensah v Salford City Council [2014] EWHC 3537 (Admin) (28 October 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Reachlocal UK Ltd & Anor v Bennett & Ors [2014] EWHC 3405 (QB) (21 October 2014)
Kelly v Ministry Of Justice [2014] EWHC 3440 (QB) (20 October 2014)
Coulson & Ors v Wilby [2014] EWHC 3404 (QB) (21 October 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Emerald Supplies Ltd & Ors v British Airways Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3513 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips [2014] EWHC 3545 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
Emerald Supplies Ltd & Ors v British Airways Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3514 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
A And B (Children: Brussels II Revised: Article 15) V [2014] EWHC 3516 (Fam) (23 October 2014)
London Borough of Croydon v S & Anor [2014] EWHC 3550 (Fam) (09 October 2014)
Quan v Bray & Ors [2014] EWHC 3340 (Fam) (27 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
‘The phrase “any other harm” in paragraph 88 of the National Planning Policy Framework did not mean only harm to the Green Belt, but included any other harm that was relevant for planning purposes. If a planning proposal was not in accordance with the policies in the development plan for the protection of the countryside, the planning permission should be refused having regard to the planning policy framework as a whole.’
WLR Daily, 24th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The rules which applied to the construction of contracts generally were applicable to the construction of a bill of lading and required the words of the bill to be looked at as a whole in their context. Applying that approach, a clause in the printed conditions of carriage in a bill of lading which expressly incorporated “all terms and conditions, liberties and exceptions of the charterparty … including the law and arbitration clause” had the effect of incorporating into the bill an English law and exclusive jurisdiction clause in the charterparty.’
WLR Daily, 21st October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A purchaser of a property could not grant equitable rights of a proprietary character prior to acquisition of the legal estate.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A “change of circumstances” for the purposes of an application for permission to apply to revoke a placement order under section 24 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 had to be a change which had occurred since the making of the placement order and whichwas relevant to the circumstances of the case. It would be unacceptable to exclude any change in circumstances to the children who were the subject of the orders.’
WLR Daily, 21st October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Although the courts of the United Kingdom had jurisdiction judicially to review an Order in Council made on the advice of the Government of the United Kingdom acting in whole or in part in the interests of the United Kingdom, there were circumstances in which the court should nevertheless decline to entertain a claim for judicial review. The Queen’s Bench Divisional Court ought to have declined to entertain a human rights-compatibility challenge to legislation enacted in respect of the Island of Sark— a Crown dependency which was part of the Bailiwick of Guernsey but not of the United Kingdom— since it ought properly to have been brought before the bailiwick courts for determination under the island’s own human rights legislation.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
K v Kingswood Centre and another [2014] EWCA Civ 1332; [2014] WLR (D) 443
‘The notice period of a discharge order made for the purposes of section 25 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and served in accordance with regulation 3(3)(b)(i) of the Mental Health (Hospital, Guardianship and Treatment) (England) Regulations 2008 started to run from the time when it was received by the officer authorised by the hospital managers and not from the time when it was received at the hospital’s fax machine.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Sunrise Brokers LLP v Rodgers [2014] EWCA Civ 1373; [2014] WLR (D) 442
‘In considering whether to grant injunctive relief preventing an employee from working for another employer it was critical whether the grant of such relief would be tantamount to compelling the employee to return to work; and the question whether an employee in such a case who refused to return to work was entitled to continuing emoluments was an issue that essentially turned on the facts of the case. There was no rule requiring the employer to give some form of undertaking as to remuneration which went beyond the employer’s obligations under the contract, in order that the employer should be entitled to obtain an injunction.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk