Cox (Appellant) v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria) (Respondent) – Supreme Court
Cox (Appellant) v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria) (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 22 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 2nd April 2014
Cox (Appellant) v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria) (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 22 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 2nd April 2014
R v O’Brien (Appellant) [2014] UKSC 23 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 2nd April 2014
High Court (Chancery Division)
Littlewoods Retail Ltd & Ors v HM Revenue & Customs [2014] EWHC 868 (Ch) (28 March 2014)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Yemgas Fzco & Ors v Superior Pescadores S.A. Panama [2014] EWHC 971 (Comm) (02 April 2014)
Sonatrach v Statoil [2014] EWHC 875 (Comm) (02 April 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
Cambra v Jones & Anor [2014] EWHC 913 (Fam) (31 March 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Fern Advisers Ltd v Burford & Ors [2014] EWHC 762 (QB) (01 April 2014)
Milton Furniture Ltd v Brit Insurance Ltd [2014] EWHC 965 (QB) (01 April 2014)
Coghlan v Bailey & Anor [2014] EWHC 924 (QB) (01 April 2014)
Tippett v Guy’s & St Thomas’ Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC 917 (QB) (01 April 2014)
Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2014] EWHC 879 (QB) (27 March 2014)
Mole v Hunter [2014] EWHC 658 (QB) (27 March 2014)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Co -Operative Group Ltd v Carillion JM Ltd & Anor [2014] EWHC 837 (TCC) (27 March 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Ramdeen v State of Trinidad and Tobago: [2014] UKPC 7; [2014] WLR (D) 149
‘Once the Privy Council was seised of a death sentence case, whether by way of an appeal against conviction and/or an appeal against sentence, it had jurisdiction to deal with commutation of sentence, at least where the ground for commutation arose out of court procedures or decisions.’
WLR Daily, 27th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A person who made protected subject matter available to the public on a website without the agreement of the copyright holder, for the purpose of article 3(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2001/29/EC, was using the services of the Internet service provider of the persons accessing that subject matter, which had to be regarded as an “intermediary” within the meaning of article 8(3) of the Directive. The fundamental rights recognised by EU law did not preclude a court injunction prohibiting an Internet service provider from allowing its customers access to a website placing protected subject matter online without the agreement of the rightholders when that injunction did not specify the measures which that access provider had to take and when that access provider could avoid incurring coercive penalties for breach of that injunction by showing that it had taken all reasonable measures, provided that (i) the measures taken did not unnecessarily deprive Internet users of the possibility of lawfully accessing the information available and (ii) that those measures had the effect of preventing unauthorised access to the protected subject matter or, at least, of making it difficult to achieve and of seriously discouraging Internet users who were using the services of the addressee of that injunction from accessing the subject-matter that had been made available to them in breach of the intellectual property right, that being a matter for the national authorities and courts to establish.’
WLR Daily, 27th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Haining v Warrington Borough Council [2014] EWCA Civ 398 (02 April 2014)
Mulla v Hackney Learning Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 397 (02 April 2014)
Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Arip [2014] EWCA Civ 381 (02 April 2014)
Underwood & Anor v Mayers & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 406 (02 April 2014)
Edgehill & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 402 (02 April 2014)
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 376 (01 April 2014)
Rashid & Anor v Sharif & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 377 (31 March 2014)
Sukhoruchkin & Ors v Van Bekestein & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 399 (31 March 2014)
Harrison v Madejski & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 361 (28 March 2014)
Relfo Ltd v Varsani [2014] EWCA Civ 360 (28 March 2014)
Lombard-Knight & Anor v Rainstorm Pictures Inc [2014] EWCA Civ 356 (27 March 2014)
Patel & Anor v Peters & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 335 (27 March 2014)
TW v Enfield Borough Council [2014] EWCA Civ 362 (27 March 2014)
West & Anor v Ian Finlay & Associates (a firm) [2014] EWCA Civ 316 (27 March 2014)
B (A Child) (1980 Hague Convention Proceedings) [2014] EWCA Civ 375 (27 March 2014)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Taylor v The Queen [2014] EWCA Crim 618 (02 April 2014)
Ahmed, R v [2014] EWCA Crim 619 (01 April 2014)
R v Nealon [2014] EWCA Crim 574 (28 March 2014)
Ruth v R [2014] EWCA Crim 546 (28 March 2014)
Regina v Brahmbhatt [2014] EWCA Crim 573 (27 March 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Arunkalaivanan v General Medical Council [2014] EWHC 873 (Admin) (02 April 2014)
Shankaran v The Government of the State of India & Anor [2014] EWHC 957 (Admin) (01 April 2014)
Gifford v The Governor of HMP Bure & Ors [2014] EWHC 911 (Admin) (31 March 2014)
Abdi v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 929 (Admin) (28 March 2014)
VB & Ors v Westminster Magistrates’ Court & Ors [2014] EWHC 889 (Admin) (27 March 2014)
Ellaway v Cardiff County Council [2014] EWHC 836 (Admin) (27 March 2014)
Bristol City Council v Digs (Bristol) Ltd [2014] EWHC 869 (Admin) (27 March 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Ramdeen (Appellant) v The State (Respondent) [2014] UKPC 7 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 27th March 2014
Durkin (Appellant) v DSG Retail Ltd and another (Respondents) (Scotland) [2014] UKSC 21 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 26th March 2014
Kennedy (Appellant) v The Charity Commission (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 20 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 26th March 2014
‘The Freedom of Information Act 2000 did not provide an exhaustive scheme in respect of the disclosure of information held by the Charity Commission relating to inquiries which they conducted. Although an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of that 2000 Act from disclosure under that Act lasted beyond the completion of such an inquiry, the question whether disclosure of information relating to such an inquiry was available would be governed by the Charities Act 1993, as substituted by the Charities Act 2006, construed in the light of common law principles.’
WLR Daily, 26th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Durkin v DSG Retail Ltd and another [2014] UKSC 21; [2014] WLR (D) 144
A restricted-use credit agreement under section 12(b) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which related to a specified supply transaction was conditional upon the substantive survival of that supply transaction, so that a purchaser who rescinded the supply agreement for breach of contract could also rescind the credit agreement.
WLR Daily, 26th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
TW v Enfield London Borough Council [2014] EWCA Civ 362; [2014] WLR (D) 145
‘When an approved social worker was considering whether it was “reasonably practicable” to consult the “nearest relative” before making an application to admit a patient, pursuant to sections 3(1) and 13(1) of the Mental Health Act 1983, section 11(4) of the Act imposed on that social worker an obligation to strike a balance between the patient’s right under article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms not to be detained unless it was done by a procedure that was in accordance with the law and the patient’s right to a private life under article 8.’
WLR Daily, 27th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In an application for a declaration of invalidity of a Community trade mark, where the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (“OHIM”) was called upon to take account of the national law of the member state in which protection was given to an earlier mark on which the application was based, OHIM had to, of its own motion and by whatever means considered appropriate, obtain information about that national law, where such information was necessary for the purposes of assessing the applicability of a ground for invalidity relied on before it and of assessing the accuracy of the facts adduced or the probative value of the documents submitted.’
WLR Daily, 27th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Patel and another v Peters and others [2014] EWCA Civ 335; [2014] WLR (D) 147
‘Where the surveyor of a party involved in a dispute over building works affecting adjoining properties served a request under section 10(7) of the Party Wall etc Act 1996 on the surveyor of the other party that he act effectively in respect of the subject matter referred to in the request within ten days, after which, if he did not so act, the requesting surveyor became entitled to act ex parte in respect of the matter, a continuing state of affairs was created so that the other party’s surveyor might still act effectively after that ten-day period, thereby precluding the requesting surveyor from acting ex parte, provided that the requesting surveyor had not yet proceeded so to act.’
WLR Daily, 27th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Bhatia Best Ltd v Lord Chancellor: [2014] EWHC 746 (QB); [2014] WLR (D) 142
‘In an appeal under section 204 of the Housing Act 1996 the county court was not “required by an enactment to make a decision applying the principles that are applied by the court on an application for judicial review” for the purposes of paragraph 19(10) of Schedule 1, Part 1 to the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 with the result that the claimant was not entitled to receive civil legal aid funding for such an appeal.’
WLR Daily, 17th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Supreme Court
Durkin v DSG Retail Ltd & Anor [2014] UKSC 21 (26 March 2014)
Kennedy v The Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 (26 March 2014)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
N v N [2014] EWCA Civ 314 (26 March 2014)
D (A Child) [2014] EWCA Civ 315 (26 March 2014)
Farah v London Borough of Hillingdon [2014] EWCA Civ 359 (26 March 2014)
Zurich Insurance Plc v Umerji [2014] EWCA Civ 357 (25 March 2014)
G (Children), Re [2014] EWCA Civ 336 (25 March 2014)
Shebelle Enterprises Ltd v The Hampstead Garden Suburb Trust Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 305 (25 March 2014)
Mehjoo v Harben Barker (a firm) & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 358 (25 March 2014)
Saville v Central Capital Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 337 (24 March 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Kaziu & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 832 (Admin) (26 March 2014)
Loughlin v Singh & Ors [2014] EWHC 912 (Admin) (26 March 2014)
Moseka v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2014] EWHC 846 (Admin) (26 March 2014)
Nursing and Midwifery Council v Kidd & Anor [2014] EWHC 847 (Admin) (26 March 2014)
London Borough of Islington & Ors v The Mayor of London [2014] EWHC 751 (Admin) (25 March 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Brooke & Ors v Purton & Ors [2014] EWHC 547 (Ch) (26 March 2014)
First Subsea Ltd v Balltec Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 866 (Ch) (25 March 2014)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Sax v Tchernoy [2014] EWHC 795 (Comm) (26 March 2014)
Newland Shipping & Forwarding Ltd v Toba Trading FZC [2014] EWHC 864 (Comm) (26 March 2014)
Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su [2014] EWHC 796 (Comm) (20 March 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
MD v CT (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 871 (Fam) (25 March 2014)
High Court (Patents Court)
Starsight Telecast Inc & Anor v Virgin Media Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 828 (Pat) (26 March 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Johnston v League Publications Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 874 (QB) (26 March 2014)
White v Express Newspapers [2014] EWHC 814 (QB) (25 March 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
‘The termination of a solicitor’s actual authority by reason of a client’s supervening mental incapacity did not, it itself, automatically frustrate the underlying contract of retainer.’
WLR Daily, 5th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Supreme Court, 12th March 2014