law reports – Page 198 – Current Awareness

K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted August 1st, 2011 in assignment, covenants, law reports, leases by sally

K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd and others [2011] EWCA Civ 904; [2011] WLR (D) 265

“Any contractual arrangement contained in a tenancy (or a prior agreement ), which imposed an obligation on an existing or prospective guarantor of the tenant’s liabilities to guarantee the liabilities of a future assignee, would be void by reason of section 25(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 because it frustrated the operation of section 24(2) of that Act, by which the original tenant’s guarantor was released from his obligation on the assignment of the tenancy. Similarly, a contractual arrangement contained in a later document, for instance, a renewal obligation imposed on a guarantor of an assignee’s liabilities in an assignment or a licence to assign, would be invalid.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Brownbill and others v St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust – WLR Daily

Posted August 1st, 2011 in employment tribunals, equal pay, law reports, sex discrimination by sally

Brownbill and others v St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 903; [2011] WLR (D) 264

“Once an employment tribunal had found that there were terms in women’s contracts and terms in men’s contracts that were susceptible to comparison and that each of the terms was a distinct provision with sufficient content to make it possible to compare them so that the benefits conferred by the provision could be contrasted, it should proceed to compare them focusing on the equality of terms not of total pay actually received.”

WLR Daily, 28th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 29th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Meares v Medway Primary Care Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 897 (28 July 2011)

Greyfort Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 908 (28 July 2011)

Lait v Evening Standard Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 859 (28 July 2011)

O, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham [2011] EWCA Civ 925 (28 July 2011)

St Helens & Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust v Brownbill & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 903 (28 July 2011)

Mew & Anor v Tristmire Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 912 (28 July 2011)

OM, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 909 (28 July 2011)

Towers v Premier Waste Management Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 923 (28 July 2011)

Gayle v Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 924 (28 July 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Sulaiman v General Medical Council [2011] EWHC 1903 (Admin) (28 July 2011)

Loader v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWHC 2010 (Admin) (28 July 2011)

Belmihoub, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 2044 (Admin) (28 July 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Williams v Lawrence & Anor [2011] EWHC 2001 (Ch) (28 July 2011)

BT Pension Scheme Trustees Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc & Anor [2011] EWHC 2071 (Ch) (28 July 2011)

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp & Ors v British Telecommunications Plc [2011] EWHC 1981 (Ch) (28 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Swift 1st Ltd v Colin and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 29th, 2011 in land registration, law reports, mortgages, sale of land by sally

Swift 1st Ltd v Colin and others [2011] WLR (D) 262

“The holder of a charge over a property had full power of sale under the Law of Property Act 1925 irrespective of the fact that the charge had not been substantially registered. All that was required to exercise that power was for the mortgage to have been executed by deed.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and others v Meltwater Holding BV and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 29th, 2011 in appeals, copyright, internet, law reports, licensing, media by sally

Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and others v Meltwater Holding BV and others [2011] EWCA Civ 890; [2011] WLR (D) 261

“The end users of a commercial online media monitoring service who did not hold a web end-user licence from the publishers committed infringement of the publishers’ copyright in receiving and using the service.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Belmont Park Investments Pty v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted July 29th, 2011 in insolvency, law reports, Supreme Court, winding up by sally

Belmont Park Investments Pty v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd [2011] UKSC 38; [2011] WLR (D) 260

“The policy behind the anti-deprivation rule in insolvency law, that parties could not, on bankruptcy, deprive the bankrupt of property which would otherwise be available for creditors, was to be given a commonsense application which prevented its application to bona fide commercial transactions which did not have as their predominant purpose the deprivation of the property of one of the parties on bankruptcy.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Oguz v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Centre for Advice on Individual Rights in Europe intervening) – WLR daily

Posted July 29th, 2011 in appeals, EC law, immigration, law reports, self-employment by sally

Oguz v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Centre for Advice on Individual Rights in Europe intervening) C-186/10; [2011] WLR (D) 259

“Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol, signed on 23 November 1970 at Brussels and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 (OJ 1973 C 113 p17), had to be interpreted as meaning that it could be relied on by a Turkish national who, having leave to remain in a member state on condition that he did not engage in any business or profession, nevertheless entered into self-employment in breach of that condition and later applied to the national authorities for further leave to remain on the basis of the business which he had meanwhile established.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 28th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors [2011] UKSC 41 (27 July 2011)

Belmont Park Investments PTY Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 38 (27 July 2011)

Jivraj v Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40 (27 July 2011)

Houldsworth & Anor v Bridge Trustees Ltd & Anor [2011] UKSC 42 (27 July 2011)

Lucasfilm Ltd & Ors v Ainsworth & Anor [2011] UKSC 39 (27 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd & Ors. v Meltwater Holding BV & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 890 (27 July 2011)

K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 904 (27 July 2011)

Grand v Gill [2011] EWCA Civ 902 (27 July 2011)

Addis & Ors v Campbell & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 906 (27 July 2011)

XX v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 860 (27 July 2011)

Herron & Anor., R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator [2011] EWCA Civ 905 (27 July 2011)

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company SAL & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 898 (27 July 2011)

Telford Trustee No.1 Ltd & Anor, R (on the application of) v Telford and Wrekin Council [2011] EWCA Civ 896 (27 July 2011)

Condliff, R (on the application of) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 910 (27 July 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Windsor v Bristol Crown Court & Anor [2011] EWHC 1899 (Admin) (27 July 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Shah v Shah & Ors [2011] EWHC 1902 (Ch) (26 July 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Dowans Holding SA & Anor v Tanzania Electric Supply Co Ltd [2011] EWHC 1957 (Comm) (27 July 2011)

High Court (Patents Court)

Convatec Ltd. & Ors v Smith & Nephew Healthcare Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 2039 (Pat) (27 July 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Suurpere v Nice & Anor [2011] EWHC 2003 (QB) (27 July 2011)

Bowen (A Child) & Ors v The National Trust [2011] EWHC 1992 (QB) (27 July 2011)

W v Veolia Environmental Services (UK) Plc [2011] EWHC 2020 (QB) (27 July 2011)

Wright v Caan [2011] EWHC 1978 (QB) (27 July 2011)

Divya & Ors v Toyo Tire and Rubber Co. Ltd (t/a Toyo Tires of Japan) & Anor [2011] EWHC 1993 (QB) (27 July 2011)

BGC Capital Markets (Switzerland) LLC v Rees & Ors [2011] EWHC 2009 (QB) (27 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Wilberforce silk fails to win over Supreme Court in pensions case – The Lawyer

Posted July 28th, 2011 in judgments, law reports, legislation, pensions, Supreme Court by sally

“The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) is set to redraft pensions legislation after defeat in a key pensions case in the Supreme Court this morning.”

Full story

The Lawyer, 27th July 2011

Source: www.thelawyer.com

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company SAL and others – WLR daily

Posted July 28th, 2011 in appeals, contempt of court, enforcement, law reports by sally

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company SAL and others [2011] EWCA Civ 898; [2011] WLR (D) 258

“A company found in contempt of court could not appeal the findings of contempt as of right but required the permission of the judge or the Court of Appeal.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Lucasfilm Ltd and others v Ainsworth and another – WLR Daily

Posted July 28th, 2011 in conflict of laws, copyright, jurisdiction, law reports, Supreme Court by sally

Lucasfilm Ltd and others v Ainsworth and another [2011] UKSC 39; [2011] WLR (D) 257

“A judge was entitled to conclude that a helmet worn by a fictional character in a film was not a ‘sculpture’ for the purposes of copyright protection. A claim against a defendant domiciled in England for infringement of a foreign copyright could be justiciable in England.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina (Condliff) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust – WLR Daily

Posted July 28th, 2011 in appeals, hospitals, human rights, law reports, medical treatment, obesity by sally

Regina (Condliff) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 910; [2011] WLR (D) 256

“It was not unlawful for a primary care trust to adopt a policy by which all individual funding requests were to be considered and determined exclusively by reference to clinical factors.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 28th, 2011 in contract of employment, law reports, Supreme Court, working time by sally

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and others [2011] UKSC 41; [2011] WLR (D) 255

“In the employment context, the courts should focus on the reality of the relationship between the parties, which might not be accurately reflected by the written documentation. In deciding whether the terms of any written agreement in truth represented what was agreed, the relative bargaining power of the parties had to be taken into account.”

WLR Daily, 27th July 2011

Source; www.iclr.co.uk

Thomas and others v Bridgend County Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted July 28th, 2011 in appeals, human rights, law reports, local government, noise, roads, valuation by sally

Thomas and others v Bridgend County Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 862; [2011] WLR (D) 254

“For article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms to be engaged, it was enough to show interference with peaceful enjoyment possessions combined with evidence of loss of value.”

WLR Daily, 26th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 27th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

AR, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 857 (26 July 2011)

Thomas & Ors v Bridgend County Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 862 (26 July 2011)

Rust Consulting Ltd v PB Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 899 (26 July 2011)

Destiny 1 Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc [2011] EWCA Civ 831 (26 July 2011)

MH (Algeria), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 901 (26 July 2011)

DRL Ltd v Wincanton Group Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 839 (26 July 2011)

Bahta & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 (26 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Cooper, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 1872 (26 July 2011)

Kapotra v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1843 (26 July 2011)

Haque v R [2011] EWCA Crim 1871 (26 July 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Cheshire East Borough Council Cheshire West & Anor, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs & Anor [2011] EWHC 1975 (Admin) (26 July 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Rayford Homes Ltd v Bank of Scotland Plc & Anor [2011] EWHC 1948 (Ch) (23 July 2011)

High Court Queen’s Bench Division)

Sheikh v Beaumont [2011] EWHC 1946 (QB) (26 July 2011)

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] EWHC 1884 (QB) (26 July 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Arqiva Ltd & Ors v Everything Everywhere Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 2016 (TCC) (26 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Regina (Huitson) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners – WLR Daily

Posted July 27th, 2011 in double taxation, human rights, income tax, law reports, retrospectivity, tax avoidance by sally

Regina (Huitson) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2011] EWCA Civ 893 ; [2011] WLR (D) 248

“Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008 which amended fiscal legislation regarding double taxation relief with retrospective effect, thereby removing tax relief from tax avoidance schemes to United Kingdom residents, was neither disproportionate nor incompatible with article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998.”

WLR Daily, 25th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 26th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Huitson, R (on the application of) v Revenue and Customs [2011] EWCA Civ 893 (25 July 2011)

Shiner & Anor, R (on the application of) v Revenue & Customs [2011] EWCA Civ 892 (25 July 2011)

High Court (Patents Court)

ITV Broadcasting Ltd & Ors v TV Catchup Ltd [2011] EWHC 1874 (Pat) (18 July 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Bank of Scotland v Hussain [2011] EWHC 1934 (QB) (25 July 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Inframatrix Investments Ltd. v Dean Construction Ltd. [2011] EWHC 1947 (TCC) (25 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher; Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted July 26th, 2011 in employment tribunals, jurisdiction, law reports, Supreme Court, teachers, unfair dismissal by sally

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher; Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (No 2); [2011] UKSC 36 [2011] WLR (D) 247

“Teachers who had been employed by the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families and seconded to work at European Schools throughout the European Union were entitled to bring unfair dismissal claims before an employment tribunal under section 94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.”

WLR Daily, 15th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Finnerty and another v Clark and another; In re St George’s Property Services (London) Ltd (in administration) – WLR Daily

Posted July 26th, 2011 in administrators, appeals, insolvency, law reports by sally

Finnerty and another v Clark and another; In re St George’s Property Services (London) Ltd (in administration) [2011] EWCA Civ 858; [2011] WLR (D) 246

“The administrators of an insolvent company were the officers of the court with statutory powers to exercise their discretion to act for the interests of the creditors as a whole. The court had statutory power to removal and replace the administrators, but it had first to be established by the evidence that there was a good or sufficient ground or cause for the removal and replacement. Only then could the court properly proceed to consider the exercise of its discretion by having regard to all the relevant factors for and against an order for removal, such as the beneficial consequences of success in possible legal proceedings.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk