Category: law reports

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

 

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 25th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

AAO v Entry Clearance Officer [2011] EWCA Civ 840 (22 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Jackson v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1870 (22 July 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office v Johnson [2011] EWHC 1950 (Admin) (25 July 2011)

Secretary of State for the Home Department v CB & Anor (Rev 1) [2011] EWHC 1990 (Admin) (25 July 2011)

Britannia Assets (UK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Anor [2011] EWHC 1908 (Admin) (22 July 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) v Lee (t/a Cropton Brewery) [2011] EWHC 1879 (Ch) (22 July 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Robins v Kordowski & Anor [2011] EWHC 1912 (QB) (22 July 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

Trebor Bassett Holdings Ltd & Anor v ADT Fire and Security Plc [2011] EWHC 1936 (TCC) (22 July 2011)

Jerram Falkus Construction Ltd v Fenice Investments Inc [2011] EWHC 1935 (TCC) (21 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szeptiewski and others (No 2) – WLR daily

Posted July 25th, 2011 in appeals, equity, law reports, proceeds of crime by sally

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szeptiewski and others (No 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 856;  [2011] WLR (D)  245

“In the circumstances which arose the Serious Organised Crime Agency (‘SOCA’) was entitled to invoke the equitable doctrine of marshalling and in effect to be subrogated to a second charge over a property as security for the shortfall left unsatisfied following the sale of other properties.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Drake v Harvey and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 25th, 2011 in appeals, law reports, partnerships, valuation by sally

Drake v Harvey and others [2011] EWCA Civ 838;  [2011] WLR (D)  244

“There was no general default rule or presumption that the basis on which an outgoing partner’s share of partnership assets was to be determined was a fair value unless the partnership deed expressly stated otherwise; the correct approach was to derive the basis of valuation from the terms of the deed itself applying normal principles of contractual interpretation.”

WLR Daily, 20th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

B v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

Posted July 25th, 2011 in appeals, contempt of court, law reports by sally

B v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 828;  [2011] WLR (D)  243

“The question for the Court of Appeal exercising its appellate jurisdiction under section 13 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 in respect of a sentence imposed for contempt of court was whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v F(S) – WLR daily

Posted July 25th, 2011 in abuse of process, appeals, delay, law reports, stay of proceedings by sally

Regina v F(S) [2011] EWCA Crim 1844;  [2011] WLR (D)  242

“An application to stay criminal proceedings for abuse of process on grounds of delay and a submission of ‘no case to answer’ were two distinct matters which had to receive distinct and separate consideration. An application to stay for abuse of process on the grounds of delay could not succeed unless, exceptionally, a fair trial was no longer possible owing to prejudice to the defendant caused by the delay which could not fairly be addressed in the normal trial process, whereas on a submission of ‘no case’ the question was whether the evidence, viewed overall, was such that the jury could properly convict.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

CPS v F [2011] EWCA Crim 1844 (21 July 2011)

McDonald v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1776 (21 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Rees & Anor v Peters [2011] EWCA Civ 836 (21 July 2011)

Finnerty & Anor v Clark & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 858 (21 July 2011)

Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 834 (21 July 2011)

Fulham Football Club (1987) Ltd v Richards & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 855 (21 July 2011)

Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency [2011] EWCA Civ 856 (21 July 2011)

B v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 828 (21 July 2011)

Meritz Fire & Marine Insurance Co Ltd v Jan De Nul NV & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 827 (21 July 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Mutua & Ors v The Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2011] EWHC 1913 (QB) (21 July 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Pioneer Freight Futures Company Ltd v TMT Asia Ltd [2011] EWHC 1888 (Comm) (21 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Fulham Football Club (1987) v Richards and another – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in appeals, arbitration, law reports, sport, stay of proceedings by sally

Fulham Football Club (1987) v Richards and another [2011] EWCA Civ 855; [2011] WLR (D) 241

“A dispute between a premier league football club and the first and second defendants, the chairman of the Football Association Premier League Ltd and the company itself, was covered by arbitration clauses in the rules of the company and the Football Association. Neither the Companies Act 2006 nor considerations of public policy prohibited the submission to arbitration of matters relating to an unfair prejudice petition under section 994 of the 2006 Act.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in disability discrimination, housing, law reports, local government by sally

Barnsley Metroplitan Borough Councl v Norton and others [2011] EWCA Civ 834; [2011] WLR (D) 240

“The duty in section 49A(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 was intended to apply whenever an authority was taking decisions such as a decision to seek possession of a disabled person’s home.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Smith (Nicholas) – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in appeals, law reports, sentencing, Supreme Court by sally

Regina v Smith (Nicholas) [2011] UKSC 37; [2011] WLR (D) 239

“A sentence of imprisonment for public protection could be imposed upon a defendant who was already serving a sentence of life imprisonment.”

WLR Daily, 20th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Maxwell – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in law reports, retrials, Supreme Court by sally

Regina v Maxwell [2010] UKSC 48; [2011] WLR (D) 238

“When the Court of Appeal quashed a conviction and then exercised its discretion under section 7 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 to order a retrial of the defendant, that decision should not be upset on appeal unless it could be shown that it was plainly wrong in that it was one which no reasonable court could have made or that it took into account immaterial factors or failed to consider material factors.”

WLR Daily, 20th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v Boggild and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in affray, appeals, crime, football banning orders, jurisdiction, law reports, sport by sally

Regina v Boggild and others [2011] WLR (D) 237

“An appeal by the prosecution under section 14A(5A) of the Football Spectators Act 1989 against a failure by a court to make a football banning order fell to be considered by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) because no provision in that Act or elsewhere allocated the jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).”

WLR Daily, 19th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Jones – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in customs and excise, jurisdiction, law reports, tribunals by sally

Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 824; [2011] WLR (D) 236

“The first tier and upper tribunals were statutory appellate tribunals which had not been given any original jurisdiction for resolving disputes as to whether or not goods were imported legally for personal use. The issue could only be decided by the court. The first tier tribunal’s jurisdiction was limited to hearing an appeal against a discretionary decision by HM Commissioners for Revenue and Customs not to restore the seized goods to the importer.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Barclays Bank plc v Nylon Capital LLP – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in contracts, hedge funds, jurisdiction, law reports, partnerships by sally

Barclays Bank plc v Nylon Capital LLP [2011] EWCA Civ 826 ; [2011] WLR (D) 235

“In any case where a dispute arose as to the jurisdiction of an expert, a court was the final decision maker as to whether the expert had jurisdiction, even if a clause purported to confer that jurisdiction on the expert in a manner that was final and binding.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

William McIlroy (Swindon) Ltd and others v Quinn Insurance Ltd; Rannoch Investments Ltd v Same – WLR Daily

Posted July 22nd, 2011 in arbitration, contracts, insurance, law reports, time limits by sally

William McIlroy (Swindon) Ltd and others v Quinn Insurance Ltd; Rannoch Investments Ltd v Same [2011] EWCA Civ 825; [2011] WLR (D) 234

“A clause in a public liability insurance policy requiring the insured to seek arbitration within nine months of a dispute arising on the insurer’s liability did not operate to bar an insured person’s claim before he had any cause of action to bring a claim. The Court of Appeal so held allowing appeals by the first claimants, William McIlroy (Swindon) Ltd, Mackays Stores Ltd, Cathedral Works Organisation (Chichester) Ltd, and the second claimants, Rannoch Investments Ltd, from a decision of Edwards-Stuart J in the Technology and Construction Court finding as a preliminary issue that the claimants were barred by general condition 16 of their insurance contract from proceeding against the defendants, Quinn Insurance Ltd.”

WLR Daily, 18th July 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted July 21st, 2011 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Smith, R. v [2011] UKSC 37 (20 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Barkshire & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim B3 (20 July 2011)

Hewgill & Ors, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 1778 (20 July 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Interactive Investor Trading Ltd v City Index Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 837 (20 July 2011)

AQ (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 833 (20 July 2011)

Drake v Harvey & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 838 (20 July 2011)

Burridge & Anor v MPH Soccer Management Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 835 (20 July 2011)

Haq v Island Homes Housing Association & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 805 (20 July 2011)

BSS Group Plc v Makers (UK) Ltd (t/a Allied Services) [2011] EWCA Civ 809 (20 July 2011)

Derwent Holdings Ltd v Trafford Borough Council & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 832 (20 July 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

R G Grain Trade Llp (UK) v Feed Factors International Ltd [2011] EWHC 1889 (Comm) (20 July 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org