“A high court judge has criticised a senior Sunday Telegraph journalist over his reporting of a case heard in the family courts last year.”
The Guardian, 17th May 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Dizaei v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1174 (16 May 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Avon Estates Ltd v Welsh Ministers & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 553 (16 May 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench)
CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 1232 (QB) (16 May 2011)
Furmedge & Ors v Chester -Le -Street District Council [2011] EWHC 1226 (QB) (16 May 2011)
High Court (Family Division)
Mekarska (Wife) v Ruiz (Husband) [2011] EWHC 913 (Fam) (09 May 2011)
K (A Child), Re [2011] EWHC 1082 (Fam) (16 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA [2011] EWHC 1165 (Comm) (12 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
MSD Sharp & Dohme GmbH v Merckle GmbH (Case C-316/09); [2011] WLR (D) 159
“The dissemination on a website by a pharmaceutical undertaking of information relating to medicinal products available on medical prescription only, which consisted in the reproduction of the packaging, and in the literal and complete reproduction of the package leaflet or summary of the product’s characteristics, was not contrary to article 88(1)(a) of Parliament and Council Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended, prohibiting advertising to the general public of medicinal products available on medical prescription only. The dissemination of such information which had been rewritten by the manufacturer and which could only be explained by an advertising purpose was prohibited.”
WLR Daily, 5th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Bartlett and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Case (C-537/09); [2011] WLR (D) 158
“The mobility component of disability living allowance constituted a special non-contributory benefit within the meaning of article 4(2a) of and Annex IIa to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 and Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 631/2005, and of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 as amended by Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 647/2005. The provisions in article 10a of the Regulation and of the amended Regulation making the award of this benefit subject to conditions of residence and presence within the awarding member state were not contrary to the provisions of free movement of persons.”
WLR Daily, 5th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
High Court (Chancery Division)
Franbar Holdings Ltd v Casualty Plus Ltd [2011] EWHC 1161 (Ch) (11 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Source: www.bailii.org
High Court (Chancery Division)
Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports [2011] EWHC 1184 (Ch) (11 May 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
MJN v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWHC 1192 (QB) (11 May 2011)
Clynes v O’ Connor [2011] EWHC 1201 (QB) (13 May 2011)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Harry Yearsley Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] EWHC 1160 (TCC) (12 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
K v L [2011] EWCA Civ 550 (13 May 2011)
AXA Sunlife Services Plc v Campbell Martin Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 549 (12 May 2011)
Kennedy v The Information Commissioner & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 367 (12 May 2011)
DM v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] EWCA Civ 522 (12 May 2011)
Amos v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 552 (12 May 2011)
Fraenkl -Rietti v Cheltenham & Gloucester Plc [2011] EWCA Civ 524 (12 May 2011)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Young, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 1176 (12 May 2011)
Twist & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1143 (12 May 2011)
Bond, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 1197 (13 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Evans, R (on the application of) v The Lord Chancellor & Anor [2011] EWHC 1146 (Admin) (12 May 2011)
A, R (on the application of) v Lewisham Youth Court & Anor [2011] EWHC 1193 (Admin) (12 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Lane v Cullens Solicitors and others [2011] EWCA Civ 547; [2011] WLR (D) 157
“Where a personal representative had distributed sums out of the relevant estate notwithstanding a notified third party claim against the estate, and sought to sue solicitors in professional negligence, the applicable limitation period could be found to run from the time at which the legal position had altered, viz upon payment out, regardless of the question whether the third party claim was correctly to be characterised as a vested or a contingent claim.”
WLR Daily, 11th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed
Regina (Nassery) v Brent London Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 539; [2011] WLR (D) 156
“Where a local authority was assessing whether a person was ‘in need of care and attention’ for the purposes of section 21(1)(a) of the National Assistance Act 1948 the primary focus was on present rather than future needs, but provided there was a present need for some sort of care an authority was also empowered to intervene before it became much worse.”
WLR Daily, 11th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed
Regina (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice (JUSTICE and another intervening); In re MacDermott’s and McCartney’s Applications for Judicial Review (JUSTICE intervening) [2011] UKSC 18; [2011] WLR (D) 155
“A miscarriage of justice, within the meaning of section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, occurred where a new fact so undermined the evidence against the defendant that no conviction could possibly be based upon it.”
WLR Daily, 11th may 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed
“At the hearing of a taxpayer’s appeal against a closure notice determining an inquiry into a limited liability partnership’s tax return, the revenue was not confined to relying on the precise reasons for the decision given by the investigating officer in his closure notice.”
WLR Daily, 11th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed
McCarthy v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-434/09); [2011] WLR (D) 153
“Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC was not applicable to a European Union citizen who had never exercised their right of free movement, who had always resided in a member state of which they were a national and who was also a national of another member state. Article 21FEU of the FEU Treaty was likewise not applicable to a European Union citizen in such circumstances provided the situation of that citizen did not include the application of measures by a member state that would have the effect of depriving them of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights conferred by virtue of their status as a Union citizen.”
WLR Daily, 5th MAy 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Supreme Court
Adams, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18 (11 May 2011)
Revenue & Customs v Tower MCashback LLP 1 & Anor [2011] UKSC 19 (11 May 2011)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Zejmowicz & Anor, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 1173 (11 May 2011)
Nicholas & Anor v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 1175 (11 May 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Mahan Air & Anor v Blue Sky One Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 544 (11 May 2011)
Helden v Strathmore Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 542 (11 May 2011)
Nassery, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Brent [2011] EWCA Civ 539 (11 May 2011)
Lane v Cullens Solicitors & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 547 (11 May 2011)
Wardle v Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank [2011] EWCA Civ 545 (11 May 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports [2011] EWHC 1184 (Ch) (11 May 2011)
High Court (Family Division)
X, Y, and Z & Anor v A Local Authority [2011] EWHC 1157 (Fam) (11 May 2011)
R & Anor v A [2011] EWHC 1158 (Fam) (11 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Patents Court)
Schutz (UK) Ltd & Anor v Delta Containers Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 1173 (Pat) (05 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Regina (G) v Lambeth London Borough Council and another [2011] EWCA Civ 526; [2011] WLR (D) 152
“Accommodation ostensibly provided to a child aged 16 to 17 by a council as a local housing authority was to be deemed to be accommodation provided by it as a children’s services authority where the child met the criteria of a ‘child in need’ within section 17(10) of the Children Act 1989 and the actions of a social worker working for the council in a different team could properly be imputed to the social services division. Consequently on reaching adulthood that person became a ‘former relevant child’ within section 23C(1) of the 1989 Act, as inserted, and was owed the duties set out in that section.”
WLR Daily, 6th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Regina v Bajwa and others [2011] EWCA Crim 1093; [2011] WLR (D) 151
“In assessing, for the purposes of imposing a confiscation order, whether a defendant had a criminal lifestyle the question of whether the offence had been committed over a period of at least six months related to each particular defendant’s part in the offence.”
WLR Daily, 6th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
In re Rodenstock GmbH [2011] EWHC 1104; [2011] WLR (D) 150
“Neither Council Regulation (EC) No 3046/2000 on insolvency proceedings (‘the Insolvency Regulation’) nor Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘the Judgments Regulation’) had narrowed the court’s jurisdiction in relation to the sanctioning of schemes of arrangement, by impacting restrictively on the circumstances when a company was ‘liable to be wound up’.”
WLR Daily, 6th May 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
High Court (Family Division)
N (a Child), Re [2011] EWCA 1156 (Fam) (10 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Hackett v Crown Prosecution Service & Anor [2011] EWHC 1170 (Admin) (10 May 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Ors [2011] EWHC 1136 (Comm) (10 May 2011)
Berezovsky v Abramovich [2011] EWHC 1143 (Comm) (06 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
W, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 1142 (05 May 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Cook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] EWHC 1134 (QB) (09 May 2011)
MS v Lincolnshire County Council [2011] EWHC 1032 (QB) (05 May 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Withers LLP v Rybak & Ors [2011] EWHC 1151 (Ch) (09 May 2011)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Renwick & Anor v Simon and Michael Brooke Architects & Ors [2011] EWHC 874 (TCC) (05 May 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
TTMI SARL v Statoil ASA [2011] EWHC 1150 (Comm) (09 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Bajwa & Ors, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 1093 (06 May 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
TG, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Lambeth [2011] EWCA Civ 526 (06 May 2011)
C (A Child), Re [2011] EWCA Civ 521 (06 May 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Potts v Densley & Anor [2011] EWHC 1144 (QB) (06 May 2011)
Bacon v Automattic Inc & Ors [2011] EWHC 1072 (QB) (06 May 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Suggitt v Suggitt & Anor [2011] EWHC 903 (Ch) (20 April 2011)
Rodenstock GmbH (The “Scheme Company”), Re [2011] EWHC 1104 (Ch) (06 May 2011)
Oliver & Anor v Symons & Anor [2011] EWHC B9 (Ch) (14 April 2011)
Brown & Anor v Button & Ors [2011] EWHC 1034 (Ch) (04 May 2011)
Peoples Phone Ltd v Nicolaou [2011] EWHC 1129 (Ch) (06 May 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Saverymuttu v The General Medical Council [2011] EWHC 1139 (Admin) (06 May 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
MMP GmbH v Antal International Network Ltd [2011] EWHC 1120 (Comm) (06 May 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
RK (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 456; [2011] WLR (D) 147
“There was no general rule to the effect that any returned asylum seeker who would be in a position to avoid risk of persecution only by falsely claiming to support the regime in his home country would be entitled to asylum; rather, it was necessary to make a close examination of the particular circumstances of the individual, as each case would turn on its own facts.”
WLR Daily, 20th April 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
© Inner Temple Library 2025