BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Murtati v Government of the Republic of Albania [2008] EWHC 2856 (Admin) (25 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Murtati v Government of the Republic of Albania [2008] EWHC 2856 (Admin) (25 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
“A stay under s 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 could only be obtained against a party to an arbitration agreement or a person claiming through or under such a party and a mere legal or commercial connection was not sufficient.”
WLR Daily, 24th November 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
In re Phonographic Performance Ltd [2008] EWHC 2715 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 363
“On a reference by the Secretary of State, pursuant to s 128A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, of a proposed licensing scheme for excepted sound recordings, the Copyright Tribunal had jurisdiction, under s 128B of the Act, to consider a delivery system neutral licensing scheme as a whole and was not limited to a consideration of the terms of a licensing scheme referred thereto only in so far as the scheme related to excepted sound recordings in broadcasts.”
WLR Daily, 24th November 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“A computer, or its hard disk, fell within the meaning of ‘material’ in s 8(1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and was to be regarded as a single item or thing, rather than a container of a number of things, so that, where there were reasonable grounds for believing that it contained material evidence, a warrant under s 8 could properly specify a computer or similar item even if it were likely to contain irrelevant material.”
WLR Daily, 24th November 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
“A custodial sentence could be appropriate for an offence of commercial flytipping even where aggravating features, such as depositing waste of a dangerous or offensive nature, were not present.”
The Times, 25th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Wandsworth London Borough Council v Whibley
Court of Appeal
“While it was possible to have a summary disposal of applications to fix a date in a landlord’s possession action, an unsupported assertion that the tenant had to answer did not suffice to procure a hearing, and nor would a bare denial amount to an answer.”
The Times, 25th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Court of Appeal
“Even a definitive sentencing guideline was not to be used or approached as if each offence could be put into a fixed and inflexible compartment. The assessment of the seriousness of an offence involved a broad judgment of the overall criminality.”
The Times, 24th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Regina v Height and Regina v Anderson
Court of Appeal
“The sentencing provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 were not intended to be applied inflexibly. No scheme or guidance or statutory framework could be fully comprehensive, and any system of purported compartmentalisation or prescription had the potential to produce injustice.”
The Times, 24th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from teh date of publication.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Sherif & Ors, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 2653 (21 November 2008)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Osibanjo & Anor v Seahive Investments Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1282 (21 November 2008)
City of London v Sancheti [2008] EWCA Civ 1283 (21 November 2008)
Grosvenor Estates Ltd v Prospect Estates Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1281 (21 November 2008)
McCall v Poulton & Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 1263 (21 November 2008)
High Court (Chancery Division)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Employers’ Liability Policy “Trigger” Litigation [2008] EWHC 2692 (QB) (21 November 2008)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Minshall v Marylebone Magistrates’ Court & Ors [2008] EWHC 2800 (Admin) (21 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Regina (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Court of Appeal
“Ministerial power to detain an overstaying immigrant was limited only to the process of deportation; any detention under the immigration provisions would be subject to the control of the courts, principally by way of judicial review.”
The Times, 21st November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Biffa Waste Services Ltd and Another v Maschinenfabrik Ernst Hese GmbH and Another
Court of Appeal
“The principle which made an employer liable for the negligence of a subcontractor engaged to carry out extra-hazardous or dangerous operations was unsaisfactory and should be applied as narrowly as possible.”
The Times, 21st November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
KJM Superbikes Ltd. v Hinton [2008] EWCA Civ 1280 (20 November 2008)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Cobden Investments Ltd. v RWM Langport Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 2810 (Ch) (20 November 2008)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Clarke (t/a Elumina Iberica UK) v Bain & Anor [2008] EWHC 2636 (QB) (19 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Ishaq & Ors, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 2565 (19 November 2008)
Assani, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 2563 (19 November 2008)
Labastide & Anor, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 2564 (19 November 2008)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
White v Withers LLP & Anor [2008] EWHC 2821 (QB) (19 November 2008)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Mubarak v General Medical Council [2008] EWHC 2830 (Admin) (20 November 2008)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Sotrade Denizcilik Sanayi VE Ticaret AS v Amadou Lo & Ors [2008] EWHC 2762 (Comm) (19 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Blacklight Power Inc v Comptroller-General of Patents [2008] EWHC 2763 (Pat); [2008] WLR (D) 360
“The correct standard of proof that an applicant was required to satisfy to establish patentability was the balance of probabilities.”
WLR Daily, 19th November 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Carson and Others v United Kingdom (Application No 42184/05)
European Court of Human Rights
“The exclusion of pensioners living abroad from an index-linked uprating scheme applicable to all pensioners in the United Kingdom was not in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.”
The Times, 20th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another
House of Lords
“The positive obligation imposed on the state by article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights to prevent the infliction by third parties of inhuman or degrading treatment was not unqualified and absolute. It was an obligation to do all that was reasonably to be expected to avoid a real or immediate risk to an individual once the existence of that risk was known or ought to have been known.”
The Times, 19th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Sangha & Ors, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 2562 (18 November 2008)
Whittle & Ors, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 2560 (14 November 2008)
Headlam & Ors, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 2578 (10 October 2008)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Reid (Formerly Trading As Reid Minty) v Edwards & Ors [2008] EWHC 2722 (Ch) (07 November 2008)
Samad v Thompson & Anor [2008] EWHC 2809 (Ch) (18 November 2008)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Aspen Insurance UK Ltd & Ors v Pectel Ltd [2008] EWHC 2804 (Comm) (18 November 2008)
High Court (Patents Court)
Blacklight Power Inc v The Comptroller-General of Patents [2008] EWHC 2763 (Pat) (18 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal
“Where a party with limited means applied for a protective costs order to bring a matter of public importance before the court, and that party was represented by means of a conditional fee agreement, the agreed success fee was relevant to the amount of the cap on the costs order and consequently was to be disclosed to the court.”
The Times, 18th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Randhawa & Anor, R. v [2008] EWCA Crim 2599 (22 October 2008)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Wandsworth v Whibley [2008] EWCA Civ 1259 (14 November 2008)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Farraj & Anor v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust & Anor [2008] EWHC 2468 (QB) (17 October 2008)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Muscat v Health Professions Council [2008] EWHC 2798 (Admin) (14 November 2008)
Secretary of State for the Home Department v AR & Ors [2008] EWHC 2789 (Admin) (14 November 2008)
Azzam v The General Medical Council [2008] EWHC 2711 (Admin) (12 November 2008)
High Court (Commercial Court)
CMA CGM SA v Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co Ltd [2008] EWHC 2791 (Comm) (14 November 2008)
High Court (Patents Court)
Armour Group Plc v Leisuretech Electronics Pty Ltd [2008] EWHC 2797 (Pat) (14 November 2008)
Source: www.bailii.org
Spirerose Ltd (In Administration) v Transport for London [2008] EWCA Civ 1230; [2008] WLR (D) 358
“In concluding that a valuation of the claimant’s land on the basis that at the date of valuation there would have been a determined planning application granting permission , the Lands Tribunal had not erred. In the absence of an actual planning permission or a permission that was required to be assumed under the Land Compensation Act 1961, the tribunal was not limited to assessing the value by reference to the view that the market would have taken as to the prospects of achieving planning permission, the hope value.”
WLR Daily, 14th November 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.