Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408; [2014] WLR (D) 451
‘An application under CPR r 3.1(2)(a) for an extension of time in which to file a respondent’s notice was by analogy subject to the robust approach to compliance with rules set down by the Court of Appeal in relation to applications for relief from sanction under CPR r 3.9.’
WLR Daily, 29th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Kerrigan; Regina v Walker (Nicholas) [2014] WLR (D) 450
‘There was no automatic deduction for time spent in custody by a defendant who, following arrest, was recalled to prison, on revocation of licence, to continue serving a previous sentence.’
WLR Daily, 28th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Routier and another v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2014] EWHC 3010 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 449
‘For a transfer under a will to be exempt from inheritance tax because it was to be “held on trust for charitable purposes” within the meaning of section 23(6) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 the relevant trust had to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts.’
WLR Daily, 18th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Supreme Court
Moseley, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Haringey [2014] UKSC 56 (29 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Hall & Ors, R. v [2014] EWCA Crim 2046 (07 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Vocalspruce Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2014] EWCA Civ 1302 (30 October 2014)
Belhaj & Anor v Straw & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1394 (30 October 2014)
Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (t/a LexisNexis) & Anor v Bewry [2014] EWCA Civ 1411 (30 October 2014)
Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No. 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408 (29 October 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Sirhowy Investments Ltd v Henderson & Anor [2014] EWHC 3562 (Ch) (30 October 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Trushin v National Crime Agency [2014] EWHC 3551 (Admin) (29 October 2014)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Arcadia Group Brands Ltd & Ors v Visa Inc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3561 (Comm) (30 October 2014)
Ted Baker Plc & Anor v Axa Insurance UK Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3548 (Comm) (30 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Halawi v WDFG UK Ltd (t/a World Duty Free) [2014] EWCA Civ 1387 (28 October 2014)
Chalfont St Peter Parish Council v Chiltern District Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1393 (28 October 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Mensah v Salford City Council [2014] EWHC 3537 (Admin) (28 October 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Reachlocal UK Ltd & Anor v Bennett & Ors [2014] EWHC 3405 (QB) (21 October 2014)
Kelly v Ministry Of Justice [2014] EWHC 3440 (QB) (20 October 2014)
Coulson & Ors v Wilby [2014] EWHC 3404 (QB) (21 October 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Emerald Supplies Ltd & Ors v British Airways Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3513 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips [2014] EWHC 3545 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
Emerald Supplies Ltd & Ors v British Airways Plc & Ors [2014] EWHC 3514 (Ch) (28 October 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
A And B (Children: Brussels II Revised: Article 15) V [2014] EWHC 3516 (Fam) (23 October 2014)
London Borough of Croydon v S & Anor [2014] EWHC 3550 (Fam) (09 October 2014)
Quan v Bray & Ors [2014] EWHC 3340 (Fam) (27 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
‘The phrase “any other harm” in paragraph 88 of the National Planning Policy Framework did not mean only harm to the Green Belt, but included any other harm that was relevant for planning purposes. If a planning proposal was not in accordance with the policies in the development plan for the protection of the countryside, the planning permission should be refused having regard to the planning policy framework as a whole.’
WLR Daily, 24th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The rules which applied to the construction of contracts generally were applicable to the construction of a bill of lading and required the words of the bill to be looked at as a whole in their context. Applying that approach, a clause in the printed conditions of carriage in a bill of lading which expressly incorporated “all terms and conditions, liberties and exceptions of the charterparty … including the law and arbitration clause” had the effect of incorporating into the bill an English law and exclusive jurisdiction clause in the charterparty.’
WLR Daily, 21st October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A purchaser of a property could not grant equitable rights of a proprietary character prior to acquisition of the legal estate.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A “change of circumstances” for the purposes of an application for permission to apply to revoke a placement order under section 24 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 had to be a change which had occurred since the making of the placement order and whichwas relevant to the circumstances of the case. It would be unacceptable to exclude any change in circumstances to the children who were the subject of the orders.’
WLR Daily, 21st October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Although the courts of the United Kingdom had jurisdiction judicially to review an Order in Council made on the advice of the Government of the United Kingdom acting in whole or in part in the interests of the United Kingdom, there were circumstances in which the court should nevertheless decline to entertain a claim for judicial review. The Queen’s Bench Divisional Court ought to have declined to entertain a human rights-compatibility challenge to legislation enacted in respect of the Island of Sark— a Crown dependency which was part of the Bailiwick of Guernsey but not of the United Kingdom— since it ought properly to have been brought before the bailiwick courts for determination under the island’s own human rights legislation.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
K v Kingswood Centre and another [2014] EWCA Civ 1332; [2014] WLR (D) 443
‘The notice period of a discharge order made for the purposes of section 25 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and served in accordance with regulation 3(3)(b)(i) of the Mental Health (Hospital, Guardianship and Treatment) (England) Regulations 2008 started to run from the time when it was received by the officer authorised by the hospital managers and not from the time when it was received at the hospital’s fax machine.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Sunrise Brokers LLP v Rodgers [2014] EWCA Civ 1373; [2014] WLR (D) 442
‘In considering whether to grant injunctive relief preventing an employee from working for another employer it was critical whether the grant of such relief would be tantamount to compelling the employee to return to work; and the question whether an employee in such a case who refused to return to work was entitled to continuing emoluments was an issue that essentially turned on the facts of the case. There was no rule requiring the employer to give some form of undertaking as to remuneration which went beyond the employer’s obligations under the contract, in order that the employer should be entitled to obtain an injunction.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The last sentence of article 4(4) of the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome Convention) applied to a commission contract for the carriage of goods solely when the main purpose of the contract consisted in the actual transport of the goods concerned, which was for the referring court to verify. Where the law applicable to a contract for the carriage of goods could not be fixed under the second sentence of article 4(4), it had to be determined in accordance with the general rule laid down in article 4(1) that the law governing the contract was that of the country with which it was most closely connected. Where it was argued that a contract had a closer connection with a country other than that the law of which was designated by the presumption laid down in article 4(2), the national court had to compare the connections existing between that contract and the country whose law was designated by the presumption and the other country concerned. In so doing, the national court had to take account of the circumstances as a whole, including the existence of other contracts connected with the contract in question.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Standard Chartered Bank v Dorchester LNG (2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1382; [2014] WLR (D) 440
‘The expression “completion, by delivery of the bill, of any indorsement of the bill” in section 5(2)(b) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 meant that completion of an indorsement by delivery required the voluntary and unconditional transfer of possession by the holder to the indorsee and an unconditional acceptance by the indorsee.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
McDonald v National Grid Electricity Transmission plc [2014] UKSC 53; [2014] WLR (D) 439
‘The Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931, made under section 79 of the Factory and Workshop Act 1901, were capable of applying where a person who, in the course of employment with a different employer, attended the defendant’s premises, and as a visitor viewed workers carrying on a process of mixing asbestos dust with water to form a paste for lagging work which exposed him to asbestos dust, even though the main business of the premises was not the processing of asbestos or the making of asbestos products.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The question as to whether a complainant was a consumer for the purposes of the Financial Conduct Authority’s compulsory jurisdiction dispute resolution rules was a matter of precedent fact to be decided by the courts; it was not a question for Financial Ombudsman Service to determine that was reviewable only on conventional (“Wednesbury”) grounds.’
WLR Daily, 20th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Halahan v R [2014] EWCA Crim 2079 (24 October 2014)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Aster Healthcare Ltd v Shafi (The Estate of) [2014] EWCA Civ 1350 (24 October 2014)
Morris v Blackpool Borough Council & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1384 (24 October 2014)
K v The Hospital Managers of the Kingswood Centre & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1332 (23 October 2014)
HTC Corporation v Gemalto SA [2014] EWCA Civ 1335 (22 October 2014)
Rees & Anor v Gateley Wareing (a firm) & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1351 (22 October 2014)
Foster & Anor v Action Aviation Ltd & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1368 (23 October 2014)
Sunrise Brokers LLP v Rodgers [2014] EWCA Civ 1373 (23 October 2014)
Standard Chartered Bank v Dorchester LNG (2) Ltd (Rev 1) [2014] EWCA Civ 1382 (22 October 2014)
G (A Child) [2014] EWCA Civ 1365 (22 October 2014)
Nzolameso v City of Westminster [2014] EWCA Civ 1383 (22 October 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
Nzolameso v Westminster City Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1383; [2014] WLR (D) 437
‘For the purposes of section 208 of the Housing Act 1996, when deciding whether it was “reasonably practicable” to accommodate a particular homeless person within its own district, bearing in mind that the accommodation might be of no more than a temporary nature, a local housing authority was entitled to have regard to all the factors that had a bearing on its ability to provide accommodation to that person, including the demands made on its resources, whether of a financial or administrative nature.’
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Further guidance on the approach to a “streamlined” process to deal with all deprivation of liberty (“DoL”) cases in a timely but just and fair way which was compliant with article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 16th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Where an applicant applied to the Secretary of State only for definite leave to remain, pursuant to section 3(1)(b) of the Immigration Act 1971, but made no request for indefinite leave to remain, and provided no material in support of the application specifically directed at an application for indefinite leave to remain, or which pointed to any disadvantage associated with the grant of discretionary leave to remain as opposed to indefinite leave to remain, the Secretary of State had no positive duty to consider what might support the granting of indefinite leave to remain.’
WLR Daily, 16th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025