Ramburs Inc v Agrifert SA [2015] EWHC 3548 (Comm); [2015] WLR (D) 505
‘Where a buyer of goods FOB nominated a substitute vessel pursuant to its right under the GAFTA FOB period of delivery clause appearing in GAFTA form 49, he was nevertheless required to comply with the terms of the contract of sale as to nomination and pre-advice in respect of the nomination of the substitute vessel.’
WLR Daily, 4th December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Gavin Edmondson Ltd v Haven Insurance Co Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1230; [2015] WLR (D) 496
‘A solicitors firm which had concluded conditional fee agreements with road traffic victims and had entered those details in accordance with the Pre-action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents on the website used by lawyers and insurers in such circumstances was entitled, when the claimants settled their personal injury claims directly with the defendants’ insurers, to recover the fixed costs and other sums payable under the Protocol scheme.’
WLR Daily, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
West End Investments (Cowell Group) Ltd v Birchlea Ltd [2015] EWHC 3381 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 499
‘There must be a significant deviation from the vertical plane for the exception in section 2(2) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 to apply.’
WLR Daily, 27th November 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The law of enfranchisement is very complicated. A whole industry has evolved to try to interpret the provisions of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (“the 1967 Act”) and the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (“the 1993 Act”) and put them into practice. The cost and frustration to leaseholders of such a convoluted process is considerable.’
Tanfield Chambers, 3rd December 2015
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘Most landlord and tenant disputes end up in court. From the perspective of landlords, this can be a lengthy, frustrating, and costly process. For tenants, the experience is often uncertain, draining, and also costly. Is there a place for arbitration in this?’
Tanfield Chambers, 30th November 2015
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The decision of Mann J. in Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and Michael Dreelan v HMRC [2015]EWHC 2878 (Ch) answers an important question regarding what is excluded property for purposes of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 s.48(3). This provides that foreign situs property which is settled property is excluded property for IHT purposes unless the settlor was domiciled in the U.K. at the time the settlement was made. Suppose a settlement was made when the settlor was domiciled outside the U.K, he subsequently becomes domiciled in the U.K and then adds foreign property to the settlement. Is the added property excluded property? HMRC have always contended that it is not. It has been argued in leading textbooks that it is. Mann J. has decided that HMRC are right.’
New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘In recent years it has become increasingly common for parties to a development agreement to agree to act towards one another with “good faith”. The meaning and extent of the obligations on the contracting parties imposed by such clauses is often difficult to ascertain. The purpose of this paper is to consider a number of cases in which good faith clauses, implied and express, are discussed and identify the general principles that apply to development agreements.’
Tanfield Chambers, 30th November 2015
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘On 4 November 2015 the Supreme Court handed down a judgment in relation to penalty clauses in a contract – Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67, a judgment of 124 pages before a panel of seven Justices. This was the first time that this Court or the House of Lords had considered such an issue for a century. Some commentators describe this judgment as, in effect, a complete re-writing of the relevant law. Others may call it merely a change, albeit an important change, of emphasis.’
New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘In Wellesley Partners LLP v Withers LLP [2015] EWCA Civ 1146 the Court of Appeal made an important change to the law of causation. From now onwards, the contractual approach causation shall apply instead of the tortious principles of remoteness in cases of concurrent liability. The effect of this case will be to materially change causation analyses in professional negligence matters, albeit the conclusion (as demonstrated in the Wellesley case itself) through the two analytical frameworks may well be identical.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘In his monthly column, James Bickford Smith discusses the decision in Ong and others v Ping [2015] EWHC 3258 (Ch) and the apparent revival of the “rule” in Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd (No 2) [1964] 2 QB 601.’
Full story
Littleton Chambers, 4th December 2015
Source: www.littletonchambers.co.uk
‘The majority of claims against professionals are framed in contract, the tort of negligence, or a combination of both. As readers of this article will be aware, the Limitation Act 1980 provides the same limitation period for both causes of action: “six years from the date on which the case of action arose.” But readers will also know that those periods frequently begin (and more importantly end) on different dates. This is because a breach of contract is actionable per se, i.e. without the need to prove damage, where as a claim in negligence requires proof of damage, which will often occur some time after the breach of duty, which is said to have caused it. For this reason many claims which are out of time for a claim in contract, are nevertheless in time for a claim in the tort of negligence.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘In its decision in Arnold v Britton [2015] 2 WLR 1593 the Supreme Court has restored the supremacy of the traditional approach to the construction of commercial contracts.’
New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘Applications for wrongful trading under s 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 are notoriously difficult. In Brooks v Armstrong [2015] EWHC 2289 (Ch), Registrar Jones ordered the former directors of Robin Hood Centre plc (the “Directors”) (the “Company”) to make a contribution to the Company’s assets under s 214. But the relatively small award serves as a cautionary reminder of the risks of s 214 applications for liquidators and directors alike.’
New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘The National Planning Policy Framework’s paragraph 17 lists 12 core land-use planning principles, including “encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value”. Within Green Belts its paragraph 89 lists six circumstances where the construction of new buildings is not inappropriate, including “… the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development”. Its paragraph 111 states, “Planning policies and decisions should encourage the effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value. Local planning authorities may continue to consider the case for setting a locally appropriate target for the use of brownfield land.”’
No. 5 Chambers, 1st December 2015
Source: www.no5.com
‘Last week, The Mirror reported that John Leslie was being questioned by police in connection with an alleged sexual assault. The report contained photographs of the police with evidence bags outside Leslie’s house. The Mirror reminded its readers of allegations made against the former TV presenter in 2002 and 2008. This the most recent example of media reports concerning allegations of sexual offences involving public figures.’
Doughty Street, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘While many practitioners are familiar with the general workings of lease renewals under the ’54 Act, there is one aspect of the law that is often overlooked: interim rent under sections 24A to D. Andy Creer takes a look at the law.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 20th November 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Labour lords are preparing to defy the House of Commons after it blocked their proposals to let 16- and 17-year-olds vote in the EU referendum.’
The Guardian, 8th December 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Amanda Eilledge explores the availability of public law defences and promissory estoppel in the context of a contract for the sale of land following the decision in Dudley Muslim Association v Dudley MBC [2015] EWCA Civ 1123.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 9th December 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘A company promoting sexual liaisons using pictures of a naked woman has been reprimanded for running ads in a children’s smartphone game.’
The Guardian, 9th December 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘We are now bombarded with case reports by email and over the Internet. The reporting of 1st instance quantum decisions used to be a comparative rarity before 1992 and the PIQR. Even then there was a time lag in publication and many decisions were never covered. On one level, we are immensely fortunate now to be able to discern how the best counsel and 1st instance judges set about their respective tasks in serious personal injuries litigation; but with that opportunity comes the obligation on the serious practitioner to take the time really to get to grips with the lengthy judgments. It is not easy. This paper, evolving since the autumn of 2007, is an exercise in the on-going fulfilment of that obligation.’
Byrom Chambers, 7th December 2015
Source: www.byromstreet.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024