Flanagan v Liontrust Investment Partners LLP and others [2015] EWHC 2171 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 338
‘The doctrine of repudiatory breach was excluded from multi-party agreements falling within the scope of section 5 of Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000.’
WLR Daily, 24th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
NRAM plc v McAdam and another [2015] EWCA Civ 751; [2015] WLR (D) 334
‘In a specific loan agreement, which was the template for agreements between a bank and numerous customers, the protections under section 77A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 had not been incorporated, and no estoppel arose from the existence of the statutory wording in the agreement. Nor was it possible to treat the borrowers “as if” they had been under the protection provided by the 1974 Act. However, there had been a representation (and contractual warranty) arising from the statement that the loan agreement was a regulated agreement, when it was not, which would have entitled the borrowers to sue for misrepresentation or breach of contractual warranty.’
WLR Daily, 23rd July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘H & S (Surrogacy Arrangement) EWFC 36, 30 April 2015. M, a fifteen month old girl, was born as the result of artificial or assisted conception and of a highly contested agreement between S (the mother, a Romanian national) and H (the father, of Hungarian extraction) and B (the second applicant and H’s partner who had moved to the UK in 2004).’
UK Human Rights Blog, 11th May 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Lawyers are calling for rules surrounding surrogacy to be tightened up after a woman who had a child with a gay couple then refused them access was ordered to hand over the baby.’
The Guardian, 6th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Don’t settle for less, says Adam Short.’
New Law Journal, 24th April 2015
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘The question of whether two Parties have entered in to a binding settlement compromising a case is often just as (if not more) acrimonious matter as the substantive case. In particular as the devil is often in the detail of any settlement, the intention is often that even where settlement is agreed in principle, one party does not wish to be bound to the settlement until all the terms are agreed and embodied in a signed document. If this is the intention then it is important that the same is made well known to the other negotiating party, in order to avoid the pitfall of finding oneself having inadvertently entering in to a binding settlement, prior to concluding those subsequent negotiations.’
No. 5 Chambers, 13th January 2015
Source: www.no5.com
‘Judy Dawson looks at the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal in Delaney v Secretary of State for Transport and the insurance indemnity issues that arise.’
Park Square Barristers, 11th March 2015
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Periodically the topic of gagging clauses resurfaces in the press. In 2013 the revelation of large numbers of NHS employees entering into such agreements produced a mass of publicity. Interest in the topic duly stimulated, it led to recommendations by the Public Accounts Committee in the House of Commons that revised guidance from the Cabinet Office should require public sector organisations to secure approval from the Cabinet Office for special severance payments and associated compromise agreements where they relate to cases of whistleblowing.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 8th January 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘A highway authority could lawfully enter into an agreement with a developer or other party under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 for that other party to pay a sum for the expenses of highways maintenance after the date on which the highway became maintainable at public expense.’
WLR Daily, 31st October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Wickland (Holdings) Ltd v Telchadder; [2014] UKSC 57; [2014] WLR (D) 469
‘Where the owners of a mobile home park had given an occupier written notice that they would seek a court order terminating his agreement to live at the park unless he stopped his anti-social behaviour, which under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 was required prior to any eviction, they could not rely on that same notice when he next committed a further act of anti-social behaviour three years later.’
WLR Daily, 5th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Brian Philip Telchadder (Appellant) v Wickland Holdings Limited (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 57 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 5th November 2014
‘Judge warns of trauma ‘unleashed’ by fallout from ‘known-donor fertilisation’ arrangement between former friends.’
Daily Telegraph, 3rd November 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Lord Justice Jackson took this appeal as an opportunity to stress the importance of parties acting reasonably in agreeing to extensions of time where court hearings are not disrupted. Whilst one might have expected courts to be less approving of parties granting each other extensions of time following the 1 April 2013 reforms, the contrary appears to be the case: Jackson LJ made it quite clear that “…it was no part of my recommendations that parties should refrain from agreeing reasonable extensions of time, which neither imperil hearing dates nor otherwise disrupt the proceedings” (at [30]).
Full story (PDF)
Henderson Chambers, 27th May 2014
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘As a matter of construction of section 77A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, where a creditor had provided the debtor with a statement which failed to set out the information required by the Consumer Credit (Information Requirements and Duration of Licences and Charges) Regulations 2007, the period of non-compliance commenced on a date to be calculated as if no statement had been served at all, and the period of non-compliance began on the day following the last day on which a compliant statement could have been given.’
WLR Daily, 19th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘One encounters the following situation fairly routinely in practice. On Monday the parties sign a carefully drafted and negotiated contract intended to govern all aspects of their relationship. Detailed mechanisms purport to cater for all eventualities. By Friday, the parties have slipped into a mode of performance which, in material respects, differs radically from the provisions of the contract.’
Henderson Chambers, 10th February 2014
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘In almost every litigated case the parties usually find themselves needing to vary the dates of some directions. This can be done by way of written agreement between the parties and is allowed by CPR 2.11.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 22nd January 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘For the purposes of section 106(d) of the Consumer Act 1974 the words “realisation of the security” should be interpreted conventionally so as to achieve the policy objective stated in section 113(1) that the security provided in relation to a regulated agreement could not be enforced so as to benefit the creditor to any greater extent than would be the case if the security were not provided. In the case of a secured loan to which section 106(d) applied, its provisions did not catch all sums paid by the debtor in discharge of the loan.’
WLR Daily, 17th December 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A woman who moved out from her flat while a local authority carried out repairs still held her tenancy eight years later, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
Local Government Lawyer, 12th August 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
“Changes to the law that will allow employers to carry out certain negotiations
with employees in relation to termination without those conversations being
admissible in a future unfair dismissal claim will come into force on 29
July.”
OUT-LAW.com, 11th July 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“Margaret Hodge says government must make clear deals should not stop whistleblowers from speaking out, after NAO report.”
The Guardian, 21st June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025