‘Chauffeurs, photographers and caterers could have to pay thousands of pounds in damages if they refuse to provide services to a same-sex wedding.’
Daily Telegraph, 30th March 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A man placed on a credit blacklist after a row over payments for a laptop computer said today he had “mixed feelings” despite winning a court battle that lasted 16 years.’
The Independent, 26th March 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘In the case of Coventry and others (Respondents) v Lawrence and another (Appellants) [2014] UKSC 13 the Supreme Court has addressed five key matters which will play an important role in informing future claims for nuisance.’
Henderson Chambers, 25th March 2014
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘The termination of a solicitor’s actual authority by reason of a client’s supervening mental incapacity did not, it itself, automatically frustrate the underlying contract of retainer.’
WLR Daily, 5th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Dunhill v Burgin (Nos 1 and 2): [2014] UKSC 18; [2014] WLR (D) 122
‘The test of capacity to conduct proceedings for the purpose of CPR Pt 21 was the capacity to conduct the claim or cause of action which the claimant in fact had, rather than the claim as formulated by her lawyers. A consent order based on the settlement of a claim by a claimant who lacked capacity and did not have a litigation friend was not valid even though the claimant was legally represented.’
WLR Daily, 12th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Leading London law firm Withers has been ordered to pay £1.6m in damages after the High Court upheld a claim of professional negligence over the drafting of an LLP agreement.’
Legal Futures, 13th March 2014
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The High Court is this week hearing a judicial review that claimant lawyers hope will strike down the deeply unpopular policy of HM Revenue & Customs that means it will only release the employment history of a mesothelioma victim to their lawyer with a High Court order.’
Litigation futures, 12th March 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The court could not award damages for distress and injury to feelings caused to a disabled passenger during flight in breach of Council Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 (implemented in domestic law by the Civil Aviation (Access to Air Travel for Disabled Persons and Persons with Reduced Mobility) Regulations 2007) since such an award was precluded by article 29 of the Montreal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air 1999 (“the Montreal Convention”), as adopted in the European Union by Council Regulation (EC) No 2027/97, as amended by article 3(1) of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 889/2002, (“the Montreal Regulation”), and pursuant to the European Communities Act 1972, as amended.’
WLR Daily, 5th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Readers of this blog will be familiar with the Government’s announcement, following the conclusion last year of its consultation on private actions in competition law, that it intends to introduce an “opt out” regime for collective competition law actions. In brief, unless they specifically choose to opt out, UK-domiciled consumers and businesses will automatically be included as claimants in collective actions, provided they satisfy the criteria for membership set by the Competition Appeal Tribunal when it certifies the class. One of the particular policy objectives behind this proposal is to empower small businesses and consumers to seek redress in respect of anti-competitive behaviour. The combination of the complexity and cost of seeking such redress is seen currently to form an almost insurmountable hurdle to all but the largest claims.’
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers,
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
‘The law of private nuisance is the way of balancing the rights of neighours, the right to be noisy or smelly, and to be free of noise or smells. Hitherto it is has been explicitly a private law remedy, and has slightly odd rules. But it has been struggling with public interests for some years; are they irrelevant, or can they carry the day for claimant or defendant in a private nuisance claim?’
UK Human Rights Blog, 3rd March 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Coventry and others (Respondents) v Lawrence and another (Appellants) [2014] UKSC 13 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 26th February 2014
‘A victim of domestic violence has been awarded £2,350 from Gwent Police after she was arrested when she phoned for help.’
BBC News, 24th February 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers Assurances [2014] EWCA 12; [2014] WLR (D) 86
‘Where a cyclist had been run down in France and brought proceedings in the English courts seeking damages for personal injury, the question whether there should be one single joint expert, or more than one expert pursuant to CPR Pt 35, was a matter of “evidence and procedure” within the meaning of article 1(3) of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 864/2007. Therefore the question of which expert evidence the court should order fell to be determined in accordance with English and not French law.’
WLR Daily, 20th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Litigation costs are troublesome, but they are particularly difficult in environmental cases where the claimant is not necessarily pursuing his private interests. This case is the result of a long-running and successful campaign by NGOs to persuade the EU Commission to investigate UK environmental legal costs. The main finding may not bother the UK too much, because wisely it saw this one coming and changed costs rules in environmental public law cases. But a subsidiary ruling about cross-undertakings as to damages will cause the courts, if not the Government, to rethink things.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th February 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Dominic Regan predicts the likely civil procedure developments for 2014.’
New Law Journal, 29th January 2014
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘An Afghan refugee granted asylum in the UK has accepted substantial libel damages over a newspaper accused him of being a member of the Taliban.’
BBC News, 29th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A mentally-ill Ghanaian man who was wrongly held in immigration detention centres is to receive “substantial” damages following a High Court ruling.’
BBC News, 29th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A 10-year-old girl who was left brain damaged after she was accidentally injected with glue in her brain is to receive a multimillion-pound payout.’
BBC News, 27th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Haxton v Philips Electronics UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 4; [2014] WLR (D) 19
‘There was no reason of principle or policy why a claimant whose life expectancy had been reduced by the negligence of the defendant should not be able to recover damages compensating her for the consequent reduction in damages for loss of dependency which she was entitled to claim in a separate action against the same defendant under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 as a dependant of her late husband.’
WLR Daily, 22nd January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025