Brough v Law and another [2011] EWCA Civ 1183; [2011] WLR (D) 300
“A maintenance assessment under which an absent parent was liable to pay maintenance in respect of a qualifying child to the parent with care did not end as a result of a brief reconciliation between the parents within paragraph 16(1)(b) of Schedule 1 to the Child Support Act 1991 as read with section 3 of that Act.”
WLR Daily, 20th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
SSL International plc and another v TTK LIG Ltd and others [2011] EWCA Civ 1170; [2011] WLR (D) 299
“Service of a claim form on the director of a foreign company during his temporary visit to England did not constitute personal service of the claim form on the company, within CPR r 6.5(3)(b), where the company was neither resident nor carried on business in England and all its directors were resident overseas when the proceedings were purportedly served.”
WLR Daily, 19th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Judges should not sit or should face recusal or disqualification where there was a real possibility on the objective appearances of things, assessed by the fair-minded and informed observer, that the tribunal could be biased. The vice-president of the Institute of Legal Executives (‘ILEX’) ought not to have been a member of a disciplinary appeal tribunal set up by the institute to deal with breaches of its rules. Her leading role in the institute and her inevitable interest in its policy of disciplinary regulation should have disqualified her because the fair-minded and informed observer ought to have or would have concluded that there was a real possibility of bias.”
WLR Daily, 19th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Supreme Court
Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander Ltd, Re [2011] UKSC 48 (19 October 2011)
Davies & Anor, R (on the application of) v Revenue and Customs [2011] UKSC 47 (19 October 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Agard v Westminster Kingsway College [2011] EWCA Civ 1169 (20 October 2011)
Rochdale Borough Council v Dixon [2011] EWCA Civ 1173 (20 October 2011)
The Financial Services Authority v Sinaloa Gold Plc & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1158 (18 October 2011)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
KV & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 2342 (19 October 2011)
High Court (Chancery Divsion)
Toshiba Carrier UK Ltd & Ors v KME Yorkshire Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 2665 (Ch) (19 October 2011)
High Court (Family Division)
S v AG (Financial Remedy: Lottery Prize) [2011] EWHC 2637 (Fam) (14 October 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
In re Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander Ltd [2011] UKSC 48; [2011] WLR (D) 297
“The equitable rule which prevented a person sharing in a fund while his debts to the fund were unpaid was trumped by the rule against double proof in a suretyship situation.”
WLR Daily, 19th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In order to gain non-resident status for tax purposes, a person who had left the United Kingdom had to demonstrate a distinct break from his or her previous pattern of life in the UK. Such a test was clear from the ordinary law of residence, and the Inland Revenue guidance booklet IR20 (operative until 2009) did not contain any less stringent test which taxpayers could rely on.”
WLR Daily, 19th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“When obtaining an injunction the Financial Services Authority should not normally be required to give an undertaking in damages to third parties, beyond an undertaking to cover the costs incurred in complying with the injunction.”
WLR Daily, 18th october 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A claim for damages for personal injury was a chose in action capable of assignment. The law would not, however, recognise on the grounds of public policy an assignment to a party who did not have sufficient interest to support what would otherwise be a bare right of action.”
WLR Daily, 12th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Blackshaw, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2312 (18 October 2011)
Hindley, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2100 (28 July 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
The Financial Services Authority v Sinaloa Gold Plc & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1158 (18 October 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
City Index Ltd (t/a Finspreads) v Balducci [2011] EWHC 2562 (Ch) (07 October 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
DL & Anor v London Borough of Newham [2011] EWHC 2666 (Admin) (18 October 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Lornamead Acquisitions Ltd v Kaupthing Bank HF [2011] EWHC 2611 (Comm) (18 October 2011)
Stiedl v Enyo Law LLP & Ors [2011] EWHC 2649 (Comm) (18 October 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
“Neither the obligation to comply with a financial support direction issued by the Pensions Regulator under section 43 of the Pensions Act 2004 nor the obligation to pay the trustees of the relevant occupational pension scheme the sum specified in a contribution notice issued under section 47 of the 2004 Act, following non-compliance with the direction, constituted a provable debt in an administration or liquidation within the meaning of rule 13.12 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 where the direction was issued after the commencement of the insolvency process; such obligations ranked instead as an expense of the administration or liquidation.”
WLR Daily, 14th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Daventry District Council v Daventry & District Housing Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1153 (13 October 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association & Ors [2011] EWHC 2631 (QB) (17 October 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
High Court (Patents Court)
Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Novartis AG [2011] EWHC 2403 (Pat) (30 September 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Motto and others v Trafigura Ltd and another [2011] EWCA Civ 1150; [2011] WLR (D) 292
“Where a costs judge determined that base costs were disproportionate for the purposes of CPR r 44.4(2)(a), to render them proportionate the judge was required to satisfy himself that the work on each item on the bill of costs was necessary, and, if necessary, that the cost of the item was reasonable. That was the approach to be taken generally, including in group litigation.”
WLR Daily, 12th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Bloom & Ors v The Pensions Regulator & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1124 (14 October 2011)
HM Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc [2011] EWCA Civ 1156 (14 October 2011)
Estafnous v London & Leeds Business Centres Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1157 (14 October 2011)
Williams & Anor v Hinton & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1123 (14 October 2011)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Stewart & Ors, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 2296 (14 October 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Cowderoy v Cranfield [2011] EWHC 2628 (Ch) (13 October 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Rimpacific Navigation Inc v Daehan Shipbuilding CoLtd [2011] EWHC 2618 (Comm) (14 October 2011)
WMS Gaming Inc v B Plus Giocolegale Ltd [2011] EWHC 2620 (Comm) (13 October 2011)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Omni Laboratories Inc v Eden Energy Ltd [2011] EWHC 2626 (TCC) (14 October 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Supreme Court
AXA General Insurance Ltd & Ors v Lord Advocate & Ors (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 46 (12 October 2011)
Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 43 (6 October 2011)
Her Majesty’s Advocate v P (Scotland) [2011] UKSC 44 (6 October 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Jones v Environcom Ltd & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1152 (13 October 2011)
Revenue and Customs v Rochdale Drinks Distributors Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1116 (13 October 2011)
Christie Owen & Davies Plc v Raobgle Trust Corporation [2011] EWCA Civ 1151 (13 October 2011)
The Great Estates Group Ltd v Digby [2011] EWCA Civ 1120 (13 October 2011)
KM v Lambeth London Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1125 (12 October 2011)
Motto & Ors v Trafigura Ltd & Anor (Rev 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 1150 (12 October 2011)
Barts and the London NHS Trust v Verma [2011] EWCA Civ 1129 (12 October 2011)
Roder UK Ltd v West & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1126 (12 October 2011)
Simpson v Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 1149 (12 October 2011)
Harrison & Anor v Black Horse Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1128 (12 October 2011)
CF Capital Plc v Willoughby [2011] EWCA Civ 1115 (12 October 2011)
Gesner Investments Ltd v Bombardier Inc [2011] EWCA Civ 1118 (11 October 2011)
French v Groupama Insurance Company Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1119 (11 October 2011)
Celtic Energy Ltd v The Welsh Ministers [2011] EWCA Civ 1122 (11 October 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Plentyoffish Media Inc. v Plenty More Llp [2011] EWHC 2568 (Ch) (11 October 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Source: www.bailii.org
“An immigration rule designed to deter forced marriages, which prevented the granting of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom as a spouse if either of the parties to the marriage was aged under 21, was an unjustified interference with the right to family life.”
WLR Daily, 12th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
HM Advocate v P [2011] UKSC 44; [2011] WLR (D) 290
“There was no absolute rule that evidence which had been obtained from an accused who had been questioned by police when he had not been given access to legal advice, but which existed independently of his answers, was inadmissible.”
WLR Daily, 6th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Williams, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 2126 (02 September 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
H-K (Children) [2011] EWCA Civ 1100 (10 October 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Zajaczkowski v Sad Rejonowy W Malborku Poland [2011] EWHC 2433 (Admin) (02 September 2011)
Nursing and Midwifery Council v Murray [2011] EWHC 2434 (Admin) (02 September 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Stratford Coin & Bullion Inc v Henien & Ors [2011] EWHC 2552 (Comm) (10 October 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Khan & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 2240 (07 October 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Berezovsky v Hine & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1089 (07 October 2011)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Adelson & Anor v Anderson & Anor [2011] EWHC 2497 (QB) (07 October 2011)
Charles Terence Estates Ltd v Cornwall Council & Anor [2011] EWHC 2542 (QB) (07 October 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Quigley v Masterson [2011] EWHC 2529 (Ch) (07 October 2011)
Care Matters Partnership Ltd, Re [2011] EWHC 2543 (Ch) (07 October 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Family Division)
FG v MBW [2011] EWHC 1729 (Fam) (07 October 2011)
High Court (Commercial Court)
JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Ors [2011] EWHC 2545 (Comm) (07 October 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Northern Rock Applicants v Caldwell and another [2011] UKUT 408 (TCC); [2011] WLR (D) 289
“The statutory assumption in section 5(4)(a) of the Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 that all financial assistance provided by the Bank of England or the Treasury ‘has been withdrawn’ required the independent valuer to assume that the assistance had been terminated and repaid, following realisations of assets made just before the date of nationalisation.”
WLR Daily, 6th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In principle the line as to when access to legal advice had to be provided before a person suspected of a criminal offence was questioned by police should be drawn as from the moment when he had been taken into police custody, or his freedom of action had been significantly curtailed.”
WLR Daily, 6th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025