BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted February 4th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Auton & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 76 (03 February 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Islam & Anor v Al- Sami & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 32 (03 February 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Wollenberg v Casinos Austria International Holding GmbH [2011] EWHC 103 (Ch) (03 February 2011)

Hobbs & Anor v Gibson & Ors [2010] EWHC 3676 (Ch) (17 December 2010)

Rosebery Ltd v Rocklee Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC B1 (Ch) (20 January 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Kasprzak v Warsaw Regional Court, Poland; Bingham v Trial Court No 4 of Marbella, Spain; Wilson-Campbell v Court of Instruction No 4 of Orihuela, Alicante, Spain – WLR Daily

Posted February 4th, 2011 in EC law, extradition, law reports, time limits by sally

Kasprzak v Warsaw Regional Court, Poland; Bingham v Trial Court No 4 of Marbella, Spain; Wilson-Campbell v Court of Instruction No 4 of Orihuela, Alicante, Spain [2011] EWHC 100 (Admin); [2011] WLR (D) 35

“Article 23 of the Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between member states, as implemented by s 36(3)(b) of the Extradition Act 2003, contemplated the possibility of agreement being sought and given for an extension of the period for extradition after the expiry of the original period, since it was only at the end of the original period that circumstances beyond the control of the member state or serious humanitarian reasons prevented extradition within that period and gave rise to the need for agreement on a new date for removal.”

WLR Daily, 3rd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted February 4th, 2011 in causation, consumer protection, law reports, unfair commercial practices by sally

Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and others [2011] EWHC 106 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 34

“For the purposes of applying the causation test in regulations 5 and 6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 the combined effect of all relevant misleading acts and omissions had first to be ascertained, and then subjected to the test whether, taken in the aggregate, it would probably cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision which he would not otherwise have taken.”

WLR Daily, 3rd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

HSBC Bank Plc v Brophy – WLR Daily

Posted February 4th, 2011 in consumer credit, law reports by sally

HSBC Bank Plc v Brophy [2011] EWCA Civ 67; [2011] WLR (D) 33

“A clause in a credit card agreement which provided for the bank to determine the credit limit from time to time at its discretion by notifying the debtor of its amount was valid.”

WLR Daily, 3rd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted February 3rd, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Llewellyn v Lorey & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 37 (03 February 2011)

Glaves v Crown Prosecution Service [2011] EWCA Civ 69 (03 February 2011)

Bowater v Northwest London Hospitals NHS Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 63 (03 February 2011)

Uren v Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 66 (02 February 2011)

HSBC Bank Plc v Brophy [2011] EWCA Civ 67 (02 February 2011)

Morgan v The Spirit Group Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 68 (02 February 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Forrest v Lord Chancellor & Anor [2011] EWHC 142 (Admin) (03 February 2011)

Patel v The Office of the Attorney General, Frankfurt [2011] EWHC 155 (Admin) (03 February 2011)

Kasprzak v Warsaw Regional Court, Poland [2011] EWHC 100 (Admin) (02 February 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Ketteringham & Anor v Hardy [2011] EWHC 162 (Ch) (03 February 2011)

Marley v Rawlings & Anor [2011] EWHC 161 (Ch) (03 February 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench)

Ashia Centur Ltd v Barker Gillette LLP [2011] EWHC 148 (QB) (03 February 2011)

Trigger v Northampton Magistrates’ Court & Anor [2011] EWHC 149 (QB) (02 February 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

Posted February 3rd, 2011 in asylum, children, deportation, human rights, immigration, law reports by sally
“The need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children who were in the United Kingdom was a primary consideration when immigration authorities were making a decision as to the deportation of a parent whose application for asylum in the United Kingdom had been refused. Once the children’s best interests had been identified, the authorities were then required to assess whether those interests were outweighed by any other considerations such as the need to maintain a proper and efficient system of immigration control. When the children had British citizenship that was of particular importance in assessing their best interests.”

WLR Daily, 2nd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Global Process Systems Inc and another v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad – WLR Daily

Posted February 3rd, 2011 in insurance, law reports, shipping law by sally
“A provision in a marine cargo insurance policy excluding loss resulting from any inherent inability of the goods to withstand a voyage applied only where the goods had deteriorated, not because they had been subjected to some external fortuitous accident or casualty, but because of their natural behaviour in the ordinary course of the voyage.”
WLR Daily, 2nd February 2011
 
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Orr v Milton Keynes Council – WLR Daily

Posted February 3rd, 2011 in employment, law reports, unfair dismissal by sally
“The employer’s knowledge for the purposes of section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was that of the person who was deputed to carry out the employer’s functions.”
WLR Daily, 2nd February 2011
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Regina (Z) v Croydon London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted February 3rd, 2011 in asylum, children, judicial review, law reports by sally

Regina (Z) v Croydon London Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 59; [2011] WLR (D) 29

“Where a court was considering whether to grant permission to proceed with a claim for judicial review of a local authority’s decision in an age assessment case the court should ask whether the material before it raised a factual case which, taken at its highest, could not properly succeed in a contested factual hearing. If so, permission should be refused. If not, permission should normally be granted, subject to other discretionary factors, such as delay. It was axiomatic that an unaccompanied asylum seeker who claimed to be a child should be given, where an assessment of his age was being conducted by a local authority, a fair and proper opportunity, at a stage when a possible adverse decision was no more than provisional, to deal with important points adverse to his age case which weighed against him.”

WLR Daily, 2nd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted February 2nd, 2011 in law reports by sally

Supreme Court

Global Process Systems Inc & Anor v Berhad [2011] UKSC 5 (1 February 2011)

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4 (1 February 2011)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Steed v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 75 (01 February 2011)

Barclay & Ors v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 32 (01 February 2011)

Hereworth v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 74 (01 February 2011)

Welsh v R. [2011] EWCA Crim 73 (01 February 2011)

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

D’ Silva v Manchester Metropolitan University [2011] EWCA Civ 36 (01 February 2011)

FZ, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59 (01 February 2011)

Orr v Milton Keynes Council [2011] EWCA Civ 62 (01 February 2011)

Campbell & Anor v Banks & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 61 (01 February 2011)

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 42 (31 January 2011)

French v Entry Clearance Officer Kingston [2011] EWCA Civ 35 (31 January 2011)

Fortis Bank SA/NV & Anor v Indian Overseas Bank [2011] EWCA Civ 58 (31 January 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Looney v Trafigura Beheer BV [2011] EWHC 125 (Ch) (01 February 2011)

Re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 122 (Ch) (31 January 2011)

Re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd & Ors [2011] EWHC 122 (Ch) (31 January 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Wilson & Anor v MF Global UK Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 138 (QB) (01 February 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Garner & Ors v Elmbridge Borough Council & Ors [2011] EWHC 86 (Admin) (31 January 2011)

High Court (Family Division)

CW & Ors v TW [2011] EWHC 76 (Fam) (01 February 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

AES-3C Maritza East 1 Eood v Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank & Anor [2011] EWHC 123 (TCC) (31 January 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Ispat Indurstries Ltd v Western Bulk PTE.Ltd [2011] EWHC 93 (Comm) (31 January 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted February 2nd, 2011 in financial regulation, insurance, law reports, warranties by sally

In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others [2011] EWHC 122 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 28

“A contract for repair or replacement only in the event of breakdown or malfunction which did not oblige the insurer to indemnify the insured for costs which the insured himself incurred fell within para (b) of class 16 Schedule 1 to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001.”

WLR Daily, 1st February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd – WLR Daily

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 42; [2011] WLR (D) 27

“Where a claimant applied for an injunction restraining publication of private information and sought reporting restrictions, in balancing the rights of the individual to confidentiality against the public interest in freedom of expression, generally the court would either direct that the claimant’s name be anonymised but disclosure of the nature of the information was permitted, or direct that the claimant could be named but the nature of the information was not to be identified.”

WLR Daily, 1st February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Jones v Jones – WLR Daily

Posted February 1st, 2011 in divorce, financial provision, law reports by sally

Jones v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 41; [2011] WLR (D) 26

“Even if an earning capacity might also sometimes be relevant to a fair distribution of the assets pursuant to the sharing principle, it did not follow that the earning capacity should itself be treated as one of those assets, still less that an attempt should be made to capitalise it.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Haugesund Kommune and another v DEPFA ACS Bank (Wikborg Rein & Co, Part 20 defendants) – WLR Daily

Posted February 1st, 2011 in banking, damages, law reports, negligence, solicitors, ultra vires by sally

Haugesund Kommune and another v DEPFA ACS Bank (Wikborg Rein & Co, Part 20 defendants) [2011] EWCA Civ 33; [2011] WLR (D) 25

“A firm of solicitors which erroneously advised a bank that municipalities would not be acting ultra vires if they entered into a swap arrangement with the bank was not liable for the losses resulting from the municipalities’ inability to make restitution once the void nature of the swap agreement came to light. Despite their negligence in relation to the vires of the municipalities, the solicitors had taken no responsibility for their creditworthiness or good faith or for the fact that the bank could not lawfully obtain execution against them when they defaulted on the arrangement.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding wLR Daily summary is removed.

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others – WLR Daily

Posted February 1st, 2011 in covenants, landlord & tenant, law reports, service charges by sally

Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson and Others [2011] EWCA Civ 38; [2011] WLR (D) 24

“The proper exercise of the discretion in section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as inserted) to dispense with the requirement of consultation laid down in the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 did not depend on financial consequences for the landlord or tenant of granting or refusing such a dispensation.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted January 31st, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Goldstone v Goldstone & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 39 (28 January 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Wallis & Anor v Meredith [2011] EWHC 75 (QB) (28 January 2011)

Irish Response Ltd v Direct Beauty Products Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 37 (QB) (21 January 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

AO, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 110 (Admin) (28 January 2011)

High Court (Commercial Court)

Teal Assurance Company Ltd v W R Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 91 (Comm) (31 January 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

BAILII: Recent Decisions

Posted January 28th, 2011 in law reports by sally

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Jones v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 41 (28 January 2011)

Hope and Glory Public House Ltd, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 31 (26 January 2011)

High Court (Administrative Court)

Shah v General Pharmaceutical Council [2011] EWHC 73 (Admin) (28 January 2011)

Jones v Director of Public Prosecutions [2011] EWHC 50 (Admin) (27 January 2011)

Oadby Hilltop and Meadowcroft Conservation Area Association & Anor, R (on the application of) v Oadby and Wigston Borough Council & Anor [2011] EWHC 60 (Admin) (21 January 2011)

High Court (Chancery Division)

Carpenter & Ors v Calico Quays Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 96 (Ch) (27 January 2011)

High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)

Raymond Stevenson Lucia Hinton Michael Taylor v London Borough of Southwark [2011] EWHC 108 (QB) (28 January 2011)

High Court (Technology and Construction Court)

McCain Foods Gb Ltd v Eco-Tec (Europe) Ltd [2011] EWHC 66 (TCC) (27 January 2011)

The Halo Trust v Secretary of State for International Development [2011] EWHC 87 (TCC) (27 January 2011)

Source: www.bailii.org

Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd (The Bunga Melati Dua) – WLR Daily

Posted January 28th, 2011 in insurance, law reports, piracy, shipping law by sally

Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd (The Bunga Melati Dua) [2011] EWCA Civ 24; [2011] WLR (D) 23

“A cargo seized by pirates and subsequently recovered after being ransomed by the shipowner was not ‘irretrievably lost’ within the terms of section 57(1) of the Marine Insurance Act 1906, even though some might regard the payment of a ransom as morally objectionable and it was something the owner was not required to do.”

WLR Daily, 27th January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Regina v Hoath; Regina v Standage – WLR Daily

Regina v Hoath; Regina v Standage [2011] WLR (D) 22

“Where a defendant had been given a statutory right of appeal against a refusal to vary a sexual offences prevention order the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division was not precluded from exercising its normal powers on an appeal where there was no express statutory power to make an order on the appeal.”

WLR Daily, 27th January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Sibthorpe and another v Southwark London Borough Council (Law Society intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted January 28th, 2011 in champerty, costs, indemnities, law reports by sally

Sibthorpe and another v Southwark London Borough Council (Law Society intervening) [2011] EWCA Civ 25; [2011] WLR (D) 21

“A conditional fee agreement which provided for the claimant’s solicitors to indemnify her against payment of the defendant’s costs if the claim was dismissed was not champertous or otherwise contrary to public policy. As a result its inclusion in a conditional fee agreement which in all other respects complied with the requirements of section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 did not invalidate the agreement.”

WLR Daily, 26th January 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.