Regina (Coleman) v Governor of Wayland Prison and Another
Queen’s Bench Division
“A prison governor had no power, whether under the Prison Rules (SI 1999 No 728) or the common law, to destroy a mobile telephone confiscated from a prisoner.”
The Times, 23rd April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Regina v Khan Regina v Lockett; Regina v Carrington
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
“Confiscation orders made under old regulations in tobacco-smuggling cases had to be quashed because the prosecuting authority had overlooked the fact that new regulations had narrowed the categories of persons liable to pay excise duty.”
The Times, 23rd April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Whippey v Jones [2009] EWCA Civ 452 (08 April 2009)
So v HSBC Bank Plc & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 296 (03 April 2009)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Heslop v Bishton & Ors [2009] EWHC 607 (Ch) (20 April 2009)
High Court (Commercial Court)
High Court (Admiralty Division)
George v Coastal Marine 2004 Ltd (t/a Mashfords) [2009] EWHC 816 (Admlty) (21 April 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
H (a Child) v East Sussex County Council
Court of Appeal
“Special educational needs tribunals were required to give only summary reasons for their decisions.”
The Times, 22nd April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
AT & Anor, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 668 (12 March 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Watersheds v Simms [2009] EWHC 713 (QB) (12 March 2009)
High Court (Family Division)
Re A (Minor) V [2009] EWHC 710 (Fam) (17 March 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
Sinclair and Another v Glatt and Others
Court of Appeal
“A court-appointed receiver could have a lien on the property held in a convict’s name even though he had only a bare legal interest in it. A pending financial relief claim of the former wife of the convict had no priority over the receiver’s lien.”
The Times, 16th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Hatzl and Another v XL Insurance Co Ltd
Court of Appeal
“On a proper construction of article 31(1)(a) of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, scheduled to the Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965, a dispute did not become justiciable in England merely by the fact that an assignor of one of the contracting parties happened to be domiciled in England if that was the only connection with the jurisdiction.”
The Times, 16th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd
Court of Appeal
“International supply contracts which excluded liability for misrepresentation and the right to rescind were not subject to the requirement of reasonableness.”
The Times, 15th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Regina (Bunce) v Pensions Appeal Tribunal and Another
Court of Appeal
“On an appeal against an interim assessment by the Ministry of Defence of the degree of a person’s disability, the Pensions Appeal Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to challenge either the existence of the disability or whether the disability was attributable to service in the Armed Forces.”
The Times, 15th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
McMillan-Smith, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 732 (08 April 2009)
Awosika, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 625 (18 March 2009)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd [2009] EWHC 781 (QB) (08 April 2009)
Peacock v MGN Ltd [2009] EWHC 769 (QB) (08 April 2009)
High Court (Administrative Division)
Ardagh Glass Ltd v Chester City Council & Anor [2009] EWHC 745 (Admin) (08 April 2009)
Source: www.bailii.org
R (Tait) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel [2009] EWHC 767 (Admin); [2009] WLR (D) 138
“As a matter of construction of para 11 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2001, a finding that it was not the motive of a driver in using his vehicle to inflict or attempt to inflict injury on any person was not determinative of the question whether the vehicle was used so as deliberately to inflict or attempt to inflict injury on any person, because it was not inconsistent with a finding that it was nevertheless the driver’s intention to cause injury; if such an intention was proved, the para 11 exception would not apply to render the injured person ineligible for compensation.”
WLR Daily, 9th April 2009
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.
Smallwood and others v Revenue and Customs Comrs [2009] EWHC 777 (Ch); [2009] WLR(D) 137
“Art 13(4) of the Schedule to the Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Mauritius) Order 1981 (SI 1981/1121) gave the right to tax capital gains to the state in which there was residence at the time of the disposition.”
WLR Daily, 9th April 2009
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.
Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc [2009] EWHC 741 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 136
“The court had no jurisdiction to make a representation order under CPR r 19.6 where the criteria for inclusion in the class depended on the outcome of the action itself.”
WLR Daily, 9th April 2009
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.
Court of Appeal
“A child at school playing a game in an authorised play area who was not breaking any rules and who was not acting beyond the norms of the game was not liable for an injury caused to a playground supervisor.”
The Times, 14th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Slack and Others v Cumbria County Council
Court of Appeal
“A variation in the terms of an employment contract between an employer and employee in a stable employment relationship did not terminate the preexisting contract so as to trigger the beginning of the six-month period allowed for initiating equal pay claims.”
The Times, 14th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Akhurst v Director of Public Prosecutions
Queen’s Bench Divisional Court
“University grounds and buildings were not an enclosed area for the purposes of the Vagrancy Act 1824 which referred to any dwelling house, warehouse, coach house, stable or outhouse, enclosed yard, garden or area.”
The Times, 13th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Birmingham City Council v Dixon
Queen’s Bench Divisional Court
“Evidence of a defendant’s antisocial behaviour which occurred after the making of an application for an antisocial behaviour order against him was admissible when a court was determining (i) whether a defendant had acted in an antisocial manner and (ii) whether it was necessary to make an antisocial behaviour order.”
The Times, 13th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v Alexander-David
Court of Appeal
“A local housing authority which granted a tenancy to a minor who was homeless and in priority need held the premises in trust for the minor. For as long as the authority was the trustee, it could not lawfully serve a notice to quit on the minor.”
The Times, 13th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd
Court of Appeal
“An injunction granted in a general challenge by the Office of Fair Trading against the unfairness of certain clauses in an estate agent’s standard terms could extend to the continuing use of unfair terms in an existing contract.”
The Times, 10th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform v Neufeld and Another
Court of Appeal
“A person who was a majority shareholder and director of a company could also be an employee of that company under a contract of employment, even if he had total control of the company.”
The Times, 10th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025