‘Councils in London have set aside millions of pounds and thousands of tenants may be in line for payouts after a landmark legal ruling over water charges.’
BBC News, 31st January 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The government repaid £1.8m to employment tribunal claimants in the first two months of the scheme set up in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling tribunal fees unlawful, it has revealed.’
Litigation Futures, 19th January 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘If an individual has in years past paid him or herself for mental health aftercare services, which should have been paid for by public bodies, does that person have a valid restitution claim to be refunded the monies spent? The Court of Appeal in Richards v Worcestershire County Council [2017] EWCA Civ 1998 has upheld the decision of Newey J at first instance, that a claimant can bring a private law action against public authorities under Part 7 of the CPR, when it is alleged that:
· the public authority was responsible for providing mental health aftercare services to the claimant pursuant to section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983;
· aftercare services were received by the claimant; and
· those services were paid for by the claimant themselves.
Such a claim would be brought in restitution, on the basis that the payments made by the claimant served to relieve the public authority of liabilities which they ought to have been bearing under section 117.’
Community Care Blog, 18th December 2017
Source: communitycare11kbw.com
‘Repaying fees to employment tribunal claimants will continue for up to two years and cost the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) between £1.8m and £2m to administer, it has emerged.’
Litigation Futures, 20th December 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘All those eligible for employment tribunal fee refunds can apply from today, following a successful opening phase of the scheme.”
Ministry of Justice, 15th November 2017
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
‘The government expects to refund £33m to employment tribunal claimants after the Supreme Court ruled tribunal fees unlawful.’
Litigation Futures, 20th October 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Employment tribunals are failing to hit basic targets and judges are departing without being replaced, users have revealed. Minutes of the National User Group Meeting on employment tribunals report that tribunals are falling short of targets for completing and disposing of claims.’
Law Society's Gazette, 19th October 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Asda has been forced to pay back hundreds of thousands of pounds to dozens of suppliers after breaching an industry code governing fair dealing.’
The Guardian, 4th September 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A woman who conned a business out of more than £14,000 after claiming to have terminal cancer has been ordered to pay back £1.’
BBC News, 20th June 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This case concerned the issue of whether or not claimants (or their solicitors) should be obliged to repay Stage 1 costs of £400 + VAT (under the “old” Portal rules) in claims which did not then proceed to Stage 2.’
Zenith PI Blog, 16th May 2017
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘The Court of Appeal has ruled that solicitors should be able to claim protocol costs for claims which did not go beyond the first stage.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 16th May 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Solicitors who received the £400 stage 1 fixed-costs payment due under the original version of the RTA protocol do not have to repay the money even though no action was then taken on their cases, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 16th May 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The communications regulator found that the company broke a “fundamental billing rule” on two separate occasions, resulting in nearly 40,000 customers being overcharged around £250,000.’
The Independent, 18th January 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Foreign Office is to review its policy on forced marriage after the Guardian revealed that victims are ordered to repay the government the costs of their repatriation.’
The Guardian, 11th January 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Four health experts who fraudulently billed the NHS for 14,000 hours they did not work have been ordered to pay more than £575,000 or face further time in prison.’
Crown Prosecution Service, 25th November 2016
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
Kilker Projects Ltd v Purton (trading as Richwood Interiors) [2016] EWHC 2616 (TCC)
‘The parties entered into an oral construction contract, to which the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2011 applied. Following completion of the works, a dispute arose as to the sums due in respect of the final account. In a first adjudication, the adjudicator, having held that no valid “payment notice” or “pay less notice” had been served by the employer, ordered it to pay the “notified sum”, as defined by section 111 of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, in respect of the contractor’s final account application. The employer subsequently paid the judgment sum. In a second adjudication, the adjudicator determined the true value of the final account for the works and directed the contractor to repay the employer a sum found to have been overpaid. On the employer’s application to enforce that decision, the contractor contended that adjudicator had not had jurisdiction to determine the dispute because it had been decided in the earlier adjudication.’
WLR Daily, 22nd September 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A woman who obtained a grant of letters of administration and then used a firm of licensed conveyancers to defend herself against a claim from other potential beneficiaries, has been told by the High Court that she has to pay back to the estate nearly £87,000 given to the firm that has been lost.’
Legal Futures, 26th August 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The High Court has rejected a solicitor’s appeal against a Legal Ombudsman (LeO) order that he refund £34,000 of his £37,000 fee to a client he signed up to a contingency fee agreement (CFA).’
Legal Futures, 4th August 2016
‘Contracts for the sale of land can fail to complete for many reasons. The Standard Conditions and Standard Commercial Conditions require a 10% deposit to be paid on exchange of contracts. This can amount to a substantial sum of money. Purchasers will know that where they fail to complete it is commonplace for the vendor to retain that deposit. In the current market, with property prices soaring ever higher, the out-of-pocket purchaser may be justified in feeling that the vendor has obtained a windfall in keeping the deposit and selling the property on to a third party at a higher price.’
Tanfield Chambers, 6th July 2016
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council has agreed to refund more than 60 older people if they are found to have been overcharged for care, following an investigation by the Local Government Ombudsman.’
Local Government Lawyer, 2nd June 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024