“The phone-hacking scandal has spilled over into an extraordinary public clash between the Metropolitan police and the director of public prosecutions, with each side implying the other has misled parliament.”
The Guardian, 24th March 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
41–60 Albert Palace Mansions (Freehold) Ltd v Craftrule Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 185; [2011] WLR (D) 62
“The meaning of the words ‘a self-contained … part of a building’ in section 3 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 was clear and there was nothing in the section to suggest that the right to enfranchisement attached only to the smallest possible self-contained part of a building.”
WLR Daily, 25th February 2011
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
DCC Holdings (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs Comrs [2010] UKSC 58; [2010] WLR (D) 333
“When interpreting a deeming provision in a taxing statute it was important not to take the hypothesis further than was warranted. It followed that the deeming provisions in corporation tax legislation on sale and resale ‘repo’ transactions — whereby the parties’ accounts were to be debited and credited on the basis that it was a deemed loan relationship between them — were to be construed so that they reflected the statutory purpose of taxing such transactions on a uniform basis and not so that one party could claim a debit which could be set off against other liabilities.”
WLR Daily, 16th December 2010
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 Williams (Jason John) [2010] EWCA Crim 2552; [2010] WLR (D) 274
“As a matter of statutory construction, fault or other blameworthy conduct on the part of the defendant was not required to establish that he was guilty of an offence under s 3ZB of the Road Traffic Act 1988 of causing the death of another person by driving while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured; and it was sufficient that the driving was a cause of the death, provided that it was a more than negligible or de minimis cause.”
WLR Daily, 3rd November 2010
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.
Hertfordshire County Council v Veolia Water Central Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 887; [2010] WLR (D) 200
“In order to avoid absurdity, s 81 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and regs 3 and 4 of the Street Works (Maintenance) Regulations 1992 had to be given a purposive interpretation, meaning that the power of a street authority to undertake emergency works under reg 4 was conditional upon an inspection having been undertaken under reg 3 only where appropriate.”
WLR Daily, 28th July 2010
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.
“There was no reason to adopt a particularly narrow or restrictive approach to the construction of s 13 of the Interpretation Act 1978 by which statutory powers may be exercised at any time after the passing of an enabling Act in anticipation of the Act or any provision of it coming into force.”
WLR Daily, 9th July 2010
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.
Wallis v Bristol Water Plc [2009] WLR (D) 362
“For a water undertaker to prove that a water fitting had been connected by a person in such a manner that it was “likely to cause contamination” of water supplied by the water undertaker pursuant to reg 3(2) of the Water Supply (Water Fittings ) Regulations 1999 the water undertaker had to show that there was a real possibility that the manner of connection of the water fitting would cause contamination.”
WLR Daily, 14th December 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.
R (Boggis) and another v Natural England [2009] EWCA Civ 1061; [2009] WLR (D) 304
“A notification pursuant to s 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 that an area of land was of special scientific interest did not constitute a ‘plan’ or a ‘project’ for the purposes of art 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EC (‘the Habitats Directive’) and so was not subject to an appropriate assessment of its conservation implications for any special protection area on which it was likely to have a significant effect.”
WLR Daily, 23rd October 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.
R v Ghulam; [2009] WLR (D) 303
“The word ‘determination’ in s 4(6) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 refers only to a determination that a defendant is unfit to plead so that, where that provision’s requirement for evidence from two or more registered medical practitioners to be before the court has not been met, the trial judge is not bound to adjourn the trial but may properly conclude that the defendant is fit to plead and that the trial may continue.”
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2009
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.
Regina (Aweys and Others) v Birmingham City Council; Moran v Manchester City Council
House of Lords
“A local housing authority had been entitled to decide that overcrowded families were homeless but to leave them there in the short term; it was a question of fact what term was too long.”
The Times, 7th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Boyle v SCA Packaging Ltd, Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening
House of Lords
“In determining whether a person was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1975 by reason of having an impairment which, although capable of being controlled by measures taken to treat it, would be likely to have substantial adverse effects but for those measures, the word ‘likely’ did not mean ‘probable’ but ‘could well happen’.”
The Times, 6th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“When determining whether a person was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 by reason of having an impairment which, though capable of being controlled by measures taken to treat or control it, would be likely to have substantial adverse effects but for those measures, the word “likely” did not mean probable but ‘could well happen’. It followed that a woman whose propensity to develop vocal nodules was controlled by a strict management regime based on avoiding raising her voice, but which “could well” return and cause substantial adverse effects if that regime was not followed, was disabled for the purposes of the Act and her former employer, who had decided to place her in a noisier work environment despite her claim that it would require her to speak louder and so jeopardise her voice management regime, had to answer her claim that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability.”
WLR Daily, 1st July 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.
Queen’s Bench Divisional Court
“On a return to custody following release from a detention and training order, the period of the ‘remainder of the term’ was to be calculated from the date when it was proved to the satisfaction of the youth court that an offender had failed to comply with the requirements of the supervision element of the order.”
The Times, 12th January 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
JT (Cameroon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] EWCA Civ 878; [2008] WLR (D) 260
“When construing s 8(1) of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004, which provided various factors that the court should take account of in assessing the credibility of an asylum seeker, the qualifying word ‘potentially’ should be read into an explanatory clause which would then read: ‘as (potentially) damaging the claimant’s credibility’.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2008
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.
“Lecture by the Rt Hon Lady Justice Arden at the Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association”
Judiciary of England and Wales, 28th November 2007
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025