Results: 125

• Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v Revenue and Customs Comrs

  12 Dec 2008 [2008] EWHC 2893 (Ch); [2009] STC 254, Ch D (Henderson J)

  23 Feb 2010 [2010] EWCA Civ 103; [2010] STC 1251; [2010] WLR (D) 58, CA

  23 May 2012 [2012] UKSC 19; [2012] 2 AC 337; [2012] 2 WLR 1149; [2012] Bus LR 1033; [2012] 3 All ER 909; [2012] STC 1362; [2012] WLR (D) 161; Case details, SC(E)

  12 Dec 2013 (Case C-362/12); EU:C:2013:834; [2014] AC 1161; [2014] 3 WLR 743; [2014] All ER (EC) 375; [2014] STC 638; [2014] 2 CMLR 33; [2013] WLR (D) 488, ECJ

  23 Jul 2021 [2021] UKSC 31; [2021] 1 WLR 4354; [2022] 1 All ER 751; [2021] STC 1597; [2021] WLR(D) 446, SC(E) (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Briggs, Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 4 positive; 2 neutral; 1 negative; most recently considered: 2020. Subsequent citations: 102.
  REVENUE — Corporation tax — Advance corporation tax

  EUROPEAN COMMUNITY — Breach of Community law — Domestic remedy

  RESTITUTION — Quasi-contract — Moneys had and received

  EUROPEAN UNION — Breach of European Union law — Domestic remedy

  REVENUE — Taxpayers paying advance corporation tax in breach of European Union law — Proper approach to calculating amount payable to taxpayers in restitution

  EUROPEAN UNION — Judicial protection — Principle of effectiveness
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  REVENUE — Corporation tax — Advance corporation tax — United Kingdom resident companies entitled to deduct advance corporation tax paid on nationally-sourced dividends when paying dividends to UK shareholders — No entitlement to deduct foreign tax paid on foreign-sourced dividends — Court of Justice of European Communities holding rule withholding tax credit from non-resident shareholders precluded by EC law — Whether further reference to Court of Justice required — Differential treatment of foreign-sourced and nationally-sourced dividends under United Kingdom law — Whether differential treatment precluded by European Community law — EC Treaty, arts 43EC, 56EC, 57EC

  EUROPEAN COMMUNITY — Breach of Community law — Domestic remedy — Claims for recovery of taxes unduly levied — Requirement that domestic law of member state provide effective remedy for recovery of taxes levied contrary to Community law — English law providing resitutionary remedy of recovery of unlawfully exacted taxes — Claimant relying on alternative remedy of recovery of sums paid under mistake of law — Whether Community law requirement extending to alternative remedy so as to preclude statutory curtailment of limitation period if contrary to Community law principles — Finance Act 2004, s 320 — Finance Act 2007, s 107

  RESTITUTION — Quasi-contract — Moneys had and received — Statute levying tax contrary to EU law — Payments of moneys to revenue in accordance with taxing statute — Payments made without prior formal demand by revenue — Taxpayers’ right to recover unlawfully exacted taxes — Whether applicable in absence of demand by revenue — Whether within statutory provision extending limitation period for actions for relief from consequences of mistake — Whether applicable where recovery possible under statutory right for repayment of tax paid by error or mistake — Taxes Management Act 1970 (as amended by Finance Act 1994, s 196, Sch 19, para 8(2)), s 33(1)(2A) — Limitation Act 1980, s 32(1)(c)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Breach of European Union law — Domestic remedy — Claims for recovery of taxes unduly levied — Requirement that domestic law of member state provide effective remedy for recovery of taxes levied contrary to European Union law — English common law restitutionary remedy enabling recovery of unlawfully exacted taxes — Claimants relying on alternative remedy of recovery of sums paid under mistake of law — National statutory provisions curtailing limitation period for applicable remedies without notice and retroactively — Whether European Union principles of effectiveness, legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations precluding statutory curtailment of limitation period for alternative remedy — Limitation Act 1980, s 32(1)(c) — Finance Act 2004, s 320

  REVENUE — Corporation tax — Advance corporation tax — Different tax treatment of nationally-sourced and foreign-sourced dividends received by UK-resident companies contrary to EU law — Taxpayers entitled to repayment of tax unlawfully levied and tax credits — Revenue making concession that taxpayers entitled to compound interest on restitutionary award — Whether revenue barred from withdrawing concession — Whether and on what basis taxpayers entitled to interest for tax paid prematurely — Whether taxpayers entitled to carry forward unused double taxation relief — Whether revenue enriched by receipt of unlawful tax — Whether amount of repayment reduced if UK companies having foreign parent — Whether EU standstill provision applying after UK altered foreign tax rules — When and to what extent unlawfully charged tax regarded as surrendered — Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, ss 231, 240 — FEU Treaty, arts 63, 64

  REVENUE — Taxpayers paying advance corporation tax in breach of European Union law — Proper approach to calculating amount payable to taxpayers in restitution

  REVENUE — Corporation tax — Advance corporation tax — Taxpayers’ claims for restitution of tax levied in breach of EU law — Revenue conceding taxpayers entitled to restitution of unlawfully levied tax with compound interest — Whether revenue barred from withdrawing concession to prejudice of taxpayers — Whether and on what basis taxpayers entitled to interest for tax paid prematurely — Whether taxpayers entitled to restitution in respect of unused double taxation relief credits — Whether revenue enriched by receipt of unlawful tax when paying out shareholder credits — Whether EU standstill provision applying after UK altering foreign tax rules — Appropriate method for calculating award where parent company surrendering surplus tax to subsidiary — Senior Courts Act 1981 (c 54), s 35A — Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (c 1), ss 231, 240 — Access to Justice Act 1999 (c 22), s 54(4) — Finance Act 2019 (c 1), s 85 — FEU Treaty, arts 63, 64

  EUROPEAN UNION — Judicial protection — Principle of effectiveness — Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations — Restitution of sums paid but not due — Remedies — National legislation — Curtailment of the limitation period for the applicable remedies without notice and retroactively

  19 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  3 Statutes considered
• Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2)

  11 Jun 2010 [2010] EWHC 1332 (QB); [2010] Lloyd's Rep FC 504; [2010] WLR (D) 148, QBD (Mitting J)

  13 Jan 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 1; [2012] QB 101; [2011] 3 WLR 714; [2011] 2 All ER 802, CA

  19 Jun 2013 [2013] UKSC 38; [2013] UKSC 39; [2014] AC 700; [2013] 3 WLR 179; [2013] 4 All ER 495; [2013] 4 All ER 533; [2013] Lloyd's Rep FC 580; [2013] HRLR 30; [2013] WLR (D) 244, SC(E) (Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury PSC, Lord Dyson MR, Lord Hope of Craighead DPSC, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 21 positive; 5 neutral; 4 negative; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 353.
  STATUTORY INSTRUMENT — Validity — -

  CROWN — Order in Council — Validity

  SUPREME COURT — Jurisdiction — Evidence
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  STATUTORY INSTRUMENT — Validity — - — Order directing persons operating in UK financial sector not to do business with claimant with aim of inhibiting development of nuclear weapons by Iran— Whether claimant should have been given opportunity to make representations before order made— Whether order “proportionate” having regard to risk to national interests of United Kingdom posed by Iranian development of nuclear weapons— Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, art 6(1), Pt II, art 1— Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, Sch 7, paras 1(4), 9(6)— Financial Restrictions (Iran) Order 2009 (SI 2009/2725)

  CROWN — Order in Council — Validity — Treasury making Order in Council containing direction prohibiting transactions or business relationships with Iranian bank in order to prevent facilitation of production of nuclear weapons in Iran— Bank not given opportunity to make representations before making of Order— Bank applying to set aside direction— Whether requirement that least measure be used— Whether existence of less intrusive measure use of which would not significantly compromise legitimate aim of restriction relevant to its proportionality— Whether Order proportionate— Whether procedurally flawed— Whether Parliament excluding common law right to make representations before direction made— Whether Convention right to fair hearing engaged when direction made and laid before Parliament— Whether statutory procedure breaching Convention rights— Whether Order lawful— Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 6, Pt II, art 1 — Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (c 28), ss 62, 63, Sch 7

  CROWN — Order in Council — Validity — Treasury making Order in Council containing direction prohibiting transactions or business relationships with Iranian bank in order to prevent facilitation of production of nuclear weapons in Iran— Bank not given opportunity to make representations before making of Order— Bank applying to set aside direction— Whether requirement that least measure be used— Whether Order proportionate— Whether procedurally flawed— Whether Parliament excluding common law right to make representations before direction made— Whether statutory procedure breaching Convention rights— Whether Order lawful— Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 6, Pt II, art 1 — Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (c 28), ss 62, 63, Sch 7

  SUPREME COURT — Jurisdiction — Evidence — Closed material procedure— Order in Council containing direction prohibiting transactions or business relationships with Iranian bank in order to prevent facilitation of production of nuclear weapons in Iran— Bank’s appeal from court’s refusal to set aside Order— Treasury proposing to rely on closed material in resisting appeal— Whether jurisdiction for Supreme Court to entertain closed material— Whether appropriate to entertain material— Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c 4), s 40

  8 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• A v A (Children: Habitual Residence) (Re A (Jurisdiction: Return of Child))

  26 Oct 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 1396; [2013] Fam 232; [2013] 2 WLR 1061; [2013] 1 FLR 1041; [2012] WLR (D) 297, CA (Thorpe LJ, Rimer LJ, Patten LJ)

  09 Sep 2013 (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) [2013] UKSC 60; [2014] AC 1; [2013] 3 WLR 761; [2014] 1 All ER 827; [2014] 1 FLR 111; [2013] WLR (D) 345; Case details, SC(E)

  07 Oct 2013 [2013] EWHC 3298 (Fam); [2014] 2 FLR 244; [2013] CN 1699, Fam D (Parker J)

  07 Nov 2013 [2013] EWHC 3554 (Fam); [2014] 2 FLR 365; [2013] CN 1737, Fam D (Parker J)

  Subsequent considerations : 21 positive; 5 neutral. Subsequent citations: 206.
  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Jurisdiction

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Nationality as basis of jurisdiction

  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Children at high risk of emotional harm
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Jurisdiction — Habitual residence — Three children born in England — Father removing children from mother while family on holiday in Pakistan and keeping them there without mother’s consent — Fourth child born in Pakistan while mother forcibly detained there by father — Father thwarting mother’s attempt to bring all children to England — Mother applying to English court for order for return of children — Whether child born in Pakistan acquiring on birth habitual residence in England — Whether prior physical presence in England necessary prerequisite of finding of habitual residence — Whether court in any event having jurisdiction to order return on basis of child’s nationality — Family Law Act 1986, ss 1(1)(a)(d), 2(1), 3(1) (as amended by Children Act 1989, s 108, Sch 13, para 63(1) and European Communities (Jurisdiction and Judgments in Matrimonial and Parental Responsibility Matters) Regulations 2005, regs 8(2), 10) — Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, arts 1(1)(b), 8(1), 14

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Nationality as basis of jurisdiction — Whether child to be returned

  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Children at high risk of emotional harm — Only interim care order appropriate

  13 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statute considered
• In re L (A Child) (Custody: Habitual Residence) (DL v EL (Abduction: Effect of Court Order))

  17 Jan 2013 [2013] EWHC 49 (Fam); [2013] 2 FLR 163, Fam D (Sir Peter Singer)

  16 Jul 2013 [2013] EWCA Civ 865; [2014] 1 FLR 570; [2013] 3 FCR 69; [2013] WLR (D) 285, CA

  04 Dec 2013 (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) [2013] UKSC 75; [2014] AC 1017; [2013] 3 WLR 1597; [2014] 1 All ER 999; [2014] 1 FLR 772; [2014] 1 FCR 69; [2013] WLR (D) 475; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 2 neutral. Subsequent citations: 99.
  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Jurisdiction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach — Mother removing child from United States to England pursuant to Texan court order — Order made on basis child had been habitually resident with mother in England — Texan Court of Appeal reversing order and ordering mother to return child to United States — Father applying to family court for return of child — Whether removal of child to United Kingdom breaching father’s right to custody pursuant to order of Texan Court of Appeal — Child’s habitual residence when father issuing application to family court — Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, Sch 1

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Jurisdiction — Habitual residence — Child born in Texas — Father granted exclusive right by Texan court to determine child’s primary residence — Mother bringing child to England pursuant to United States court order under Hague Convention on ground of child’s habitual residence in England — United States order for return to England reversed on father’s appeal — Father applying to High Court under Hague Convention, alternatively court’s inherent jurisdiction, for child’s return to United States — Whether child’s habitual residence in England — Whether power under inherent jurisdiction to order return to United States despite habitual residence in England — Whether child to be returned — Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, Sch 1, arts 3, 18 — Family Law Act 1986 (as amended by Children Act 1989, s 108, Sch 13, para 64 and Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (International Obligations) (England and Wales and Northern Ireland) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/1898), reg 17, Sch, para 5), ss 2(3), 3(1) — Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, art 8(1)

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  2 Statutes considered
• Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for the Home Department

  07 Apr 2009 (Appeal No SC/66/2008), SIAC

  29 Mar 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 358, CA

  09 Oct 2013 (Open Society Justice Initiative intervening) [2013] UKSC 62; [2014] AC 253; [2013] 3 WLR 1006; [2014] 1 All ER 356; [2013] WLR (D) 371; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; 2 negative. Subsequent citations: 13.
  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Deprivation of citizenship
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Deprivation of citizenship — Iraqi citizen acquiring British nationality and thereby losing Iraqi citizenship — Home Secretary subsequently depriving claimant of British citizenship as being conducive to public good — Claimant not applying for restoration of Iraqi citizenship — Whether effect of order to render claimant stateless — Whether order void — British Nationality Act 1981, s 40(4) (as substituted by Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, s 4(1))

  1 Case considered

  1 Statute considered
• R (Chester) v Secretary of State for Justice

  28 Oct 2009 [2009] EWHC 2923 (Admin); [2009] WLR (D) 316, QBD (Burton J)

  17 Dec 2010 [2010] EWCA Civ 1439; [2011] 1 WLR 1436; [2010] WLR (D) 337, CA

  16 Oct 2013 [2013] UKSC 63; [2014] AC 271; [2013] 3 WLR 1076; [2014] 1 All ER 683; [2013] WLR (D) 392; Case details; 2014 SC (UKSC) 25, SC

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral; 1 negative; most recently considered: 2021. Subsequent citations: 58.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Elections — Right to vote in European Union and municipal elections

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Free elections — Interference with

  ELECTION LAW — Right to vote — Prisoner disenfranchisement
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Elections — Right to vote in European Union and municipal elections — Statutory blanket ban on convicted prisoners voting — Prisoner serving life sentence for murder applying for his name to be included on electoral register for European Union and municipal elections — Application refused — Whether compatible with petitioner’s Treaty rights — Whether Treaties giving European Union citizens individual right to vote — Whether right having to comply with principles of European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence — Whether right limited to citizens resident in state other than that of their nationality — Representation of the People Act 1983, s 3(1) (as amended by Representation of the People Act 1985, s 24, Sch 4, para 1) — European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, s 8 — FEU Treaty, art 20(2)(b)FEU — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, art 40

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Free elections — Interference with — Statutory blanket ban on convicted prisoners voting — Prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment for murder challenging ban — Court’s duty to “take into account” judgments and decisions of European Court of Human Rights — Decisions of European Court of Human Rights holding statutory blanket ban on convicted prisoners voting incompatible with Convention right to free expression of opinion in choice of legislature — Government challenging correctness of decisions in domestic proceedings — Whether decisions to be applied — Whether statute to be read as conferring on judiciary function of deciding whether any given prisoner to be disfranchised — Whether ban contravening Convention right to free expression of opinion in choice of legislature — Whether declaration of incompatibility to be granted — Representation of the People Act 1983, s 3(1) (as amended by Representation of the People Act 1985, s 24, Sch 4, para 1) — Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt II, art 3 — European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, s 8

  ELECTION LAW — Right to vote — Prisoner disenfranchisement — Petitioner a prisoner seeking to vote in local municipal, Scottish parliamentary and European parliamentary elections

  ELECTION LAW — Right to vote — Prisoner disenfranchisement — Petitioner a prisoner seeking to vote in United Kingdom and European parliamentary elections

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  2 EU Enactments considered

  3 Statutes considered
• Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria

  03 Apr 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 415; [2013] QB 499; [2012] 3 WLR 1501; [2012] 3 All ER 579; [2012] WLR (D) 108, CA

  19 Feb 2014 [2014] UKSC 10; [2014] AC 1189; [2014] 2 WLR 355; [2014] 2 All ER 489; [2014] WLR (D) 88; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 61.
  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Fraudulent breach of trust — Dishonest assistance
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Fraudulent breach of trust — Dishonest assistance — Claim against bank alleging that it was party to fraudulent breach of trust by trustee — No action brought against trustee — Whether “action by a beneficiary under a trust … in respect of … fraudulent breach of trust to which the trustee was a party or privy” — Whether exception to time bar restricted to actions brought against trustee — Whether claim statute-barred — Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1)(3)

  10 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• Paddico (267) Ltd v Kirklees Metropolitan Council

  23 Jun 2011 [2011] EWHC 1606 (Ch); [2011] LGR 727, Ch D (Vos J)

  07 Mar 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 262; [2012] LGR 617, CA (Carnwath, Sullivan, Patten LJJ)

  05 Feb 2014 [2014] UKSC 7; [2014] AC 1072; [2014] 2 WLR 300; [2014] 2 All ER 1; [2014] LGR 249; [2014] WLR (D) 51; Case details, SC(E) (Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury PSC, Baroness Hale of Richmond DPSC, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 15.
  COMMONS — Town or village green — Registration
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMMONS — Town or village green — Registration — Rectification of register — Grassland registered as town or village green — Claimant subsequently acquiring land and applying for order removing grassland from register — Meaning of “any locality” in definition of village green — Whether land ought to have been registered — Whether just to rectify register — Commons Registration Act 1965, ss 13, 14, 22

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered
• Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG

  28 Oct 2011 [2011] EWHC 2806 (QB); [2012] RTR 137, QBD

  25 Jun 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 854, CA

  02 Apr 2014 [2014] UKSC 22; [2014] AC 1379; [2014] 2 WLR 948; [2014] 2 All ER 926; [2014] RTR 280; [2014] WLR (D) 150; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 5 positive. Subsequent citations: 29.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Choice of law

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Assessment of damages
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Choice of law — Claimant widow of UK soldier killed in road traffic accident in Germany — Claim against German insurer — Whether claimant able to base claim on English Fatal Accidents Act — Whether German law applicable to heads of damage — Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1 — Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, ss 9, 11

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Assessment of damages — Englishman hit by car and killed in Germany — Driver of car German national insured by German insurance company — Widow claiming damages in England for bereavement and loss of dependency — Whether English or German law applicable to assessment of damages — Whether English fatal accidents legislation having any application — Whether restrictions on damages in German statute procedural or substantive — Fatal Accidents Act 1976 (as amended by Administration of Justice Act 1982, s 3), ss 1A, 3(1)(3), 4

  5 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

• National Crime Agency (formerly Serious Organised Crime Agency) v Szepietowski

  15 Oct 2010 [2010] EWHC 2570 (Ch); [2011] 1 BCLC 458, Ch D (Henderson J)

  21 Jul 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 856; [2014] 1 BCLC 143; [2011] WTLR 1435, CA

  23 Oct 2013 [2013] UKSC 65; [2014] AC 338; [2013] 3 WLR 1250; [2014] 1 All ER 225; [2013] WLR (D) 408; [2014] 1 P & CR 233, [2014] 1 BCLC 143; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  EQUITY — Marshalling — Availability of remedy
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EQUITY — Marshalling — Availability of remedy — Statutory scheme to recover assets purchased with proceeds of crime — Recovery agency alleging defendant having assets purchased with proceeds of crime — Settlement whereby agency given second charge over defendant’s investment property — Bank with first charge over investment property also having charge over defendant’s family home — Proceeds of sale of investment property only sufficient to repay debt owed to bank — Agency invoking doctrine of marshalling to seek sale of family home to recover amount secured by second charge on investment property — Whether doctrine applicable where no personal debt due from chargor to second chargee — Whether terms of deed of settlement and of charge precluding marshalling in any event

  1 Case considered