Results: 84

• John Lyon’s Charity v London Sephardi Trust

  19 Nov 2015 [2015] UKUT 619 (LC), UT

  29 Jun 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 846; [2018] QB 1163; [2018] 2 WLR 1016; [2017] WLR (D) 442, CA (Arden, Briggs, Bean LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; most recently considered: 2020.
  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Leasehold enfranchisement — Purchase price

  STATUTE — Construction — Saving provision
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Leasehold enfranchisement — Purchase price — Valuation assumptions — Previous tenant obtaining lease extension — Current tenant exercising right to purchase freehold — Whether freehold price determined by reference to expiry date of original lease or of extended lease — Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (c 88) (as amended by Housing Act 1974 (c 44), s 118(4), Housing and Planning Act 1986 (c 63), s 23(1) and Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (c 15), s 143(4)), s 9(1A)(1AA)) — Interpretation Act 1978 (c 30), s 17(2)(a) — Housing and Planning Act 1986 (c 63), s 23(3)(c)

  STATUTE — Construction — Saving provision — Saving provision derogating from effect of another subsection of same section of Act — Whether saving provision “any other enactment” — Interpretation Act 1978 (c 30), s 17(2)(a)

  4 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

• Loake v Director of Public Prosecutions

  16 Nov 2017 [2017] EWHC 2855 (Admin) {0} {1}; [2018] QB 998; [2018] 2 WLR 1159; [2018] 1 Cr App R 16; [2017] WLR (D) 763, DC (Irwin LJ, Julian Knowles J)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CRIME — Harassment — Insanity
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Harassment — Insanity — Whether insanity defence available on charge of harassment — Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (c 40) (as amended by Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (c 15), s 125(2) and Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (c 9), Sch 9(11), para 143(2)), ss 1, 2

  CRIME — Harassment — Insanity — Whether insanity defence available on charge of harassment — Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (c 40) (as amended by Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (c 15), s 125(2)(3) and Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (c 9), s 115(1), Sch 9, para 143(2)), ss 1, 2

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• R v Robinson (Anthony) (R (Robinson) v Independent Adjudicator)

  14 Jun 2017 [2017] EWCA Crim 936; [2018] QB 941; [2018] 3 WLR 52; [2017] WLR(D) 698, CA (Sir Brian Leveson P, Haddon-Cave J, Judge Inman QC)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive.
  CRIME — Double jeopardy — Autrefois convict

  PRISONS — Discipline — Independent adjudicator
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Double jeopardy — Autrefois convict — Defendant charged with escape from lawful custody after absconding from prison — Defendant also charged by prison authorities with disciplinary charge of absconding from prison — Independent adjudicator sentencing defendant to 14 days’ imprisonment on disciplinary charge — Defendant subsequently sentenced to three months’ imprisonment on criminal charge — Whether decision of independent adjudicator in excess of jurisdiction — Prison Rules 1999 (SI 1999/728), r 51

  PRISONS — Discipline — Independent adjudicator — Prisoner charged with criminal offence of escape from lawful custody after absconding from prison — Prisoner also charged by prison authorities with disciplinary charge of escaping from prison — Independent adjudicator sentencing prisoner to 14 days’ imprisonment on disciplinary charge — Prisoner subsequently sentenced to three months’ imprisonment on criminal charge — Whether decision of independent adjudicator in excess of jurisdiction — Whether to be quashed — Prison Rules 1999 (SI 1999/728), r 51(7)

  4 Case(s) considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• Tchenguiz v Grant Thornton UK llp

  01 Jul 2015 [2015] EWHC 1864 (Comm); [2015] 2 BCLC 307; [2015] CN 1131, QBD (Carr J)

  03 Mar 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 83; [2018] QB 695; [2018] 2 WLR 834; [2017] 2 BCLC 299; [2017] WLR (D) 153, CA (Briggs, Sales, Henderson LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Jurisdiction

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under European Union Regulation — Insolvency
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Jurisdiction — Claimants alleging torts of malicious prosecution, conspiracy to injure by unlawful means, and malicious procurement of arrest and search documentation — Whether action to be stayed — Credit Institutions (Reorganisation and Winding-up) Regulations 2004, reg 5 — Parliament and Council Directive 2001/24/EC — Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 2007, art 1(2)(b)

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under European Union Regulation — Insolvency — Claimants bringing tortious claim in England against Icelandic bank subject to winding up proceedings in Iceland — Icelandic insolvency law prohibiting bringing of court proceedings against bank subject to winding up proceedings — Whether having jurisdictional effect throughout European Economic Area — Whether claim to be dismissed — Credit Institutions (Reorganisation and Winding up) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1045), reg 5 — Parliament and Council Directive 2001/24/EC, art 10 — Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (2007), art 5(3)

  1 Case considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

  1 International Agreement considered
• R (XH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (R (AI) v Secretary of State for the Home Department)

  28 Jul 2016 [2016] EWHC 1898 (Admin); [2016] WLR (D) 437, DC

  02 Feb 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 41; [2018] QB 355; [2017] 2 WLR 1437; [2017] WLR (D) 76, CA (Sir Terence Etherton MR, Lloyd Jones, Sales LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2021. Subsequent citations: 12.
  CROWN — Minister — Exercise of prerogative power

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Cancellation of passport
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CROWN — Minister — Exercise of prerogative power — Secretary of State’s power to cancel or withdraw passports under royal prerogative from persons suspected of involvement in terrorism related activities — Whether lawful exercise of royal prerogative power — Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (c 23) — Parliament and Council Directive EC/2004/38, art 27 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, art 41

  CROWN — Minister — Exercise of prerogative power — Home Secretary cancelling passports of persons suspected of involvement in terrorism-related activities — Whether lawful exercise of Royal Prerogative power — Whether prerogative power abridged or put into abeyance by statute — Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (c 23)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Cancellation of passport — Home Secretary cancelling passports of persons suspected of involvement in terrorism-related activities — Whether European Union law engaged — Whether breached — Whether proportionate restriction on freedom of movement — Whether breach of duty to inform claimants of reason for cancellation of passport — Whether necessary to disclose evidence — Whether obligation to give passport holder opportunity to make representations before cancellation — Whether sufficient for such opportunity to be given prior to review of decision — Appropriate standard of review — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 6 — Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC, art 27 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, art 41

  11 Case(s) considered

  2 EU Enactments considered

  2 Statutes considered
• R (Watson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Rights Group intervening) (R (Lewis) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Rights Group intervening), R (Brice) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Open Rights Group intervening))

  17 Jul 2015 [2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin); [2016] 1 CMLR 13; [2015] HRLR 14; [2016] Crim LR 48, DC (Bean LJ and Collins J)

  30 Jan 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 70; [2018] QB 912; [2018] 2 WLR 1735; [2018] 4 All ER 105; [2018] WLR (D) 87, CA (Lord Lloyd-Jones JSC, Sir Geoffrey Vos C, Patten LJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 2.
  DATA PROTECTION — Personal data — Access to
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DATA PROTECTION — Personal data — Access to — United Kingdom legislation permitting Secretary of State to access communications data on grounds necessary for purpose of preventing or detecting crime — Claimants challenging validity of legislation in judicial review claim — Court of Justice ruling legislation incompatible with European Union law since access not restricted to purpose of fighting serious crime and not subject to prior review — Relief to be granted in light of ruling — Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (c 27), s 1 — Parliament and Council Directive 2002/58/EC (as amended by Parliament and Council Directive 2009/136/EC), art 15(1)

  DATA PROTECTION — Personal data — Access to

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statute considered
• Barkhuysen v Hamilton

  10 Nov 2016 [2016] EWHC 2858 (QB); [2018] QB 1015; [2018] 2 WLR 9; [2016] WLR (D) 609, QBD (Warby J)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 11.
  TORT — Cause of action — False imprisonment

  TORT — Cause of action — Malicious prosecution
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  TORT — Cause of action — False imprisonment — Police lawfully arresting and detaining claimant on basis of false report by defendant — Whether defendant liable for damages for false imprisonment — Test for informant liability

  TORT — Cause of action — Malicious prosecution — Police lawfully arresting and detaining claimant on basis of false report by defendant — Claimant released without charge — Whether defendant liable for damages for malicious prosecution

  2 Case(s) considered

• Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd v Vgenopoulos

  22 Jun 2016 [2016] EWHC 1442 (QB); [2016] EWHC 1695 (QB); [2017] QB 453; [2017] 2 WLR 67; [2016] 2 Lloyd's Rep 177; [2016] WLR (D) 332, QBD (Picken J)

  12 Jan 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 1; [2018] QB 886; [2018] 2 WLR 1330; [2018] WLR(D) 18, CA (McCombe, Flaux, Holroyde LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign judgment — Recognition

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under Council Regulation — Provisional and protective measures
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign judgment — Recognition — Claimant obtaining worldwide freezing order against defendants in proceedings before Cypriot court — Freezing order registered as judgment of High Court pursuant to European Union Regulation — Claimant notifying third party bank of existence of freezing order and registration as English order seeking compliance in relation to assets of defendants — Defendants appealing against registration order within applicable time limits — Whether freezing order becoming immediately effective and enforceable on registration — Whether enforceability subject to appeal process — Whether prohibition on taking “measures of enforcement” pending appeal relating only to enforcement action before court — Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, arts 43(5), 47

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under Council Regulation — Provisional and protective measures — Claimant obtaining worldwide freezing order against defendants in proceedings before Cypriot court — Defendants lodging appeal against order registering Cypriot order as a judgment of the High Court — Claimant seeking protective measures pursuant to European Union Regulation in form of domestic freezing order — Whether claimant having automatic right to relief sought — Whether application to be determined according to domestic law principles regarding grant of freezing order — Whether freezing order to be granted — Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, art 47(2)(3)

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign judgment — Recognition — Claimant obtaining worldwide freezing order against defendants in proceedings before Cypriot court — Freezing order registered as judgment of High Court pursuant to European Union Regulation — Claimant notifying third party bank of freezing order and seeking compliance in relation to assets of defendants — Defendants appealing against registration order within applicable time limits — Whether freezing order becoming immediately effective and enforceable on registration — Whether enforceability subject to appeal process — Whether prohibition on taking “measures of enforcement” pending appeal relating only to enforcement action in which court involved — Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, arts 38.2, 47.3 — Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Order 2001 (SI 2001/3929), Sch 1, para 2 — CPR rr 74.6, 74.9

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign judgment — Recognition — Claimant obtaining worldwide freezing order against defendants in proceedings before Cypriot court — Freezing order registered as judgment of High Court pursuant to European Union Regulation — Claimant notifying third party bank of freezing and registration orders — Defendants appealing against registration order — Whether freezing order immediately effective and enforceable on registration — Whether notification to bank breach of prohibition on taking “measures of enforcement” pending appeal against registration order — CPR rr 74.6, 74.9 — Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Order 2001 (SI 2001/3929), Sch 1, para 2 — Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, arts 38(2), 43(5), 47

  2 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• Blackmore v Department for Communities and Local Government

  27 Jul 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 1136; [2018] QB 471; [2018] 2 WLR 139; [2017] WLR (D) 521, CA (Lord Justice Lloyd Jones, Lord Justice David Richards, Lord Justice Moylan)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment — Deceased dying of lung cancer following exposure to asbestos at work and lifetime of smoking — Employer admitting liability — Judge assessing deceased’s contributory negligence at 30% — Whether judge to consider causation alone and exclude blameworthiness when assessing “responsibility” for damage suffered — Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 (8 & 9 Geo 6, c 28), s 1

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment — Deceased dying of lung cancer following 20 years’ exposure to asbestos at work and lifetime of smoking — Employer admitting liability — Judge assessing deceased’s contributory negligence — Whether judge to consider causation alone and exclude blameworthiness when assessing claimant’s share in “responsibility” for damage suffered — Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 (8 & 9 Geo 6, c 28), s 1

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment — Deceased dying of lung cancer following 20 years’ exposure to asbestos at work and lifetime of smoking — Employer admitting liability — Judge assessing deceased’s contributory negligence — Whether judge to consider causation alone and exclude blameworthiness when assessing claimant’s share in “responsibility” for damage suffered — Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 (8 & 9 Geo 6, c 28), s 1(1)

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• AMT Futures Ltd v Boural

  11 Apr 2018 [2018] EWHC 750 (Comm); [2018] QB 1144; [2018] 3 WLR 358; [2018] WLR(D) 211, QBD (Richard Salter QC sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  CONTRACT — Construction — Exclusive jurisdiction clause

  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Cause of action — Particulars of claim
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONTRACT — Construction — Exclusive jurisdiction clause — Party commencing and continuing to prosecute foreign proceedings in breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of English courts — Other party bringing claim for damages for breach nine years after foreign proceedings commenced — Application for summary judgment of English claim on ground that statute-barred — Whether breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause constituting once-and-for-all or continuous breach — Whether right to sue for damages for breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause waived if suit for breach not timely — Whether English claim statute-barred

  CONTRACT — Construction — Exclusive jurisdiction clause — Contract between parties containing clause conferring exclusive jurisdiction on English courts — Party commencing and continuing to prosecute foreign proceedings in breach of clause — Other party bringing claim for damages for that breach nine years after foreign proceedings commenced — Whether commencement of foreign proceedings once-for-all breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause founding single cause of action breach — Whether each further act done in pursuance of those proceedings fresh breach giving rise to fresh cause of action — Whether English claim statute-barred — Whether right to sue for damages for breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause waived if suit for breach not timely — Whether defendant to English claim to be granted summary judgment

  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Cause of action — Particulars of claim — Whether necessary for claimant to plead exact moment at which cause of action arose

  CONTRACT — Construction — Exclusive jurisdiction clause — Contract between parties containing clause conferring exclusive jurisdiction on English courts — Party commencing and continuing to prosecute foreign proceedings in breach of clause — Other party bringing claim for damages for that breach nine years after foreign proceedings commenced — Whether commencement of foreign proceedings once-for-all breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause founding single cause of action for breach — Whether each further act done in pursuance of those proceedings fresh breach giving rise to fresh cause of action — Whether English claim statute-barred — Whether right to sue for damages for breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause waived if suit for breach not timely — Whether defendant to English claim to be granted summary judgment

  4 Case(s) considered