Results: 872

• Heron Bros Ltd v Central Bedfordshire Council

  20 Mar 2015 [2015] EWHC 604 (TCC); [2015] PTSR 1146; [2015] BLR 362; [2015] WLR (D) 137, QBD (Edwards-Stuart J)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 negative; most recently considered: 2017. Subsequent citations: 6.
  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT — Claim form — Service
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT — Claim form — Service — Claimant seeking to challenge defendant’s procurement process — Whether claim form served within prescribed time limit — Whether power or discretion to extend time for service — When valid service effected — Whether time limits breaching European Union principle of equivalence — Whether sending unsealed copy of claim form to defendant valid service within time limit — Whether defects in served claim form curable — Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/5), reg 47F (as inserted by Public Contracts (Amendment) Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2992), reg 10 and amended by Public Procurement (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2011 (SI 2011/2053), reg 12(4)) — CPR rr 6.14, 7.5(1)

  7 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc (No 1) (Air Canada, third parties) (Korean Airlines Co Ltd, fourth parties) (Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc (No 2) (Air Canada, third parties) (Polar Air Cargo llc, fourth parties))

  28 Oct 2014 [2014] EWHC 3513 (Ch); [2014] CN 1855, Ch D (Peter Smith J)

  14 Oct 2015 [2015] EWCA Civ 1024; [2016] Bus LR 145; [2015] WLR (D) 411, CA

  23 May 2016 (appn dis) [2016] Bus LR 713, SC(E)

  Subsequent citations: 12.
  PRACTICE — Judgment — Redaction

  COMPETITION — Commission decision — Presumption of innocence

  TORT — Cause of action — Intention to injure
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PRACTICE — Judgment — Redaction — European Commission issuing Decision — Defendant making redactions to Decision — Claimants seeking review of lawfulness of redactions — Whether possible for English judge to order disclosure of European Decision in un-redacted form — Whether protections necessary in making such an order — Whether decision of English court on such an application potentially conflicting with future EC decisions

  COMPETITION — Commission decision — Presumption of innocence — Duty of sincere co-operation — Commission issuing confidential Decision containing infringement findings or allusions to infringements not in operative part — Claimants bringing damages proceedings in national court seeking disclosure of unredacted confidential version of Decision — Commission subsequently publishing provisional non-confidential version with protected material redacted — Judge directing disclosure of unredacted confidential version to confidentiality ring — Application of EU principle of presumption of innocence to national proceedings — Whether national court obliged to afford same protection as afforded at Community level — EU Treaty, art 4(3)EU — FEU Treaty, art 101FEU — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, art 48

  TORT — Cause of action — Intention to injure — Commission finding defendant infringing competition law — Claimants issuing proceedings claiming unlawful interference with business and unlawful means conspiracy arising out of alleged unlawful cartel — Defendant applying to strike out economic torts — Whether claimants showing necessary intent to injure particular claimants

  8 Case(s) considered

  3 EU Enactments considered
• McGraddie v McGraddie

  31 Jul 2013 [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] 1 WLR 2477; [2013] WLR (D) 323; Case details; 2014 SC (UKSC) 12, SC

  28 Jan 2015 (No 2) [2015] UKSC 1; [2015] 1 WLR 560; [2015] 3 All ER 61; [2015] WLR (D) 36; Case details; 2015 SC (UKSC) 45, SC

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 95.
  PRACTICE — Appeal — Witness action tried by judge alone

  COSTS — Order for costs — Legal expenses insurance

  LEGAL AID — Scotland — Expenses

  EVIDENCE — Credibility and reliability of witnesses — Opinion of judge who heard witnesses

  EXPENSES — Legal aid — Appeal to UK Supreme Court

  EXPENSES — ‘After the event’ insurance premiums — Whether recoverable as expense
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PRACTICE — Appeal — Witness action tried by judge alone — Findings of fact — Review by appellate court — Principles applicable

  COSTS — Order for costs — Legal expenses insurance — Defenders successfully reclaiming before Inner House of Court of Session — Pursuer obtaining after the event insurance for appeal to Supreme Court — Supreme Court allowing appeal — Pursuer seeking order for expenses — Whether insurance premium recoverable as part of expenses — Act of Sederunt (Rules of the Court of Session 1994) 1994, Sch 2, r 42.10 — Supreme Court Rules 2009, r 46(1) — Supreme Court Practice Direction 13, para 3.1

  LEGAL AID — Scotland — Expenses — Order for expenses — Legally aided defenders successfully reclaiming before Inner House of Court of Session — Pursuer appealing — Defenders granted legal aid to respond to appeal — Supreme Court allowing appeal — Whether pursuer entitled to order for expenses from legal aid fund — Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 (as amended by Legal Aid Act 1988, s 44, Sch 4, para 8), s 19

  EVIDENCE — Credibility and reliability of witnesses — Opinion of judge who heard witnesses — Duty of appellate court

  EXPENSES — Legal aid — Appeal to UK Supreme Court — Unassisted party seeking award of expenses against Scottish Legal Aid Board

  EXPENSES — ‘After the event’ insurance premiums — Whether recoverable as expense — Supreme Court Rules 2009 (SI 2009/1603 (L 17)), r 46

  12 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered

• SIA Maxima Latvija v Konkurences padome

  26 Nov 2015 (Case C-345/14); EU:C:2015:784; [2015] Bus LR 1565; [2015] WLR (D) 483, ECJ

  Subsequent citations: 8.
  COMPETITION — Restriction or distortion of competition — Anti-competitive agreement

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Competition
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMPETITION — Restriction or distortion of competition — Anti-competitive agreement — Commercial lease agreements — Clause in agreements giving anchor tenant right to prevent lessor letting premises to third parties — Whether object of agreement restriction of competition — Whether having “effect” of preventing, restricting or distorting competition — FEU Treaty, art 101(1)FEU

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Competition — Article 101(1) TFEU — Application of analogous national legislation — Jurisdiction of the Court — Concept of ‘agreement having as its object the restriction of competition’ — Commercial lease agreements — Shopping centres — Right of the anchor tenant to prevent the lessor letting commercial premises to third parties

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

• Bonsall v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

  08 Dec 2015 [2015] EWCA Civ 1246; [2016] QB 811; [2016] 2 WLR 1407; [2015] WLR (D) 514, CA

  11 Apr 2016 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court refused

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  PLANNING — Planning control — Breach
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PLANNING — Planning control — Breach — Landowner changing use of barn without planning permission — Change deliberately concealed for four years — Enforcement notice issued for breach of planning control — Supreme Court authority establishing statutory four-year limitation period for enforcement action not applying in case of deception — Subsequent enactment of procedure enabling enforcement action outside time limit by obtaining planning enforcement order — Whether time limit applying in cases of deception where no planning enforcement order obtained — Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Planning and Compensation Act 1991, s 4(1) and Localism Act 2011, s 124(1)), ss 171B, 171BA

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• University of Stirling v University and College Union

  29 Apr 2015 [2015] UKSC 26; [2015] ICR 567; [2016] 1 All ER 524; [2015] WLR (D) 188; Case details; 2015 SC (UKSC) 121, SC (Lady Hale DPSC, Lord Wilson JSC, Lord Sumption JSC, Lord Reed JSC, Lord Hughes JSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 3.
  EMPLOYMENT — Redundancy — Consultation

  EMPLOYMENT — Limited term contracts — Dismissal of employees on termination of contracts
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EMPLOYMENT — Redundancy — Consultation — Academic staff dismissed on expiry of limited term contracts — Union claiming employer failing to consult — Whether reason for dismissal “related to the individual” — Whether employees dismissed “as redundant” — Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, ss 188(1) (as substituted by Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 1995, reg 3), 195(1) (as substituted by Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act 1993, s 34(5))

  EMPLOYMENT — Limited term contracts — Dismissal of employees on termination of contracts — Whether dismissals for a reason related to individuals concerned

  1 Case considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered
• In re AB (A Child) (Deprivation of Liberty: Consent) (A Local Authority v D )

  28 Jul 2015 [2015] EWHC 3125 (Fam); [2016] 1 WLR 1160; [2016] 2 FLR 601; [2015] WLR (D) 432, Fam D (Keehan J)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 15.
  CHILDREN — Child in care — Deprivation of liberty
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Child in care — Deprivation of liberty — Child placed in residential children’s home under interim care order — Whether living arrangements amounting to deprivation of liberty — Whether parents or local authority entitled to consent to deprivation of liberty — Whether court to authorise deprivation of liberty under inherent jurisdiction — Observations on deprivation of liberty cases involving children in need or looked after children — Children Act 1989 (c 41) (as amended by Adoption and Children Act 2002 (c 38), s 139, Sch 3, para 63(a)), ss 20, 25, 33(3), 100(4) — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42). Sch 1, Pt I, art 5

  2 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

• Matei v SC Volksbank România SA (Bogdan Matei and Ioana Ofelia Matei v SC Volksbank România SA)

  26 Feb 2015 (Case C-143/13); [2015] 1 WLR 2385; [2015] WLR (D) 87; EU:C:2015:127, ECJ

  Subsequent citations: 7.
  FAIR TRADING — Contract — Unfair terms

  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  FAIR TRADING — Contract — Unfair terms — Consumer credit contract including terms allowing lender to alter interest rate in response to significant changes on financial market and to impose risk charge — Terms relating to “main subject matter of the contract” or “adequacy of the price and remuneration” excluded from review of unfairness if drafted in plain intelligible language — Whether interest rate and risk charge terms excluded from review of unfairness — Council Directive 93/13/EEC, art 4(2)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer — Article 42 — Assessment of the unfairness of contractual terms — Exclusion of terms relating to the main subject-matter of the contract or the adequacy of the price and remuneration as long as they are in plain intelligible language — Terms including a 'risk charge' charged by the lender and authorising it, under certain conditions, unilaterally to alter the interest rate

  1 Case considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

• R (HC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (AIRE Centre intervening)

  06 Dec 2013 [2013] EWHC 3874 (Admin); [2013] CN 1872, QBD (Supperstone J)

  10 Feb 2015 (AIRE Centre intervening) [2015] EWCA Civ 49; [2016] QB 455; [2015] 3 WLR 1867; [2015] WLR (D) 61, CA

  07 Mar 2016 (appn all) [2016] 1 WLR 2352, SC(E)

  15 Nov 2017 [2017] UKSC 73; [2019] AC 845; [2017] 3 WLR 1486; [2018] 2 All ER 1; [2017] WLR (D) 761; Case details, SC(E) (Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath JJSC, Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony)

  Subsequent citations: 44.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Citizenship — Right to reside
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Citizenship — Right to reside — Third-country national with right of residence in United Kingdom as primary carer of British citizen children — Carer applying for non-contributory welfare benefits — When derivative right of residence arising — Whether status conferring right to social benefits — Children Act 1989 (c 41), s 17(1) — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 14 — Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987/1967), reg 21AA (as inserted by Social Security (Persons from Abroad) Amendment Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1026), reg 6(3) and amended by Social Security (Habitual Residence) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2587), reg 2) — Child Benefit (General) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/223), reg 23(4) (as amended by Child Benefit and Child Tax Credit (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2612), reg 3) — Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1003), reg 15A (as inserted by Immigration (European Economic Area) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1547), reg 3, Sch 1, para 9 and amended by Immigration (European Economic Area) (Amendment) (No 2) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2560), reg 2, Sch, para 3) — Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility) (England) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1294), reg 4(1)(b)(iii)(iv) (as inserted by Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2588), reg 2(2)) — FEU Treaty, arts 20FEU, 21FEU

  7 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  2 Statutes considered

  4 Statutory Instruments considered
• Moreno v Motor Insurers’ Bureau

  17 Apr 2015 [2015] EWHC 1002 (QB); [2015] Lloyd's Rep IR 535; [2015] WLR (D) 177, QBD (Gilbart J)

  28 Jul 2015 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given

  03 Aug 2016 [2016] UKSC 52; [2016] 1 WLR 3194; [2017] 4 All ER 28; [2016] RTR 26; [2016] WLR (D) 453; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 9.
  ROAD TRAFFIC — Motor Insurers’ Bureau — Uninsured driver
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  ROAD TRAFFIC — Motor Insurers’ Bureau — Uninsured driver — English claimant injured in Greece when struck by Greek registered vehicle driven by uninsured driver — Claim against Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation — Whether law of Greece or English law applicable to assessment of compensation — Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/37), reg 13(2) — Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 864/2007

  ROAD TRAFFIC — Motor Insurers’ Bureau — Uninsured driver — United Kingdom resident injured in Greece when struck by Greek registered vehicle driven by uninsured driver — Claim against Motor Insurers’ Bureau for compensation — Whether Greek or English law applicable to assessment of compensation — Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/37), reg 13(2)(b) — Council Directive 2009/103/EC

  3 Case(s) considered