Results: 36

• T v P

  28 Mar 2018 [2018] EWHC 685 (Ch); [2018] Ch 565; [2018] 3 WLR 44; [2018] 3 All ER 469; [2018] WLR (D) 193, Ch D (Morgan J)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  TRUSTS — Variation — Jurisdiction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  TRUSTS — Variation — Jurisdiction — Proposed variation for benefit of infant also suffering from mental incapacity — Whether question of benefit to be determined by High Court or Court of Protection — Variation of Trusts Act 1958 (c 53), s 1

  TRUSTS — Variation — Jurisdiction — Proposed variation of trust for benefit of infant also suffering from mental incapacity — Whether question of benefit to be determined by High Court or Court of Protection — Variation of Trusts Act 1958 (6 & 7 Eliz 2, c 53), s 1(3) (as amended by County Courts Act 1959 (c 22), s 204, Sch 3 and Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 67(1), Sch 6, para 9(a)) — Mental Capacity Act 2005, s 2(1)

  TRUSTS — Variation — Jurisdiction — Proposed variation of trust for benefit of infant also suffering from mental incapacity — Whether question of benefit to be determined by High Court or Court of Protection — Variation of Trusts Act 1958 (6 & 7 Eliz 2 c 53), s 1(3) (as amended by County Courts Act 1959 (c 22), s 204, Sch 3 and Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 67(1), Sch 6, para 9(a)) — Mental Capacity Act 2005, s 2(1)

  2 Statutes considered

• Amari Lifestyle Ltd (trading as Amari Super Cars) v Warnes

  21 Jul 2017 [2017] EWHC 1891 (Ch); [2018] Ch 161; [2018] 2 WLR 416; [2017] WLR(D) 607, Ch D (Stephen Jourdan QC)

  DEBT — Security — Charge
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DEBT — Security — Charge — Borrower executing equitable charge over property to secure debt — Debt repayable only on sale of property from proceeds of sale — Whether charge valid

  DEBT — Security — Charge — Borrower entering agreement with lender intending to create charge over property to secure debt — Debt repayable only on sale of property from proceeds of sale — Agreement not giving rise to legal charge because not signed by co-owner of property — Whether creating valid equitable charge over borrower’s interest in property — Claimant subsequently obtaining final charging order against borrower’s interest in property to secure judgment debt — Claimant applying for order for sale of property — Whether order for sale futile because equitable charge exhausting borrower’s share of equity in property — Whether sale to be ordered — Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (c 47), s 14

  1 Statute considered

• Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd v RMC FH Co Ltd

  24 Oct 2017 [2017] EWHC 2609 (Ch); [2018] Ch 195; [2018] 2 WLR 432; [2017] WLR(D) 707, Ch D (Morgan J)

  EASEMENT — Light — Right to light by prescription

  EASEMENT — Right of light — Prescription
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EASEMENT — Light — Right to light by prescription — Property subject to lease acquiring right of light by prescription — New development threatening to interfere with right — Lessee proposing to agree with developer to release right of light — Whether right of light acquired after demise of property under lease appurtenant to freehold of property — Whether agreement releasing right of light permitted — Prescription Act 1832 (2 & 3 Will 4, c 71), s 3

  EASEMENT — Right of light — Prescription — Lessee covenanting not to permit encroachment on demised premises — Prescriptive right of light acquired in respect of building erected on premises after date of demise — Lessee proposing to release right to developers of site immediately opposite premises — Whether right of light subject of demise as right appurtenant to freehold — Whether release of right by lessee breach of covenant — Prescription Act 1832 (2 & 3 Will 4, c 71), s 3

  1 Statute considered
• First Subsea Ltd (formerly BSW Ltd) v Balltec Ltd

  25 Mar 2014 [2014] EWHC 866 (Ch); [2014] CN 571; [2017] WLR (D) 232, Ch D (Norris J)

  30 Mar 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 186; [2018] Ch 25; [2017] 3 WLR 896; [2018] 1 BCLC 20; [2017] FSR 37; The Times, 12 May 2017, CA

  18 Jul 2017 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given

  Subsequent considerations : 1 negative. Subsequent citations: 21.
  TORT — Cause of action — Unlawful means conspiracy and causing loss by unlawful means

  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Fraudulent breach of trust — Company director
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  TORT — Cause of action — Unlawful means conspiracy and causing loss by unlawful means — Whether defendant conspiring to injure claimant

  LIMITATION OF ACTION — Fraudulent breach of trust — Company director — Director’s fraudulent breach of trust not involving misappropriation or misuse of company property — Whether fraud exception to normal limitation period applying — Limitation Act 1980 (c 58), ss 21(1)(a)(3), 38(1)

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Hautford Ltd v Rotrust Nominees Ltd (Hautford Ltd v Sequent Nominees Ltd, Sequent Nominees Ltd (formerly Rotrust Nominees Ltd) v Hautford Ltd)

  17 Apr 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 765; [2018] Ch 603; [2018] 3 WLR 1; [2018] 2 P & CR 16; [2018] L & TR 21; [2018] WLR (D) 240, CA (Sir Terence Etherton MR, McCombe, Lindblom LJJ)

  31 Oct 2018 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given , SC(E)

  30 Oct 2019 [2019] UKSC 47; [2020] AC 28; [2019] 3 WLR 981; [2020] 1 All ER 1003; [2019] WLR(D) 606, SC(E) (Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 6.
  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Covenant — Change of use
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Covenant — Change of use — Tenant’s covenant not to apply for planning permission without landlord’s consent — Consent not to be unreasonably withheld — User covenant permitting residential use — Tenant seeking landlord’s consent to apply for planning permission to change use to residential — Landlord refusing consent on ground of potential eligibility for leasehold enfranchisement — Whether refusal of consent reasonable — Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (c 88), s 10(4)

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Covenant — Change of use — Tenant’s covenant not to apply for planning permission without landlord’s consent — Consent not to be unreasonably withheld — Separate user covenant permitting residential use — Tenant seeking landlord’s consent to apply for planning permission to change use to residential — Landlord refusing consent on ground of potential eligibility for leasehold enfranchisement — Whether refusal of consent reasonable

  9 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Lewis v Warner (Warner v Lewis)

  18 Jul 2016 [2016] EWHC 1787 (Ch); [2017] Ch 13; [2016] 3 WLR 1545; [2017] 2 FLR 133; [2016] WLR (D) 400, Ch D (Newey J)

  19 Dec 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 2182; [2018] Ch 450; [2018] 2 WLR 1205; [2018] 2 FLR 93; [2017] WLR (D) 847, CA (Sir Geoffrey Vos C, McCombe, Asplin LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 3.
  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — Maintained by deceased

  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — “Reasonable financial provision”
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — Maintained by deceased — Couple living together as husband and wife for 20 years in her house — Woman leaving estate to her daughter — Daughter claiming possession of house — Man having means to buy house — Whether ineligible for “financial provision” for his “maintenance” — Whether arrangement for full consideration representing financial provision for a person’s maintenance — Whether disposition of estate failing to make reasonable provision for man — Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (as inserted by Law Reform (Succession) Act 1995, s 2(4) and amended by Civil Partnership Act 2004, s 71, Sch 4(2), para 18), ss 1(2)(b), 3(2A)

  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — “Reasonable financial provision” — Man and woman living together as husband and wife for 19 years in her house — Woman dying and leaving estate to her daughter in her will — Daughter claiming possession of house — Man having means to buy house — Whether disposition of estate failing to make “reasonable financial provision” for man — Whether man ineligible for “financial provision” for his “maintenance” — Whether arrangement for full consideration representing financial provision for person’s maintenance — Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (c 63) (as amended by Law Reform (Succession) Act 1995 (c 41), s 2, Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c 33), s 71, Sch 4, paras 15(2)(6), 18 and Inheritance and Trustees’ Powers Act 2014 (c 16), s 6, Sch 2, para 3), ss 1, 2, 3

  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — “Reasonable financial provision” — Man and woman living together as husband and wife for 19 years in her house — Woman dying and leaving estate to her daughter in her will — Daughter claiming possession of house — Man having means to buy house — Whether disposition of estate failing to make “reasonable financial provision” for man — Whether man ineligible for “financial provision” for his “maintenance” — Whether order for transfer of house for full consideration representing financial provision for person’s maintenance — Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (c 63) (as amended by Law Reform (Succession) Act 1995 (c 41), s 2, Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c 33), s 71, Sch 4, paras 15(2)(6), 18 and Inheritance and Trustees’ Powers Act 2014 (c 16), s 6, Sch 2, para 3), ss 1, 2, 3

  4 Case(s) considered

  3 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• Baker v Craggs

  15 Dec 2016 [2016] EWHC 3250 (Ch); [2017] Ch 295; [2017] 2 WLR 1483; [2016] WLR (D) 684, Ch D (Newey J)

  16 May 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 1126; [2018] Ch 617; [2018] 3 WLR 401; [2018] 4 All ER 627; [2018] WLR (D) 299, CA (Patten, Henderson, Flaux LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — “Actual occupation”

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — Easement
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — “Actual occupation” — Owners of land first selling it to defendant then granting right of way over it in favour of claimants — Gap in registration process — Whether defendant in “actual occupation” — Whether defendant’s interest overreached — Whether defendant having “estate contract” during registration gap — Whether grant of right of way effective — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 21) (as amended by Law of Property (Amendment) Act 1926 (16 & 17 Geo 5, c 11), Sch and Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (c 47), s 525, Sch 3, para 4(2)), ss 2, 27(2)

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — Easement — Registered owners selling land to defendant and granting right of way access driveway — Owners subsequently selling different land to claimants and granting same right of way over driveway — Claimants’ title registered prior to defendant’s title — Whether defendant’s interest overreached — Whether grant of right of way to claimants effective — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 21) (as amended by Law of Property (Amendment) Act 1926 (16 & 17 Geo 5, c 11), Sch and Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (c 47), s 25(1), Sch 3, para 4(2)), ss 1(1), 2(1)

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — Easement — Registered owners selling land to defendant and granting right of way over access driveway — Owners subsequently selling different land to claimants and granting them right of way over driveway prior to registration of sale to defendant — Claimants’ title registered prior to defendant’s title — Whether right of way “legal estate in land” — Whether defendant’s interest overreached — Whether grant of right of way to claimants effective — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 20), ss 1(1), 2(1)

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — “Actual occupation” — Owners of land first selling it to defendant then granting right of way over it in favour of claimants — Gap in registration process — Whether defendant’s interest overreached — Whether defendant having “estate contract” during registration gap — Whether grant of right of way effective — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 20) (as amended by Law of Property (Amendment) Act 1926 (16 & 17 Geo 5, c 11), Sch and Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (c 47), s 25, Sch 3, para 4), ss 2, 27(2)

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered
• SAW (SW) 2010 Ltd v Wilson

  08 Dec 2015 [2015] EWHC 4069 (Ch), Ch D

  25 Jul 2017 [2017] EWCA Civ 1001; [2018] Ch 213; [2018] 2 WLR 636; [2018] 1 BCLC 291; [2017] WLR (D) 523, CA (Arden, Briggs LJJ)

  01 May 2018 (appn dis) [2018] 1 WLR 4105, SC(E) (Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Lloyd-Jones JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 2.
  COMPANY — Debenture — Floating Charge
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMPANY — Debenture — Floating Charge — Company purporting to secure borrowing by creation of qualifying floating charge — Whether floating charge valid if company’s property already subject to fixed charge — Whether floating charge enforceable — Whether lender empowered to appoint administrators — Insolvency Act 1986 (c 45) (as amended by Enterprise Act 2002 (c 40), s 248, Sch 16), Sch B1, paras 14, 16

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v Makin

  13 Oct 2017 [2017] EWHC 2543 (Ch); [2018] Ch 543; [2018] 3 WLR 337; [2017] WLR(D) 670, Ch D (Sir Geoffrey Vos C)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES — Personal representative — Inherent jurisdiction of court

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Powers — Public health

  ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES — Personal representative — Disposal of deceased’s remains
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES — Personal representative — Inherent jurisdiction of court — Disposal of body — Claimants’ concern that executor failing to make proper arrangements for disposal of deceased’s remains — Whether jurisdiction to make order limited to disposal of deceased’s body — Whether jurisdiction to direct how body of deceased should be disposed of — Senior Courts Act 1981 (c 54), s 116

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Powers — Public health — Disposal of body — Local authority’s duty to cause to be buried or cremated body of person dying in its area — Whether duty engaged — Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 (c 22), s 46(1)

  ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES — Personal representative — Disposal of deceased’s remains — Executor of deceased’s will failing to make proper arrangements for disposal of deceased’s remains — Local authorities seeking grant of administration to enable them to dispose of remains — Whether jurisdiction to make grant of administration limited to disposal of deceased’s body — Whether court having power under inherent jurisdiction to direct how body of deceased to be disposed of — Senior Courts Act 1981 (c 54), s 116

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Powers — Public health — Disposal of body — Local authority’s duty to cause to be buried or cremated body of person dying in its area where appearing to it that no other suitable arrangements being made — Whether duty engaged — Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 (c 22), s 46(1)

  2 Statutes considered
• Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (UK) v Attorney General (Lehtimäki v Cooper)

  09 Jun 2017 [2017] EWHC 1379 (Ch); [2018] Ch 371; [2018] 2 WLR 259; [2018] 2 All ER 504; [2018] 1 BCLC 677; [2017] WLR (D) 390, Ch D (Sir Geoffrey Vos C)

  06 Jul 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 1605; [2019] Ch 139; [2018] 3 WLR 1470; [2019] 1 All ER 845; [2018] 2 BCLC 478; [2018] WLR (D) 423, CA (Richards, Newey LJJ, Dame Elizabeth Gloster)

  11 Feb 2019 (appn all) [2019] 1 WLR 2016; Case details, SC(E) (Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden JJSC)

  29 Jul 2020 [2020] UKSC 33; [2022] AC 155; [2020] 3 WLR 461; [2021] 1 All ER 809; [2021] 1 All ER (Comm) 757, SC(E) (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin JJSC, Lord Wilson)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 17.
  CHARITY — Charitable company — Jurisdiction of High Court

  COMPANY — Director — Payments for loss of office
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHARITY — Charitable company — Jurisdiction of High Court — Extent of court’s jurisdiction over members of charitable company — Whether payment of grant to new charity requiring approval of company’s members — Whether prior written approval of Charity Commission required — Whether members owing fiduciary duty to company — Whether conflict of interest depriving some members of right to vote — Whether grant in best interests of company — Whether court having jurisdiction to direct members how to vote — Whether grant to be approved — Charities Act 2011 (c 25), s 201

  COMPANY — Director — Payments for loss of office — Transactions with directors requiring approval of members — Director/trustee of claimant charitable company agreeing to resign and set up another charitable company — Claimant’s directors/trustees agreeing to make grant to new charity — Whether payment of grant to be made as consideration for or in connection with director/trustee’s retirement from office — Whether “payment for loss of office” to director requiring sanction of claimant’s members — Companies Act 2006 (c 46), ss 215, 217

  CHARITY — Charitable company — Jurisdiction of High Court — Extent of court’s jurisdiction over members of charitable company — Payment of grant to new charity requiring prior written approval of Charity Commission and approval of company’s members — Whether members owing fiduciary duty to company — Conflict of interest depriving some members of right to vote — Whether court having jurisdiction to direct non-conflicted member how to vote — Whether grant to be approved — Companies Act 2006 (c 46), s 217 — Charities Act 2011 (c 25), s 201

  CHARITY — Charitable company — Jurisdiction of High Court — Extent of court’s jurisdiction over members of charitable company — Payment of grant to new charity requiring resolution of company’s members — Whether members owing fiduciary duty to company — Whether court having jurisdiction to direct member how to vote on resolution — Companies Act 2006 (c 46), s 217

  8 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  2 Statutes considered