...Commonwealth Affairs and Libya (Appellants) v Janah (Respondents)
On 12 October 2017, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the joined appeals of Gahan v Emirates and Buckley v Emirates  EWCA Civ 1530.
In Aaron Harris v Hounslow London Borough Council  EWCA 1476 the Court of Appeal has underlined the importance of social landlords being permitted to provide speedy relief to the victims of anti-social behaviour.
The claim that came before Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE in Jacobs UK Ltd v Skanska Construction Ltd concerned a party’s right to commence an adjudication, withdraw it...
The Court of Appeal was again faced with a question of contractual interpretation where a close textual analysis appeared to provide an unusual commercial outcome.
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the Act’) requires all letting agents in England and Wales to publicise details of their fees and provide a description of the fee that is ...
The decision of Fraser J. in North Midland Building Ltd. v Cryden Homes Ltd. is an interesting example of a party to a construction contract attempting...
Mark's background is in management and business development having spent over 20 years working for some of the largest law firms in the world.
The High Court judgment in Technomed v Bluecrest Health Screening is interesting and important for two reasons – ...
Ng Man-Sun (“Mr Ng”) and Chen Mei Huan (“Madam Chen”), who were living together, were the directors of Peckson, a BVI company. The appeal concerned the ownership shares in Peckson (“the Shares”).
O’Farrell J in the TCC dealt with the effect of an exclusion clause on a claim based on reliance losses. ATOS provided medical records software that the Trust argued suffered from performance issues.
Nicola Davies J. has ruled that Barclays Bank is vicariously liable for alleged sexual assaults on 126 women committed between 1968 and 1984 by a Dr. Bates, to whom the Bank sent prospective employees for pre-employment medical assessments.
On 5 September 2017, Derek Kerr and Hannah Laithwaite presented to the real estate group of Captsticks.
At the beginning of August the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in MT HØJGAARD A/S (‘MTH’) v E.ON – reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal and reinstating the first instance order of Edwards-Stuart J.
Almost four years to the day since the Employment Tribunal fee regime came into force, the Supreme Court in R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor  UKSC 51 ruled it unlawful.
In Efobi v Royal Mail Group Limited UKEAT/0203/16/DA, 10 August 2017, Laing J, the EAT has handed down an important decision on Section 136 Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA’),
Section 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010 (‘the Act’) provides that discrimination awards in the employment tribunal correspond to awards which could be awarded by a county court under Section 119 of the Act.
The Court of Appeal, reversing a strike-out ruling, has decided that it is arguable that geneticists were under a duty of care to provide information to C about her father’s diagnosis of Huntington’s disease.
Mr Justice Coulson was asked to considered the duty of care of a quantity surveyor providing a report to a bank as part of its lending decision.
The Supreme Court has refused permission to appeal to the Respondent freeholder in the case of Elim Court RTM Co Ltd v Avon Freeholds Ltd  H.L.R. 18;  EWCA Civ 89.
David Sawtell’s article, ‘Constructive trusts: more than words?’ has been published in the July/August 2017 edition of the Trusts and Estates Law & Tax Journal.
In Poshteh v RB Kensington and Chelsea, the Supreme Court disagrees with Strasbourg jurisprudence and dismisses an appeal against a suitability review.
In Ndole Assets v Designer M&E Services UK Ltd  EWHC 1148 (TCC) the claimant company was a litigant in person in proceedings brought against the defendant company.
What happens in a case involving multiple Defendants when one of those Defendants is not party to a settlement between the Claimant and one or more of the other Defendants?
In this case the TCC re-visited the question of the extent of the adjudicator’s jurisdiction when deciding a dispute arising from a construction dispute.
Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea  has re-visited the issue of whether the homelessness provisions in the Housing Act 1996 create a ‘civil right’ which engages article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In LL v The Lord Chancellor  EWCA Civ 237, the Court of Appeal held the applicant entitled to HRA damages for his committal to prison by Ms. Justice Russell because her errors cumulatively amounted to “gross and obvious irregularity”.
In Essop v Home Office and Naeem v Secretary of State for Justice, the Supreme Court has handed down two important decisions on the scope of indirect discrimination.
The Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 came into effect this month, replacing the Insolvency Rules 1986. The rules have been restructured, consolidated and modernised, with the intention of delivering efficiency savings through deregulation. The following is a brief round-up of some of the key features.
The defendant council (LBHF) held a 25 year lease of a number of units in a fairly low-rent industrial estate close to Harlesden, west London. The lease contained a full repairing covenant.
Traditionally, the costs of an adjudication are not recoverable from the paying party (subject to the agreement of the parties, which itself has arguably been limited by section 108A of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996).
With current Brexit and indeed global developments, the markets are displaying considerable volatility and there are potential profits to be made by acting quickly.
With current Brexit and indeed global developments, the markets are displaying considerable volatility and there are potential profits to be made by acting quickly.
The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has estimated that the jobs of 176,500 EU Nationals (8% of the UK construction workforce) could be under threat if Brexit removes their right to live and work in the UK.
Where the Court has set a costs budget, can a successful party expect to recover the costs set out in that budget? Following the decision in Merrix, the answer seems to be yes – unless there is a good reason to depart from it
This case illustrates another pitfall when serving at the eleventh hour. With limitation looming, C issued proceedings but did not serve. D served notice under CPR 7.7.
In Monk the Supreme Court had to determine whether a commercial building in the process of redevelopment had to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it was still a useable office?
In Case C-157/15 Achbita v G4S Secure Solutions NV, a Belgian reference, and Case C-188/15 Bougnaoui v Micropole SA, a French reference (14 March 2017) , the European Court of Justice (‘ECJ’) has considered headscarf bans in the workplace.
The recent decision of the European Court of Justice in Achbita v G4S Secure Solutions and Bougnaoui v Micropole, so far published only in press release form, has attracted widespread attention and a number of assumptions about its meaning and consequences. Not all of these are well founded.
Lamb Chambers Barristers Clive Blackwood and David Sawtell will be giving a day-long conference entitled ‘A Guide to Interim Orders in International Commercial Litigation’ for MBL Seminars this Friday 17th March 2017.
Whatever your personal feelings about Article 50, it will at least initiate the negotiation process that will clarify the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
The Business and Property Courts will be the new name for Britain’s international dispute resolution jurisdictions and will act as a single umbrella for business specialist courts across England and Wales
When the UK joined the EU, British people got some new rights – for instance, to live and work in other member states – which they had never had before. British businesses gained new rights too, providing goods and services without being impeded by tariffs or measures of similar effect.
This afternoon there was an announcement to the London Stock Exchange of a forthcoming change to the discount rate in relation to calculating compensation payments. Most people had probably never heard of it this morning, but the development has wiped billions off the value of major insurers and looks set to be front page news tomorrow.
A party serves a notice seeking to acquire a property or similar right but fails to comply with the strict requirements of the statute. Does it invalidate the notice? The Court of Appeal considers this question for the first time in relation to the right to manage legislation
Does the fixed costs regime within Section IIIA of Part 45 CPR for ex-portal personal injury claims apply to applications for pre-action disclosure (PAD)? On 1 February 2017 the Court of Appeal in Caren Sharp v Leeds City Council unanimously held it did.
CPR 3.1(7) gives the Court a power to vary or revoke an order. The power is used sparingly when the order is ‘final’ ie when it determines between the parties the issues which are the subject matter of the litigation.
In Pimlico Plumbers and Charlie Mullins v Gary Smith  EWCA Civ 51 (10 February 2017) the Court of Appeal upheld an Employment Tribunal decision that a plumber was a worker, rather than self-employed, thereby entitling him to pursue disability discrimination claims and claims for holiday pay and unauthorised deduction from wages.
Contract disputes invariably turn on well-rehearsed principles of interpretation summarised neatly in Arnold v Britton  UKSC 36, following Lord Hoffman’s restatement of the governing principles in Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society  UKHL 28.
The legal status of workers in the so-called ‘gig’ economy has now received the scrutiny of the Court of Appeal, in Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and Mullins v Smith  EWCA Civ 51.
The UK’s financial services sector generates around 7% of GDP, pays about £60bn per year in tax, directly employs about 1.1m people, and makes a significant contribution to sustaining another million jobs in associated sectors such as accountancy, management consultancy and law.
A party brings a claim within the limitation period, but can the defendant counterclaim, even though the limitation period for their own claim expired before the claimant’s claim was issued? In Al-Rawas v Hassan Khan & Co (a firm)  EWCA Civ 42, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of s. 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 on the limitation period of an original set off or counterclaim and ruled that the answer to the question was “no”.
David Sawtell has an article in the 21st January 2017 issue of the Estates Gazette concerning landlords’ options in respect of new protected commercial tenancy applications.
Some of the implications of the steps that have been achieved towards equality, and particularly equality of marriage, are still being played out. The Employment Appeal Tribunal had recently to consider where the Church’s Schedule 9 exemptions under the Equality Act 2010 begin and end.
Some of the implications of the steps that have been achieved towards equality, and particularly equality of marriage, are still being played out. The Employment Appeal Tribunal had recently to consider where the Church’s Schedule 9 exemptions under the Equality Act 2010 begin and end.
There’s nothing a barrister likes more than to see a happy judge, even if it’s not the barrister who has cheered the judge up. So joy radiates this week from the Employment Tribunal following its preliminary decision in McLoud and Mostyn (and others) v The Lord Chancellor and the MOJ.
Two dairy farmers, the Wakleys, that took on the Crown Estate were rewarded for their resolve on 15 December 2016 when the High Court in Bristol handed down Judgment in their favour.
Part 5 of the Enterprise Act 2016, which comes into force on 4 May 2017 seeks to deal with an oddity in English law the effect of which has been that an insured has no claim in damages against his insurer for the consequences of late payment of his claim. Possibly the best reported consequence of this rule comes from Sprung v Royal Insurance  Lloyd’s Rep I.R. 111.
Q purchased a property in a development from H. The purchase price paid on completion was £240,000. Two years later Q sold the property for £275,000.
In November, the Court of Appeal by majority held that the implication of terms could not turn an incomplete estate agency agreement into a binding contract.
Solicitors Regulation Authority v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal & Huseyin Arslan (Interested party) & Law Society (Intervening party)  EWHC 2862 (Admin)
This case considered the vexed relationship between section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, which requires a contract for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land to be in writing, and the preservation in section 2(5) of ‘resulting, implied or constructive trusts’.
When a court is considering a tenant’s application for a grant of a new tenancy or a landlord’s opposition to the grant of such a tenancy under the provisions of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, it is often deciding what terms will govern the future rather than considering what has happened in the past.
It seems that the legal implications of the so-called gig economy could be tested again, just a month after the Employment Tribunal considered that Uber,...
Arfan Khan was instructed as lead Counsel and led on the appeal. The appeal was allowed. The case is reported as Yadly Marketing v Secretary of State for the Home Department  WLR (D) 621;  EWCA Civ 1143.
Lamb Chambers is delighted to congratulate our door tenant James Bridgeman on his election as President of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators for the year 2018.
In Maud v Aabar Block SARL and another  EWHC 2175 (Ch) the High Court considered the correct approach to exercising discretion in a bankruptcy petition where there was an ulterior object to the petitioners’ bringing of the petition which was also opposed by other creditors.
On 28 October 2016 the Employment Tribunal ruled on the status of Uber drivers and concluded that they were workers and entitled to be paid the minimum wage and annual leave.
One of the ways in which marriage still matters is in fatal accident damages. How much do you get when your spouse or civil partner dies? £12,980 in bereavement damages. How much when the person you have cohabited with throughout your life, but never married, dies? Nothing, at least for bereavement.
Does a landlord’s failure to apply under CPR 83.2 for permission to issue a warrant of possession invalidate the warrant? No, said the Court of Appeal in Cardiff County Council v Lee (Flowers)  EWCA Civ 1034.
In Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc & Others  EWCA Civ 1144 the claimant had entered into a conditional fee agreement with its solicitors and obtained third party funding in order to pursue its claim.
The Deloitte Office Crane Survey for Winter 2016 makes for some very interesting post-Brexit reading. Construction momentum in London has slowed, with 40 new schemes starting over the past six months, compared with 51 in the previous survey.
Over the last year or two a common issue in regards to costs in RTA litigation has presented itself at the allocation stage: whether the fixed costs regime continues to apply to a case which no longer continues under the RTA Low-Value Personal Injury Protocol but is allocated to the multi-track after being issued under Part 7.
On the 10th November 2016 the CJEU held that a European trade mark for the three-dimensional representation of a puzzle (essentially a Rubik’s cube) could not continue to be registered as an EU trade mark as it offended against Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of the Trade Mark Regulation 40/94.
The newspaper front pages have had other things to occupy them in the past few days, so you might well have missed an important Supreme Court decision connected to one of this year’s hot political potatoes: the spare room subsidy or, as its critics have labelled it, the ‘bedroom tax’.
Lamb Chamber’s Colin Challenger has won a case at the Court of Appeal connected to a dispute about the care of an elderly man with dementia, between Teresa Kirk, and Devon County Council.
Lamb Chambers Barrister David Willink has written a commentary for US lawyers on the legal and political background to Brexit, following October’s High Court ruling on the Government’s right to use the Royal Prerogative to trigger Article 50.
The latest ‘baby shaking’ case again flags up the difficulties courts face when hearing expert evidence and experts encounter when giving it.
Lamb Chambers barrister David Willink was first involved in developing the e-business strategy for the courts in England and Wales sixteen years ago, when the Government set a target for all public services to be online by 2005!
In September 2016, Chief Master Marsh found that the privilege attaching to without prejudice communications extends to interlocutory hearings.
We wish him luck as he heads off to Buenos Aries later this month to act as an arbitration judge in the FDI Moot Competition
The decision of Employment Tribunal in Aslam and Farrar and others v Uber BV, Uber London Ltd and Uber Britannia Ltd (2202550/2015) has attracted far reaching attention for a number of reasons.
New insolvency rules come into effect on April 6th 2017 which will replace the procedural framework contained in Insolvency Rules 1986 (as amended) for the Insolvency Act 1986.
The news that a third runway has been approved for Heathrow has triggered renewed debate about the merits of the scheme and at least one West London by-election.
A decision which appears to have gone under the radar at the Chancery Division recently is that of Ian Billington v Davies  EWHC 1919 (CH). This could be because it is a decision of a Deputy Master, though is still technically binding on a Judge sitting in the County Court.
CPR 83.2(3)(e) was introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2014 (Si 2014/407) and marked a departure from the longstanding principle that no notice or permission was needed to issue a warrant.
Around Week Two of our law courses, we learned that guarantees must be in writing. This had an air of exoticism because it dated back to 1677 and an Act so old that it was a ‘Statute’; the Statute of Frauds.
The “fraudulent claims rule” bars the whole of a policyholder’s claim where it is either wholly invented or fraudulently exaggerated.
This recent decision in the Upper Tribunal (UT) serves as both a reminder of proper procedure and a warning to practitioners.
The High Court has handed down two judgments in which it had cause to grapple with both the interpretation and application of the robust protective disclosure regime under the Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996/2798, Reg.18.
A three-stage consideration - the High Court has clarified the approach required when a court is faced with a bankruptcy petition, an alleged ulterior object and opposition to the petition by other creditors.
Posting a hyperlink to copyright works that appear on the internet without a copyright owner's consent is not an infringement, unless done for financial gain. So the CJEU ruled on 8 September 2016 in GS Media v Sanoma (Case C – 160/15).
Acting for a leading business finance provider, Lamb Chambers Member Alex Cunliffe has obtained a series of freezing and disclosure orders to prevent the dissipation of proceeds from a major fraud.
On 3 October 2016, a new CPR Part 52 was substituted for the existing version (Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2016, rule 10 and the Schedule).
Using computer technology to assist with e-disclosure has always promised to reduce time and cost. For some years, computer software has been available to assist with the review process and now finally it is making an appearance in the UK.
Following the £5 million fine imposed on Merlin Attractions Operation Limited for Health & Safety failings in the Smiler crash, David Sawtell discusses the legal importance of facility management and the lessons that should be learnt from the case.
David Sawtell writes about the latest developments in the law on commercial compromise agreement in this month’s Commercial Litigation Journal.
When carrying out construction works to a building with existing tenants, the landlord must be very careful not to breach the covenant for quiet enjoyment of the premises.
In the conjoined appeals of Willow Court Management Co Ltd v Ratna Alexander, Shelley Sinclair v 231 Sussex Gardens Right to Manage Ltd, Raymond Stone v 54 Hogarth Road, London SW5 Management Ltd  UKUT 290 (LC),
The doctrine of illegality has been criticised for its complexity and incoherency. In Patel v Mirza  UKSC 42 the Supreme Court delivered welcome guidance as to the scope and application of the doctrine.
The jurisdiction of an adjudicator to hear a dispute about a settlement agreement arising from a construction claim is not clear cut.
If parties enter into a written contract providing that any alteration to the contract must be “set out in writing and signed on behalf of both parties before they take effect”, can the contract still be varied orally?
In City West Housing Trust v Massey and Manchester & District HA v Roberts  EWCA Civ 704 the Court of Appeal has set out some non-prescriptive guidance on how courts should exercise...
In the case of MacDonald (by her litigation friend Duncan J McDonald) v McDonald and others  UKSC 28 the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the notion...
On 15 June 2016 the Supreme Court handed down its much anticipated decision in McDonald (by her litigation friend Duncan J McDonald) v McDonald and others  UKSC 28
The way in which the built environment is constructed and facilities are managed is changing. We need to make sure our contracts, enquiries and legal services keep up.
The case of Cooper and another v Thameside Construction Company Ltd (in administration) (2016) EWHC 1248 (TCC) is a reminder that in a competing theories case claimants must diligently gather and test all...
There has been a recent trend towards treating housing associations as public bodies for the purposes of judicial review and human rights defences,...
Elizabeth Haggerty provides a refresher on some of the most significant decisions of the past six months, together with potentially important forthcoming judgments
David Sawtell explores the latest case law on the American Cyanamid guidelines when applying for an interim injunction in this month’s Procurement and Outsourcing Journal.
The harder-edged approach to deadlines wrought by cases such as Denton v TH White  1 WLR 3926 has recently been considered in the context of delays in the grant of public funding.
In this case, the Court of Appeal considered the approach to applications for relief from sanctions and setting aside a judgement in default in a case where the defaulting party delayed in applying for relief, but was alleging that the claim was fraudulent.
On 1 March 2016 the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Hills v Niksun  EWCA Civ 115. Mr Hills, the Respondent represented by Matthew Winn-Smith, was successful in resisting the appeal.
The High Court has clarified issues concerning the variation, and termination of contracts – in particular: (1) termination on grounds not initially cited by the terminating party; and (2) variation by the exchange of e-mails.
The Court of Appeal recently handed down two important decisions that looked at the question of the effective scope of the limitation on “re-adjudications” ....
There was much press coverage of two joined appeals to the Court of Appeal, which resulted in a finding that the so-called ‘Bedroom Tax’ was unlawfully discriminatory on the facts of each case.
Exploring the scope of “fundamental dishonesty” for the purposes of CPR 44.16. This case (currently unreported) appears to be the only known appellate decision dealing with this issue.
Last week, the Court of Appeal, in the conjoined appeals of Broadhurst & Taylor v Tan & Smith  EWCA Civ 94, settled the argument over which type of costs were applicable in the situation where,...
In Morby v Gate Gourmet Luxembourg IV Sarl and another  EWHC 74 (Ch), the High Court has helpfully clarified the mechanism by which personal service of a bankruptcy petition can be effected when a debtor is not handed the petition or attempts to evade service.
Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 provides a no-fault procedure for the recovery of possession of a property let on an assured shorthold tenancy.
S.14A(9) Limitation Act 1980 provides that knowledge of whether or not any acts (or omissions) amount to negligence is irrelevant for limitation purposes.
At the end of November the Court of Justice handed down a decision that finally dealt with the question of whether a party who was not involved in the proceedings before the General Court – but...
The direction of travel in commercial contract law has been towards freedom of contract and upholding the actual bargains reached by the parties, says Richard Hayes - www.solicitorsjournal.com
As any PI practitioner will know, solicitors’ success fees, previously recoverable from Defendants, can now only be recovered from their own clients’ general damages. In infant settlement cases, where any deduction from damages requires the permission of the Court, this poses particular problems.
In Montgomery the Supreme Court decided that before consenting to treatment a patient is entitled to be aware of any material risks and of alternative or variant treatments.
When registering an easement that is expressly granted or reserved out of a registered title, the grant or reservation will only operate at law if the registration requirements under s.27(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002 are met.
On 1st October 2015, the remaining provisions of the Deregulation Act 2015 relating to assured shorthold tenancies came into force. The provisions are detailed and complicated and set out in ss. 33 to 41 of the Act.
The Payment Accounts Directive (“PAD”) was adopted by the European Commission (“EC”) on 8 May 2013 and subsequently, in revised form, adopted by the European Parliament and Council on 23 July 2014.
The Deregulation Act 2015 (“the 2015 Act”) has made largescale changes to the legislative protection available to tenants of properties let on assured shorthold tenancies (“ASTs”).
The Supreme Court recently considered whether the system for the recovery of costs in civil litigation under the Access to Justice Act 1999 (“AJA”) is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”).
Judicial decisions relating to Limited Liability Partnerships (“LLPs”) have been relatively rare since their statutory invention by the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000. Like London buses, two have now come along at once: the judgments of Warren J.
On 23rd July 2015 the Court of Appeal considered, for the first time, the applicability of the Ogden Tables to the assessment of loss of earning capacity.
In what circumstances does a “solicitors’ agent” enjoy a right of audience before a court? The answer is likely to be increasingly important, as challenges to solicitors’ agents’ rights of audience appear to be on the rise.
On the 22 January 2015 the CJEU delivered its judgment in Arts & Allposters International BV v StichtingPicoright, a decision that directly addresses the question the limits of copyright protection afforded to copyright works first marketed in the EU that have subsequently been the subject of an unauthorised shift in its physical form prior to onward sale in the EU.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down an important decision on the 16 July 2015 dealing with the thorny issue of the balance to be struck between the rights of patent proprietors of patents that have become part of a European standard and the rights of third-parties who have not concluded an agreement with that patent holder for the use the protected technology – but have used it in any event to comply with the requirements of the EU standard.
Some black and minority ethnic (‘BME’) and older (35+) employees alleged indirect discrimination by the Home Office. They had all failed the Core Skills Assessment (‘CSA’) that was necessary in order to be eligible for promotion.
An estate contained 91 chalets let on 99 year terms. The Appellants were the tenants under 25 of these leases. The Respondent was the landlord.
In Chief Constable of The Bedfordshire Police v (1) Golding; (2) Fransen  EWHC 1875 (QB) the question was whether or not leaders of “Britain First” (“BF”), should be banned from entering Luton for their march on 27 June 2015 (“the Day”), under the Anti-Social, Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
In complex litigation, late amendments are not uncommon, and used to be allowed routinely, with any prejudice being dealt with in a costs order.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Starbucks (HK) v BSB has upheld the longstanding principle that to bring an action in passing off the Claimant must have more than a reputation in the UK - it must have actual paying customers and that the application of this principle is not altered by the fact that the service in question is one that is known to individuals living in the UK.
In October 2011, H, a pregnant woman, surrendered the tenancy of her bedsit in a hostel, which only accommodated single people.
Employment practitioners already know that, for tribunal claims started after May 2014, claimants must embark on the ACAS early conciliation process and, before lodging their claim, they must also obtain a certificate number from ACAS.
These Regulations come into force on the 13 June 2014 and whilst they might sound innocent enough they will have very wide ranging impact on various commercial transactions.
Any PI or clinical negligence claim issued after 12 April 2015 will be subject to section 58 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 which introduces a potentially far-ranging concept of “fundamental dishonesty” as a (near mandatory) reason for dismissing an otherwise valid claim.
Practitioners should be aware that new Pre-Action Protocols in respect of Personal Injury, Clinical Negligence, Professional Negligence, Judicial Review, Housing Disrepair and Possession Claims by Social Landlords all came into force on 6 April 2015.
A raft of acts were passed before Parliament was prorogued on 26th March 2015. Amongst them was the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“the Act”). The Act amends and consolidates the law relating to the rights and protection of consumers.
The Deregulation Act 2015 received royal assent on 26 March 2015. It contains amendments to landlord and tenant legislation that will come into force during 2015. Sections 30 to 32 deal with tenancy deposits and are already in force.
In Stevens v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd  EWCA Civ 93 the Court of Appeal added to the guidance given in Pattni v First Leicester Buses Ltd;
A conveyancing solicitor owes no general duty to a client to investigate the solvency of a vendor in a property transaction – Kandola v Mirza Solicitors LLP  EWHC 460 (Ch).
What principles should govern the review of an apportionment by an appellate court? The SC provides guidance on this issue in this appeal from the Scottish courts.
How far does an employer need to go in its investigation of an employee’s defence to a misconduct claim to satisfy the reasonable investigation test set out in British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell  I.C.R. 303?
English lawyers are occasionally asked to assist with obtaining orders requiring someone in the UK to be deposed for foreign proceedings.
Was the decision of a local authority, in refusing the partner of a pre-April 2012 secure tenant the right to succeed to his tenancy because she had not resided with him for a continuous period of 12 months before his death, unreasonable or disproportionate?
Eleven years after the changes introduced by the Regulatory Reform (Business Tenancies) (England and Wales) Order 2003/3096 to s.25 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, the Court of Appeal has clarified the meaning of the “new” wording.
In this case concerning payment protection insurance (‘PPI’) the Supreme Court has provided guidance on what gives rise to an “unfair relationship” under s.140A – C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (‘the Act’).
In R (ZH) v Newham LB; R (CN) v Lewisham LB  UKSC 62, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that, as a general principle, s. 3(2B) of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 does not apply to licences granted by a local authority
The Supreme Court reconsidered the rule in Hammersmith & Fulham LBC v Monk  AC 478 under which one tenant can terminate a joint tenancy for all tenants by serving a unilateral notice on the landlord.
In Halawi v WDFG UK Ltd t/a World Duty Free  EWCA Civ 1387, the Appellant, Ms Halawi, was a beauty consultant selling cosmetics “airside” at Heathrow Airport. Her employment situation with the Respondent (“WDF”) was convoluted.
In McDonald v McDonald  EWCA Civ 1049 the Court of Appeal provided clarity that a tenant cannot invoke Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights as a defence to possession against a private landlord.
18 months after the Court of Appeal handed down judgment partially in favour of Dr Robertson, the Supreme Court perfected his success by finding entirely in his favour in this small claim.
When assessing the issues of “unfair relationships” and deemed agency under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“the Act”), the Court of Appeal has once again robustly decided in favour of the debtor.
Jurisdiction: the law applicable under Council Regulation 864/2007 (“Rome II”) in the context of a decision about expert evidence was considered in Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers Assurances  EWCA Civ 138.
In the recent decision made by the European Court in Lock v British Gas Trading Limited  WLR (D) 224 it was determined that EU law requires a worker’s statutory holiday pay to take commission payments into account: that is to say, a worker’s holiday pay should not be based solely on basic salary.
An application to the Land Registry to be registered as proprietor of land through adverse possession requires possession for the 10 years immediately preceding the application (Schedule 6, Land Registration Act 2002).
Chartwell Estate Agents Limited v (1) Fergies Properties SA (2) Hyam Lehrer  EWCA Civ 506 concerned commission payments allegedly owed to C under an agency agreement following the sale of a property.
Whilst the introduction of the new Family Court on 22 April 2014 has received widespread publicity in both the popular and legal press, many will be surprised to learn that on the same day every one of the 173 county courts in England and Wales,
The SC has held that a broader test ought to be applied in dealing with the question of whether damages in lieu of a final injunction should be awarded.
S.81 Housing Act 1996 restricts the landlord’s right to forfeit for arrears of service and/or administration charges unless the tenant admits the debt or it has been or “finally determined” by a court or tribunal.
Under the CPR, service on an individual must be at his usual or last known residence. But there may be an alternative - at least, when the individual is a company director.
Under the new cost budgeting regime parties are required to file and serve budgets by a date specified by the Court or, in the absence of a date, at least 7 days before the first case management conference (CPR 3.13).
CPR 52.3(5) provides that a request to renew an application for permission to appeal “must be filed within 7 days after service of the notice that permission has been refused.”
Has the Court of Appeal already forgotten the new “more robust” approach to applications for relief from sanctions introduced in Mitchell and reinforced in Durrant?
The Court of Appeal has upheld the decision of Cooke J ( EWHC 1599 (Comm) – see August 2012 Round-Up) and with it the repair arrangements of Royal & Sun Alliance (“RSA”). The key elements of the CA’s conclusions can be summarised as follows.
In this High Court case, the parties both (arguably) failed to comply with a court direction as to the service of witness statements on a particular issue.
In 2008 the Appellants, who are committed Christians, refused the Respondents a double room at their private hotel on the grounds that the Respondents were a homosexual couple in a civil partnership.
The case of Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd v Stinger Compania De Inversion SA  EWCA Civ 1308 provides useful guidance in relation to calculating damages for trespass to land.
On 9th December the Court of Appeal’s decision in Spencer v Taylor  EWCA Civ 1600 upset what many commentators had regarded as a settled area of law relating to the service of notices under s.21 of the Housing Act 1988.
The Court of Appeal heard a second appeal from a decision of the Deputy Adjudicator of the Land Registry, Lamb Chambers’ own Mr Simon Brilliant, relating to alteration of the Register on grounds of mistake.
I recently delivered the above seminar, held at the offices of Norton Rose Fulbright, aimed at promoting the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre.
In Khan Ramsey J considered the principles of a claim on the basis of nuisance where damage to a house is caused by tree roots from a neighbouring property.
To satisfy a tribunal that a comparator should be treated as being "in the same employment", a claimant would ordinarily need show that their comparator, if employed at their establishment, would be subject to the same or broadly similar employment terms that the claimant was employed under.
In Abela & Others v Baadarani  UKSC 44 the SC was concerned with the circumstances in which a court may make an order retrospectively declaring that steps taken by a claimant to bring a claim form to the attention of a defendant should be treated as good service.
The SC decisions in Manchester City Council v Pinnock  2 AC 104 and Hounslow London Borough Council v Powell  2 AC 186 have had far reaching ramifications in standard possession proceedings,
From 29th July 2013 the Employment Tribunal Constitution and Rules of Procedure Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/1237) comes into full force. The new procedural rules are flexible, clearer and more user-friendly.
In the recent case of Holt v Reading Borough Council  EWCA Civ 641 the CA held that it is open to the trial judge to make a conditional order for possession on the ground of under-occupation, even when no suitable alternative accommodation is available at the date of the possession hearing.
When a fixed-term AST ends, any subsequent statutory periodic tenancy is a new tenancy (s.5(2) Housing Act 1988). What does this mean for tenancy deposits?
Chen Wei v Cambridge Power and Light Ltd (unreported). In the latest credit hire judgment, HHJ Moloney held that the credit hire agreement in this case was unenforceable under the Regulations.
The Court of Appeal considered the principles relating to applications for permission to amend statements of case made at the beginning of the trial.
In Devon CC v TR  EWCA Civ 418 the Court of Appeal gave guidance on the use of the non-statutory code of practice produced by the Roads Liaison Group under the title 'Well-Maintained Highways'.
The author recently spoke at a conference in Saudi Arabia. The conference, held in Riayadh at the Naif Arab University for Security Sciences, dealt with the use of arbitration in criminal cases. The speakers included the former President of the American Arbitration, William K Slate.
An article by Anthony Connerty on the arbitration of cotton disputes, concentrating in particular on the Liverpool – based International Cotton Association, will be published in the next edition of Arbitration International,
From 1 April 2013 costs budgets and costs management orders are introduced for most multi-track claims. They place a limit on the amount of recoverable costs and are part of a raft of reforms introduced following the report of Sir Rupert Jackson on the cost of litigation.
The Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act 2013, which received royal assent on 31 January 2013, and is yet to come into force, will represent a new era in the law relating to sub-letting.
In Horace Parshall v Clara Hackney  EWCA Civ 240 the appellant (“X”) appealed against a decision that the respondent (“Y”) had acquired possessory title to a parcel of land which had formed part of his property (“the disputed land”).
Challinor v Julian Bellis & Co.  EWHC 620 (Ch) and Sycamore Bidco Ltd v Breslin  EWHC 174 (Ch) are cases addressing the issue of what rate of interest should be applied to damages.
Service Charges. Landlords will be largely comforted by this recent decision of the Supreme Court as it makes the conditional dispensation of consultation requirements more likely and the issues more certain.
Birmingham City Council v Beech is the most recently reported case which confirms the difficulty of successfully defending a claim for possession on the basis of Art. 8 (respect for family life & home).
The Respondent (“Manchester”) appointed the Appellant (“Kudos”) its exclusive supplier of catering services for a 5 year period. Midway through the agreement Manchester purported to terminate. Kudos alleged repudiatory breach and claimed £1.3 million loss of profits.
The ban on referral fees in low value RTA cases and changes to the Fixed Recoverable Costs (‘FRC’) regime in the RTA portal scheme will go ahead as planned in April 2013.
Following a successful appeal by the claimant, in Uren and (1) Corporate Leisure (UK) Limited and (2) Ministry of Defence  EWHC 353
Following a collision the appellant’s vehicle, valued at around £250,000, required repairs. The vehicle was owned by a business partnership and formed part of a fleet of luxury cars covered on the same insurance policy.
Hypothetical husband and wife, Jack and Jill, are joint tenants under a secure periodic tenancy granted by the local authority, Crown Borough Council.
The appellant client had instructed the respondent solicitors to act on its behalf concerning possession of a flat. Their task was complete by the end of 2003. The solicitors’ fees had not been agreed, so they were entitled to claim a reasonable amount for the work done.
The appeal concerned the issue of whether a clause in a lease contained an obvious error, which the court should correct as a matter of construction.
Whether the Court of Appeal (1) applied the wrong legal test for knowledge in section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980, and (2) adopted the wrong legal approach to the exercise of discretion under section 33 of the Act.
In which circumstances can a local housing authority (‘LHA’) rely on its own breach of duty to escape its contractual obligations?
This appeal concerned the weight given by a court to the factors listed in s.85A(2) Housing Act 1985 (‘the Act’) when considering making a suspended possession order following incidents of anti social behaviour.
Mr Jolly died of mesothelioma and his widow sued his employer, who denied liability. In April 2012 the claimant made a Part 36 offer in standard format to settle liability 99% in her favour.
Most people would consider they have a firm understanding of the meaning of ‘house’.
Litigants in person are frequently afforded leniency in litigation. In the context of applications pursuant to CPR 39.3 and 13.3 there is a growing body of case law. One of the newest additions to this corpus is Tinkler v. Elliott  EWCA Civ 1289.
On 26th July 2012 the Court of Appeal announced a 10% increase in general damages in all cases where judgment is given after 1st April 2013 (Simmons v. Castle  EWCA Civ 1039 - see 'The Round-Up' August 2012 for details).
An LVT should determine the questions raised in the application before it and not questions it itself identified.
When a joint tenant dies, the tenancy vests in the survivor(s). So far, so “law school”. What if the joint tenancy is secure under the Housing Act 1985 (“HA85”)?
A 10% increase in general damages will apply to all cases involving personal injury, nuisance, defamation and all torts causing suffering and inconvenience to individuals from 1 April 2013.
The Claimants (C) were the registered freehold proprietors of the dominant land.
I mentioned Mr Edwards′ case in an earlier edition of this newsletter shortly after the Court of Appeal had delivered its judgment. Now the Supreme Court has had their say, an update is required.
The Commercial Court (Cooke J) has decided two preliminary issues in a test case concerning the legitimacy of RSA's repair arrangements following negligently caused damage to its insured's vehicles.
Where a tenant seeks to rely on disability discrimination as a defence to possession, s/he will not necessarily be entitled to an adjournment where the disability is irrelevant to the arrears.
In CEF Holdings and anr v Brian Mundey and 23 ors  EWHC 1524 the Court set down useful guidelines on how to comply with the obligation to make full and frank disclosure on without notice or proper notice applications.
In a road traffic accident, what is the effect on liability of placing your child into a child car seat for which s/he does not meet the guidelines set by the manufacturer?
CPR r. 3.1(7) provides: “A power of the court under these Rules to make an order includes a power to vary or revoke the order.”
The OED (Concise, 8th ed) gives as a definition of localism "attachment to a place", and "a limitation of ideas etc resulting from this". Who would accuse the Localism Act 2011 of lacking ideas, at least in the field of English housing law?
R were the buyers of six ships to be built by J. R were to pay by a series of instalments as the build progressed. It was a condition precedent to payment of the first instalment that J would deliver refund guarantees from a bank (“K”) in a form satisfactory to R’s financiers.
In a case that spanned 500 years of English history, Sotheby's was not negligent in advising that a decorative gold chain forming part of the regalia of the last Chief Justice Common Pleas in 1880 (the Coleridge Collar) was likely manufactured in the 17th as opposed to the 16th century.
This jointly heard appeal is the first time that the Court of Appeal has considered and applied the principles set out in Pinnock v Mancester CC  UKSC45 and Powell v Hounslow LBC  UKSC 8 that 'only in "very highly exceptional cases" will it be appropriate for the court to consider a proportionality argument'.
This appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) concerned a freeholder’s efforts to recover the solicitors’ costs and surveyors’ fees of LVT proceedings.
If a horse rider foresees the risk of a horse bucking, but does not foresee the risk of violent bucking, does this defeat the defence of volenti as set out in section 5(2) of the Animals Act 1971 ('the Act')? No, as the Court of Appeal recently found in Goldsmith v Patchcott  EWCA Civ 183.
The above conjoined appeals addressed the recoverability of costs under CPR 21.10(2) in an infant approval hearing. The following issues were before the CA:
Does the Statute of Frauds 1677 and Statute of Frauds Amendment Act 1828 afford a defence to the director who has promised his supplier that “the cheque is in the post”?
The Claimant specialised in the buy-to-let market. The Defendant mortgagors ('D1' and 'D2', respectively) bought residential properties and let them mainly to students.
In a recent decision the Upper Tribunal has provided guidance on the correct method of valuing the freehold during leasehold enfranchisement of a dwelling house under s9(1) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 and confirmed the limit scope of correction certificates.
During the past three centuries many hospitals, barracks and other institutions were provided with adjacent burial grounds for the victims of disease or war.
In Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd  UKSC 52 the Supreme Court allowed an appeal against a possession order made against the tenant (‘T’) of a fully mutual housing co-operative (‘FMHC’).
On 24 November 2011 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the above conjoined appeals. Both appeals concerned the amounts recoverable by a claimant who is the innocent victim of an RTA and who could have afforded to hire a replacement car without credit terms.
The Court of Appeal judgment was handed down on 12th October 2011 in this case which arose from the sale of policies of payment protection insurance (“PPI”). In 2003 and 2006 the Harrisons took loans from the Defendant together with policies of PPI.
In Garside, the Appellant Lessees (“A”) appealed against a decision of the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (“the LVT”)
The Claimant (“C”) sustained soft tissue injuries to her knees and hands when she slipped on water in the cafeteria Conservatory area of the Defendant’s (“D”) cruise ship.
Can a bankruptcy order preclude the making of a possession order on the ground of rent arrears in respect of a property let on an assured tenancy? In short, no, as has recently been decided in Sharples v Places for People Homes Limited  Civ EWCA 813.
It is well known that a mortgagor cannot apply to set aside a warrant for possession after it has been executed unless he can show oppression or serious procedural irregularity.
The decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) in Akorita v Marina Heights (St. Leonards) Limited  UKUT 255 (LC) emphasises the need for freeholders to comply fully with the provisions of a lease in order to ensure recovery of service charges from their leaseholders.
Recently the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal accepted a departure from the “Sportelli doctrine”, namely the general rule that, in applying deferment yield in calculations of lease enfranchisement valuations, a rate of 5% should be used for flats to reflect the increased risk to freeholders of flats as opposed to houses, for which the rate is 4.75%.
The new ICC Rules of Arbitration have been circulated. They have been three years in the making and come into effect on 1 January 2012. The last revision was in 1998 so it is not surprising that there are many changes. Most seek to speed up and thereby reduce the costs of the process.
C sold to D1 (a housing association) their reversionary interest in a number of residential tenancies subject to the Rent Act 1977, those tenants (such as D2) now being tenants of D1.
In the recent case of Smith & Ors v MoD  EWHC 1676, the MoD ("M") applied to strike out several claims brought in respect of the death or injury of British troops whilst on active military duty in Iraq.
Mr X is an individual who provides valeting services for a car cleaning business - Y. He enters into a written contract with Y that expressly defines his relationship with Y as that of sub-contractor and not employee.
Hot on the heels of the High Court judgment in Draycott v Hannells Letting Ltd  HLR 27 and of the Court of Appeal (CA) ruling in Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd  EWCA Civ 1224,
The CA upheld a finding that a pedestrian (B) was two-thirds to blame for his injuries when he ran across a road in front of the Defendant's taxi (P) at an unregulated crossing.
C makes an offer to D headed "offer to settle under CPR Part 36". C includes that the offer will be "open for 21 days" from the date of the letter and also the costs' consequences of not accepting the offer within this "relevant period".
In Robinson v. PE Jones  EWCA Civ 9 CA (Civ Div) a homeowner ('R') appealed against a finding that the respondent builder ('J') did not automatically assume a duty of care in tort further to his contractual duty. J built R a house.
You are a 55-year-old lecturer. You join the staff of a University that has a role overseeing degree courses at colleges of further education. One such college is S. You worked there for 5 years leaving 6 years ago with an excellent reference.
In Sharma v Noon Products Ltd, 7th April 2011 (Unreported), Mr Sharma ("C") worked as an unqualified repair engineer at the Defendant's (D) factory. During repairs on a piece of machinery, the tip of his index finger was sliced off.
In Sousa the issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the court should have regard to the fact that a claimant is insured (and has been fully indemnified) when considering whether it is reasonable for a claimant (and/or his insurers) to instruct solicitors on terms that include a success fee.
In considering tenants’ rights to collective leasehold enfranchisement, the Court of Appeal gave guidance on the interpretation of the words “a self-contained part of a building” under section 3 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
In Manchester City Council v Pinnock  UKSC 45, in respect of possession orders sought by public authority landlords, 9 Supreme Court Judges bowed to the repeated insistence of the ECtHR that people facing eviction from their home are entitled to have the proportionality of the decision to evict them assessed by a court.
A judge, when undertaking an assessment of costs, must conduct either a summary assessment of costs or refer the costs to a detailed assessment.
Amin involved a road traffic accident where the First Claimant (C1) and First Defendant (D1) blamed each other for the accident and both brought a claim for damages, with both parties having entered into CFA agreements.
To do justice and discourage litigants from “expert shopping” the Court of Appeal in the recent case of Ricky Edward Tubbs v JD Weatherspoon PLC  EWCA Civ 136 CA, has again demonstrated a willingness to employ its wide ranging case management powers go behind the shield of a party’s privilege in a document.
The Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2000 Art.4 allowed the use of a Conditional Fee Agreement (“CFA”) in all litigation except criminal, environmental and certain family proceedings. The maximum success fee was also fixed at 100%.
The Court of Appeal in Hackney London Borough Council v Patrick Findlay  EWCA Civ 8 CA (Civ Div) re-considered their decision of Forcelux Ltd v Binnie (2009) EWCA Civ 854, (2010) CP Rep 7
The recent case of London Tara Hotel Ltd v Kensington Close Hotel Ltd  EWHC 29 (Ch) sounds a further warning shot for claimants who grossly exaggerate their claim.
The Court of Appeal confirmed in Valentine v Transport for London & L.B. Hounslow  EWCA Civ 1358 that the removal of loose surface-lying material is not required by section 41 Highways Act 1980.
In the case of Pantelli Associates Ltd v Corporate City Developments Number Two Ltd  EWHC 3189 (TCC, Coulson J issued a reminder to all legal representatives
In 1978 the Respondent (R) granted the Appellant (P) a tenancy of a house in which he lived with his partner and their five children.
In Threlfall v Hull City Council  EWCA Civ 1147 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision by a judge that, where there was only a low risk of an employee suffering a laceration, an employer was not in breach of the PPE Regulations by providing light gloves which were not cut-resist
In The London Borough of Haringey v Hines  EWCA Civ 1111 the Court found that LBH’s deceit case was not properly put to Ms Hines in cross-examination, because they had failed to ask whether she had dishonestly misled them.
Springwell Navigation Corporation v. JP Morgan Chase & Others  EWCA Civ 1221. The Court of Appeal ended 11 years of litigation with its recent decision in Springwell.
Kay constitutes the latest round in the debate over the application of Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) to possession claims.
Jonathan Harvey v Plymouth City Council (2010). On 17th April 2003, the Claimant, H, had spent the evening drinking with friends, and shared a taxi home.
Earlier this year the Court of Appeal took another look at the question of whether or not damages could be awarded at common law for the adverse impact of steps taken by an employer which culminate in a dismissal.
In the recent case of Gary Fearns (T/A Autopaint International) v Anglo-Dutch Paint & Chemical Co Ltd & 5 Ors  EWHC 2366 (CH) the Court undertook a cogent analysis of the law of set-off.
This case recently resolved in favour of Blue Sphere in a conjoined appeal involving Mobilx, Calltell Telecom and Optotelelinks and has resulted in a restatement of the law by the Court of Appeal in cases where traders have become mixed up in a series of transactions that at some point involve a fraudsman.
The case of Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v (1) Darren Norton (2) Louise Norton (3) Samantha Norton  EWCA Civ 834 has emphasised the trend of courts seeking to get local authorities