THE NATIONWIDE ACADEMY FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION (UK) Ltd.  
   
   
Home   About us   About ADR   NADR Services   Publications
 
   
  Forms   Members   Forums   Links   NMA
 
     
       
   
• ABC OF LAW REPORTS
• ABC OF STATUTES
• ADJUDICATION ACTS
• Adjudication Case Summaries
• ADJUDICATION CASES
• Adjudication New South Wales
• Adjudication NewZealand
• Adjudication Queensland
• Adjudication Reports AU/NZ
• Adjudication Singapore
• Adjudication Victoria
• Adjudication Western Australia
• Adjudicator Nomination Bodies
• ADMIRALTY CASES
• ADR
• ADR in WALES
• ADR NEWS
• ADR Organisations
• Arbitration
• ARBITRATION ACTS
• ARBITRATION CASES
• Arbitration Cases Ireland
• Arbitration Cases Scotland
• Banking and Finance
• Building Claims Consultants
• CONFLICTS ACTS
• CONFLICTS CASES
• Conflicts Lectures
• CONSTITUTION ACTS
• CONSTITUTION CASES
• Constitutional Law
• Construction Bodies
• Construction Law
• CONSTRUCTION LAW CASES
• CONTRACT LAW CASES
• Court Mediation Schemes
• Directories - Yellow Pages
• Dispte Review Boards
• Educational establishments
• Employment Dispute Resolution
• Environment
• Ethics
• European Law and Institutions
• EXPERT WITNESS CASES
• Expert witnesses
• Export Import Directory
• Family Mediation
• Government Bodies
• Health Care Dispute Resolution
• HOME BUILDING CASES
• Intellectual Property
• International Arbitration
• International Trade Law
• Law Societies and Associations
• Legal Publishers
• Legal Research
• Legal Skills
• MARINE INSURANCE CASES
• Maritime Law
• Mediation
• MEDIATION CASES
• Mediation Organisations
• Middle East ADR
• ODR - On Line Dispute Resolution
• On-line ADR Journals and Newsletters
• Practitioners
• PROCEDURE CASES
• SHIPPING - TRANSPORT CASES
• Sources of Law
• Sport
• Telecommunications
• TORT CASES
• Trade Organisations
• Travel

Login
Username

Password



View a printer friendly version of this page.
 

A 1 : YAWS Yet another Woolf Site : Superb Directory of Cases and Court Procedures. ******

A v Birmingham City Council [2004] EWHC 156 (Admin) A special needs tribunal delivered a decision. Assertion that reasons were absent regarding some issues. Court held that where a wide range of matters are raised the tribunal does not have to provide in-depth reasons for every single matter raised. There must be flexibility as to what is addressed and the degree of explanation required. Here there was no failure to provide reasons for the key issues. Tucker Sir Richard. 12th January 2004.

ADT Auctions Ltd v SS For Environment, Transport & Regions [2000] EWHC Admin 305 The Secretary of State must state his reasons in sufficient detail to enable the reader to know what conclusion he has reached on the "principal important controversial issues". To require him to refer to every material consideration, however insignificant, and to deal with every argument, however peripheral, would be to impose an unjustifiable burden." Mr Justice Jowitt. 16th March 2000.

Aer Lingus v Gildacroft Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 4 The two year limitation period under s10 Limitation Act 1980 pursuant to the Civil Liability Contribution Act 1978 runs from a determination of both entitlement and quantum, and not from a judgement on entitlement alone. Sir Anthony Clarke MR; Rix LJ. Moore-Bick LJ. 17th January 2006.

Agassi v HM Inspector of Taxes [2005] EWCA Civ 1507 General principles regarding the recovery of the costs of non-legal expert advice in support of litigation. Brook LJ; Dyson LJ; Carnwath LJ. 2nd December 2005.

Aldi Stores Ltd. v WSP Group Plc [2007] EWHC 55 (TCC) Abuse of process : successful application for strike out as abusive a claim which should have been raised, but was not raised, in the course of earlier litigation. : Mr Justice Jackson TCC. 15th January 2007

Andromeda Marine SA v OW Bunker & Trading A/S [2006] EWHC 777 (Comm) Negative Injunction : Claimant's - third parties ship owners to a charterer's contract for bunkers from the defendant sought a declaration / injunction that no action lay against them as third parties. Main action was before the Danish Court. Held : Court had no jurisdiction. If at all, this action should be pursued before the Danish Court. HHJ Morison : Commercial Court. 11th April 2006.

Angel Airlines v Dean and Dean [2008] EWHC 1513 (QB) Costs : Without prejudice offer : Only marginally above final outcome : was there a special circumstance within s.70 of the Solicitors Act 1974. Mr Justice Coulson. 30th June 2008.

Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1968] UKHL 6 Judicial Review : Ouster Clauses. Lords Reid; Morris; Pearce; Wilberforce; Pearson. 17th December 1968.

Anya v University Of Oxford [2001] EWCA Civ 405 Failure to make findings of fact upon which the "reasons" for a decision were based. Appeal allowed. Claim of racial descrimination remitted to a reconstituted Employment Tribunal. Schiemann LJ; Sedley LJ; Mr Justice Blackburne. 22nd March 2001.

Armstrong v First York [2005] EWCA Civ 277 Reasons for preferring witnesses to joint expert. Brooke LJ (VC); Arden LJ; Longmore LJ. 17th January 2005.

Artibell Shipping Co Ltd. v Markel International Insurance Co Ltd [2008] EWHC 811 (Comm) Strike out : Defendant underwriters seek an order striking out the action brought against them by the claimant shipowners on the grounds of abuse of process and/or delay. In the alternative they seek an order imposing conditions on the continued prosecution of the claim and, in any event, security for their costs. Mr Justice David Steel: Commercial Court. 24th April 2008

ASC Anglo Scottish Concrete Ltd v Geminax Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSIH_55 Validity of trial by conference call : Absence of scope for cross questioning : Dispute as to quality of concrete supplied to construction works - non-payment. Lords Eassie, Patten; emslie. 10th October 2008

Ashley Bell & George Wimpey v East Renfrewshire Council [2006] CSOH 9 Costs of co-defender : Scottish procedure : Held : the losing party will not be required to pay out twice for legal costs of winning party - where the winning parties should have provided joint representation : they have the right to separate presentation but only the first party's costs are recoverable. R F MacDonald QC (Sitting as a Temporary Judge. 9th December 2005.


Ashworth v H [2001] EWHC Admin 901 Late reasons which elucidate earlier reasons are more palatible to the court than late reasons where none were given at the outset. Mr Justice Stanley Burnton. QBD. Admin Div. 9th November 2001.

Aspin v Metric Group Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 922 Costs : Winning on a point of principle - but recovering less than on offer for a settlement. Held : 50% recoverable costs for winning on principle plus one head to end of trial. No costs to defendants for repelling the second head of claim. All costs thereafter recoverable by applicant regarding costs litigation. Chadwick LJ; Wall LJ; Mr Justice Blackburne. 24th July 2007.

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corp. [1947] EWCA Civ 1 Judicial Review. The Wednesdury Reasonable Test. Could a reasonable decision maker have reached the decision under review? Lord Greene, MR.; Somervell LJ; Justice Singleton. 10th November 1947

Bahl v The Law Society [2004] EWCA Civ 1070 Inadequate reasons for decision of Employment Tribunal. Decision set aside by EAT - EAT decision confirmed on appeal. Peter Gibson LJ; Latham LJ; Maurice Kay LJ.30th July 2004.

Banco Nacional De Comercio Exterior SNC v Empresa De Telecomunicaciones De Cuba SA [2007] EWHC 2322 (Comm) Freezing order. Failed application for variations to a freezing order. Mr Justice Tomlinson. 11th October 2007

Barclays Bank Plc v Eustice [1995] EWCA Civ 29 Legal Privilege. Butler-Sloss LJ; Aldous LJ; Schiemann LJ. 6th July 1995.

Basso v Estry [2005] Lawtel AC0109811 Abuse of process : Despite an absence of issue estoppel, where an aspect of a claim is not raised in a trial, ait may be an abuse of process to subsequently seek a fresh trial raising the new issue. Chancery Divison. (Manchester). Mark Cawson QC. 3rd November 2005.

Battista v Bassano [2007] EWCA Civ 370 Reasons : Credibility of witness. Judge must give sufficient reasons for the CA to follow the evidence and deduce from it why the decision had been reached. Reasons do not have to be detailed or exhaustive. Tuckey LJ, Arden LJ, Lawrence Collins LJ. 8th February 2007.

Berghoff Trading Ltd v Swinbrook Developments Ltd [2008] EWHC 1785 (Comm) Freezing Order : Application for summary judgement on counterclaim granted : no real prospect of success : accordingly freezing order removed. Mr Justice Teare. 28th July 2008

Birse Construction Ltd. v McCormick (U.K.) Ltd [2004] EWHC 3053 (TCC) Time of accrual of cause of action. HHJ Peter Coulson. 9th December 2004.

BJ, R (on the application of) v Governing Body of a School [2005] EWHC 3392 (Admin) Duty to provide reasons : Decision quashed. School panel reinstated violent child. Mr James Goudie QC. Deputy Judge QBD. 19th July 2005

Briggs & Forrester Electrical Ltd v Southfield School for Girls [2005] EWHC 1734 (TCC) Discovery : Disclosure : Pre-action protocol. Documents needed to establish quantum in order to negotiate a settlement should be disclosed. documents regarding entitlement - which would not be disclosable under the CPR will not. HHJ Peter Coulson. 20 July 2005

Bunney v Burns Anderson Plc [2007] EWHC 1240 (Ch) Jurisdiction : Application for summary enforcement of two awards by the Financial Services Ombudsman in excess of 200K. The Ombudsman had jurisdiction to award up to 100K and the right to recommend additional sums. Held : The court exercised discretionary power to award enforcement by manadatory injunction. Even in the absence of statutory power akin to s66 Arbitration Act 1996, the discretion would not be exercised to enforce an ultra vires award. Mr Justice Lewison. 25 May 2007

Burkle Holdings Ltd. v Laing No 2 [2005] EWHC 2022 (TCC) Legal privilege : If the otherside gets hold of legally privileged documents does that evidence become admissible? HHJ Thornton. TCC. 27th June 2005.

C v D [2007] EWCA Civ 1282 Anti-suit injunction. Injunction against attempt through subsequent litigation to circumvent the protections provided by Bermuda Form in relation to dispute settlement of insurance issues. MR; Longmore LJ; Jacob LJ. 5th December 2007

Callery v. Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1246 Costs : Recoverability under CFA and premium for legal insurance. Lord Phillips M.R.Lord Justice Brooke. CA 31st July 2001.


Carver v BAA Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 412 Costs : Pqart 36 payment : if a claimant beats a payment of money into court by a modest amount, even 1, has she obtained a judgment more advantageous than the defendants Part 36 offer or is the Court entitled to look at all the circumstances of the case in deciding where the balance of advantage lies? His Honour Judge Knight QC sitting in the Central London County Court on 4th June 2007 took the latter, broad view and so he ordered the claimant to pay the defendants costs of the claim after the time for accepting the payment had expired. He also made no order for costs for the prior period covered by an earlier Calderbank offer. Failed appeal. Ward LJ; Rix LJ; Keene LJ. 22nd April 2008

CBR (Wakefield) Ltd v Puccino\'s Ltd (2) [2006] EWHC B7 (Ch) Admissibility of further evidence following issuing of draft judgement. HHJ John Behrens. Chancery. 30th October 2006

Cetelem SA v Roust Holdings Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 618 Jurisdiction of court : preservation order : court had jurisdiction - but the wide grounds beyond jurisdiction - judge not requested to make order on the restricted grounds but could and would have if asked. Accordingly, application for appeal granted, but appeal failed - no substantial injustice. VC. Clarke LJ, Neuberger LJ. 24th May 2005.

Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Ltd [2007] EWHC 855 (TCC) Costs : Mediation to be pursued late and out of sync with the pre-action protocol. Judgement here would clear the way and simplify matters fot the mediation. Daejan Investments v Park West Club Ltd [2004] BLR 223, approach in which HHJ Wilcox came to the conclusion that it was appropriate to make it a condition of permission to amend in a case where the pre-action protocol had not been complied with, that the amending party should pay the other parties' costs up to that stage applied. Mr Justice Ramsey. 23rd March 2007.

Cocks v Thanet DC [1982] UKHL 10 Public / private law divide : Duty of housing authority to house the homeless. House of Lords on appeal from QBD, before Lord Diplock Lord Fraser of Tullybelton Lord Keith of Kinkel Lord Bridge of Harwich Lord Brightman. 25th November 1982

Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v General Dental Council [2006] EWHC 1870 (Admin) Reasoned decisions : General Dental Council. Mr Justice Hodge. 24th July 2006.

Cundall Johnson & Partners Llp v Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust [2007] EWHC 2178 (TCC) Successful application for a stay on the grounds of non compliance with the Pre-action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes. Mr Justice Jackson. 19th September 2007.

Cunningham v Collett & Farmer (a firm) [2006] EWHC 148 (TCC) Costs Thrown Away : Interim costs hearing. Detailed analysis of the procedure to be applied when considering assessment of costs thrown away. HHJ Peter Coulson QC : TCC. 9th February 2006.

Curtis v Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Ltd [2008] EWHC 260 (Comm) Stay of action pending outcome of deliberation by Italian Court on procedural grounds refused. Mr Justice Teare. 20th February 2008

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] EWHC 90114 (Costs) Costs : Recovery : work done by non-solicitor not recoverable unless commissioned by solicitor and even then not recoverable if work that should be done by the legal profession. Master Haworth Costs Judge. 3rd September 2008

Dadourian Group International Inc v Simms [2008] EWHC 1784 (Ch) Legal privilege : Information acquired by whistle blower - downloaded from hard drive of legal consultants computer : admissibility. Chancery. 25th July 2008.

Dadu Ltd v Barrowfen Properties Ltd [2008] EWHC 90110 (Costs) Costs : settlement offer : without prejudice comunications - whether admissible. Mster Rogers. 5th August 2008.

Daejan Investments Ltd v The Part West Club Ltd (part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872 (TCC) Non-compliance with the requirements of the Professional Negligence Preaction Protocol - resulting in costs thrown away by the other parties, which in an application to amend, the claimant was required to cover. Wilcox HHJ David. 3rd November 2003.

Danepoint Ltd v AUA [2005] EWHC 2809 (TCC) Indemnity costs : Cirumstances when costs will be ordered on an indemnity basis. HHJ Peter Coulson. TCC. 28th November 2005.

David Robert Persson v Matra Marconi Space UK Ltd [1996] EWCA Civ 921 Where a party is out of time to appeal there is no requirement to provide a reasoned judgement when rejecting a late application to appeal. Lord Bingham, LCJ; Auld LJ; Mummery LJ; 11th November 1996

Davy v Spelthorne BC [1983] UKHL 3 Judicial Review : sequel to O\'Reilly v. Mackman. The circumstances in which a person with a cause of action against a public authority, which is connected with the performance of its public duty, is entitled to proceed against the authority by way of an ordinary action, as distinct from an application for judicial review. House of Lords before Lords Fraser of Tullybelton; Wilberforce; Roskill; Brandon of Oakbrook; Brightman. 13th October 1983

Devenish Nutrition Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) [2007] EWHC 2394 (Ch) Claim for compensation for damage suffered as a result of the operation of unlawful cartels. Issue here was whether the Claimants would be entitled to all or any of the following heads of relief a) an account of profits b) restitution of unjust enrichment c) exemplary damages\". Mr Justice Lewison. 19th October 2007.

Devenish Nutrition Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) [2008] EWCA Civ 1086 Application to set aside the decision of Lewison J ([2008] 2 WLR 637) on a preliminary point of law and to establish the principle that in an action for breach of statutory duty the court can in appropriate circumstances make a restitutionary award, that is, a sum of money assessed by reference to the gain which the wrongdoer has made as a result of the wrong, in place of compensatory damages, that is, damages which compensate the claimant for loss suffered as a result of the wrongdoing. Tuckey LJ; Arden LJ; Longmore LJ. 14th October 2008

Dew Pitchmastic v Birse [2000] 1998 TCC 590 Leave to introduce expert report out of time : Refused, applying criteria set out in the CPR. HHJ Humphrey Lloyd. 2nd February 2000

Diamond v Mansfield [2006] EWHC 3290 (QB) Barrister must not comment or publish information concerning any ongoing litigation in which he is involved. Mr Justice Nelson. QBD. 20th December 2006

Digicel (St. Lucia) Ltd v Cable & Wireless Plc [2008] EWHC 2522 (Ch) Disclosure : discovery : electronic communications : CPR Rule 31.12 : allegations of conspiracy to circumvent statutory duty to cooperate in allowing access to telephone line sharing. Mr Justice Morgan. 23rd October 2008

Dix v Townend [2008] EWHC 90117 (Costs) Champerty & exeptions under CFA legislation. Deputy Master Victoria Williams. Costs Judge. 30th June 2008

Dyson Technology Ltd v Strutt [2007] EWHC 1756 (Ch) How to divide the common costs of the action. Common costs are non-specific costs general to the action in the sense that they do not relate to the handling of any particular issue and would have been incurred whatever issues were involved and specific common costs which relate to work done on more than one issue in the case, but which are not separated for the purposes of charging out time or as disbursements. Mr Justice Patten. 24th July 2007.

Eastbourne Borough Council v. Hafez [2003] UKEAT 0188_04_0511 Bias : Reasons : The issuing of preliminary views by a tribunal does not amount to bias - nor does extensive questioning of a witness : However, insufficient reasons were given for the final decision so the case remitted to the tribunal to provide further reasons. HHJ Ansell. 5th November 2003.

EI Du Pont De Nemours & Company v S.T. Dupont [2003] EWCA Civ 1368 Statutory Appeals : Rehearing or review? CA. Aldous LJ; May LJ; Keene LJ. 10th October 2003.

El-Farargy v El Farargy [2007] EWCA Civ 1149 Bias - apparent. A judge made disparaging remarks in that attempts at injecting humour into the proceedings went beyond the pale of acceptability. Judgment set aside. Ward LJ; Mummery LJ; Wilson LJ. 15th November 2007

Elektrim SA v Vivendi Holdings 1 Corp [2008] EWCA Civ 1178 Construction of a \"no-action\" clause in a bond issue, whereby only the trustee of the issue is entitled to take enforcement action against the issuer, and bondholders cannot proceed directly against the issuer unless the trustee fails to take action in accordance with the bond documentation. Sir Anthony May; Hallett LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. 24th October 2008

Emerging Markets Partnership (Europe) Ltd v Bachnak [2003] EWCA Civ 1876 Inadequately reasoned ET judgment overturned by EAT - EAT decision confirmed by CA. Pill LJ; Mummery LJ; May LJ. 19th December 2003

English v Emery Reimbold & Strick Ltd. [2002] EWCA Civ 605 Reasoned Judgement : Requirements. CA. Lord Phillips MR, Latham LJ, Lady Justice Arden. Date: 30th April 2002.

Expandable Ltd v Rubin [2008] EWCA Civ 59 Privilege : What is involved in a document being \"mentioned\" in a statement of case or witness statement or the like? If a document is so mentioned, has privilege against its inspection been waived? In the circumstances, it is unnecessary to consider whether a provision impliedly leading to the automatic and absolute loss of privilege merely by virtue of the mention of documents in other specified categories of documents, however slight the reference and whether or not the mentioned documents are deployed in the litigation, would have been ultra vires. conclude that the covering letter was mentioned in Mr Rubin\'s second witness statement, but that privilege for it was not thereby automatically and absolutely lost. Rix LJ : Jacob LJ. Mr Justice Forbes. 11th February 2008

F (children), Re [2006] EWCA Civ 792 This judgment is so lacking in reasoning and substance that it presents at least an appearance not to have engaged fully with the important issues that were being ventilated before the learned judge and that it is wholly deficient in explanations as to how or why he has arrived at the conclusions that he has. Thorpe LJ; Moses LJ; Mr Justice Hedley. 18th May 2006.

Farm Assist Ltd v Secretary of State for Environment Food & Rural Affairs [2008] EWHC 3079 (TCC) Legal Privilege. Mr Justice Ramsey. 12th December 2008

Fernhill Mining Ltd v Kier Construction Ltd (2000) Lawtel AC8400498 Security of Costs : Appeal against order. Defendant's actions the principle cause of the claimant's financial situation. Appeal allowed. CA (Evans LJ, Judge LJ, Clarke LJ) 27th January 2000


Fielden v Cunliffe [2005] EWCA Civ 1508 Extempore judgement overturned as lacking any kind of judicial analysis. Mmummery LJ; Wall LJ; Moore-Bick LJ. 6th December 2005.

Fiona Trust Holding Corp v Privalov [2007] EWHC 1217 (Comm) Worldwide Freezing order : Application for extension granted. Mr Justice David Steel. 21st May 2007

Flaherty v National Greyhound Racing Club Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 1117 Apparent bias : Requirements : CA. Scott Baker LJ; Sir Peter Gibson. 14th September 2005

Flannery v Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 811 Reasons : Duty to provide a reasoned judgment. CA. Henry LJ; Laws LJ; Mr Justice Hidden. 18th February 1999.

Fulham Leisure Holdings Ltd v Nicholson Graham & Jones [2006] EWHC 2428 (Ch) Costs : Costs thrown away - one party caused delay but delay of benefit to the other - no costs award : if costs to follow the event - who actually won ? distinction between liability and quantum : Mr Justice Mann. 5th October 2006.

Gabriel v Hayward [2004] EWHC 2363 Application to amend particulars of claim - how specific must a claim be - application granted because justice requires an arguable case be heard. HHJ Richard Havery. 22nd October 2004

Galliford Try Construction Ltd v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2008] EWHC 603 (TCC) Without prejudice : Privilege. Successful application to strike out portions of a witness statmentent on the grounds of negotiation privilege. Mr Justice Coulson. 14th March 2008

Ghosh v. General Medical Council (Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) [2001] UKPC 29 GMC Reasons : Privy Council. Lords Bingham, Thorndon; Millett. 18th June 2001.

Glauser International SA v Khan (T/A Khan Design Consultants [2002] EWCA Civ 368 Striking out : Case commenced prematurely : Party requested extension to get expert report : Delivered late ? action struck out : Recommenced action. Struck out for abuse of process by trying to get around 1st strike out ? appeal against 2nd strike out : Court held ? case should proceed. Ward LJ, Chadwick LJ, Mance LJ.25th March 2002.

Glicksman v Redbridge NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 1097 Requirement of reasoned findings in respect of expert evidence. CA. Lord Phillips MR; Henry LJ; Brooke LJ. 12th July 2001

Gray Aitken Partnership Ltd v Link Housing Association Ltd [2007] ScotCS CSIH_4 Legal personality : Action commenced in the old name of an organisation not its new name. The name had then been taken up by a third party. The action was subject to a contractual 5 year time bar. Was the amendment in relation to a mere clerical error or a change of personality - thereby defeating the time bar? Held : Amendment not permitted. Lord President; Lord Osborne; Lord Eassie. 1st Div. Inner House. Court of Session. 10th January 2007

Green, R (on the application of) v Prosecution Service [2002] EWCA Civ 389 Decisions of the Police Complaints Authority : Complainant has a right to a reasoned decision but does not have a right to view the underlying evidence which led to that decision. Simon Brown LJ; Chadwick LJ; Hale LJ. 26th March 2002.

Greene Wood & McLean v Templeton Insurance Ltd [2008] EWHC 1593 (Comm) Unsuccessful challenge to order allowing service out of jurisdiction : Isel of Man : grounds of challenge : failure by the Claimant to make full and frank disclosure when seeking permission and the absence of reasonable prospects of success for the claim - but service restricted to a contribution claim. Mr Justice Teare. 10th July 2008

Gupta v. General Medical Council (GMC) [2001] UKPC 61 Reasons : GMC. Privy Council. Lords Steyn, Hobhouse, Rodger. 18th December 2001.

Hakendorf v Vivian [2004] EWHC 2821 (QB) In an action against a solicitor a client cannot rely on legal privilege. Mr Justice Tugendhat. 14th December 2004

Harris Springs Ltd v Howes [2007] EWHC 3271 (TCC) Limitation : Statutory : upon what date did the Claimant first have the knowledge required for bringing an action for damages in respect of the relevant damage under section 14A(5)-(10) of the Limitation Act 1980, it being accepted that for the purpose of the primary statutory limitation period damage to the factory extension did occur more than six years before the issue of proceedings. Judge Raynor: TCC. 2nd October 2007

Hollins v Russell [2003] EWCA Civ 718 CFA practice and procedure. CA. LJ Brooke, LJ Hale, LJ Arden. 22nd May 2003

Home Office v Lownds [2002] EWCA Civ 365 Proportionality and costs : Meaning of under CPR. CA. LJ Laws, LJ Dyson, Master Hurst. 21st March, 2002

Howell v Lees Millais [2007] EWCA Civ B1 Apparent bias : successful appeal against a judge\'s refusal to recuse himself. Sir Anthony Clarke MR; Sir Igor Judge (President QBD) ; Buxton LJ. 4th July 2007

Ian McGlin v Waltham Contractors Ltd [2005] EWHC 1419 Costs of fulfilling pre-action protocol not recoverable. HHJ Peter Coulson. TCC. 6th July 2005

Ide v ATB Sales Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 424 The approach a judge is entitled to take to the determination of proof of causation where alternative mechanisms of causation were put before the court. In each case the sole issue before the court was whether the respondent to the appeal who had suffered the damage could prove on a balance of probabilities that a defect had caused the damage sustained; each appellant contended that the judge had adopted a train of reasoning which the House of Lords made clear in The Popi M [1985] 1 WLR 948 (Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmunds) was impermissible. Ward LJ; Dyson LJ; Thomas LJ. 28th April 2008

Iggleden v Fairview New Homes (Shooters Hill) Ltd [2007] EWHC 1364 (TCC) Application for amendment to claim : Late application for amendment refused. HHJ Peter Coulson. 1st June 2007

Istil Group Inc v Zahoor [2003] EWHC 165 (Ch) Legal privilege : Communications regarding evidence gathering - disclosed by an unknown third party to defendants - is it privileged - can it be disclosed in evidence or must the documents be handed over to the claimant? Mr Justice Lawrence Collins. 14th February 2003.

IXIS Corporate & Investment Bank v WestLB Ag [2007] EWHC 1748 (Comm) Failed application for consolidation of cases. Mr Justice Aikens. 18th July 2007

Jackson v Dowdall [2008] ScotCS CSIH_41 Case management : competence : boundary between the proper role in adversarial procedure as an impartial arbiter between the parties to an action. Communications by phone and email.Management requires the taking of steps which concern the substance of the dispute between the parties : ensuring that the matters in dispute are clearly focused ;that the issues which require to be resolved by judicial decision, rather than other means, are identified ; establishing the order in which issues should be determined and how : but making a partys case is not permissible. Lord Reed Lord Clarke Lord Menzies. Outer House Court of Session. 8th July 2008

Jackson v Marley Davenport Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1225 Opinions - privilege : An experts report provided as opinion to counsel is privileged and non admissible. Peter Gibson LJ; Tuckey LJ; Longmore LJ. 29th September 2004

Januzi v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 1187 Inadequate reasons for findings of fact by IAT. Aldous LJ; Buxton LJ; May LJ. 24th July 2004.

Jirehouse Capital v Beller No1 [2008] EWHC 725 (Ch) Security of Costs : application. Mr Justice Briggs. 16th January 2008.

Jirehouse Capital v Beller No2 [2008] EWCA Civ 908 Orders for security of costs : Does CPR 25.12 & 13 apply to unlimited companies and Does the condition in the 2nd limb of CPR 25.13(2)(c) that \"there is a reason to believe that it will be unable to pay the defendants costs if ordered to do so\" mean that the court must be satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the company will be unable to pay those costs when ordered to do so. Mummery LJ; Arden LJ; Moore-Bick LJ. 30th July 2008

Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (A Firm) [1998] EWCA Civ 1763 Abuse of Process. CA. Nourse LJ, Ward LJ, Mantell LJ. 12th November 1998.

Johnson v. Gore Wood & Co. [2000] UKHL 65 Abuse of Process : House of Lords. Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hutton Lord Millett. 14th December 2000.


Kastor Navigation Co Ltd. v AGF M.A.T [2003] EWHC 472 (Comm) Defendants pay to the Claimants 15% of the Claimants\' costs, and that the Claimants pay to the Defendants 85% of the Defendants\' costs. I must stand back and ask myself whether the outcome, effectively that the Claimants will bear all of their own costs and pay 70% of the Defendants\' costs, is in the light of the Claimants\' recovery of US$3 million, together with interest, so plainly wrong that it must be regarded as perverse....It is the logical outcome of considering costs on an issue basis. Mr Justice Tomlinson: Commercial Court. 17th March 2003.

Koch Shipping Inc v Richard Butler (A Firm) [2002] EWCA Civ 1280 Confidentiality : Employee of solicitors previously acted as a solicitor for the other side. Once assurances were given that a chinese wall would be put in place to isolate her the court was prepared to allow the firm to continue to act in the arbitration proceedings. Ward LJ; Tuckey LJ; Clarke LJ. 22nd July 2002.

Koo Golden East Mongolia v Bank of Nova Scotia [2008] EWHC 1120 (Admin) Wasted costs order : Unsuccessful application. Mr Justice Silber: Administrative Court. 20th May 2008

Korea National Insurance Co v Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty AG [2008] EWHC 2829 (Comm) This is the judgement of the court on a preliminary issue as to whether certain contentions pleaded by Defendants are beyond the jurisdiction of the court by reason of the doctrine of act of state or the doctrine of non-justiciability. Mr Justice Field. 18th November 2008

Korea National Insurance Corp (KNIC) v Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG [2008] EWCA Civ 1355 Foreign immunity : Non-judiciability : The test in respect of the embarrassment of foreign governments and causing ruptures in foreign relationships. Reinsurance liability and North Korea. Waller LJ : Rix LJ : Thomas LJ. 2nd December 2008

Kuenyehia v International Hospitals Group Ltd. [2006] EWCA Civ 21 Service of Claim Form : Procedures set out in CPR to be strictly adherred to : Impact of limitation time bar on failure to make an effective service. CA. Waller LJ; Dyson LJ; Neuberger LJ. 25th January 2006.

Laing v Taylor Walton (a firm) [2007] EWHC 196 (QB)) Double Jeopardy : Issue Estoppel : Abuse of Process : Summary Judgement. Claim against solicitors for negligence in contract drafting resulting in exposure to a claim from another party. Mr Justice Langley. 20th February 2007

Landis + Gyr Ltd. v Scaleo Chip ET [2007] EWHC B3 (QB) Successful application for pre-action disclosure. John Behrens. 30th May 2007

Law v National Greyhound Racing Club [1983] EWCA Civ 6 Judicial Review : Application of JR to private regulatory regimes. Abuse of Process - Civil versus Public Law procedures. Lawton LJ; Fox LJ; Slade LJ. 29th July 1983.

Lawal v. Northern Spirit Ltd [2003] UKHL 35 Apparent bias : Test : Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry. 19th June 2003.

LFEPA v Halcrow Gilbert & Co Ltd [2004] EWHC 2340 (TCC) Disclosure - whether a report privileged. Held : disclosure ordered. Toulmin J. 28th July 2004

Lloyds Bank Plc v Michael William Cassidy [2004] EWCA Civ 1767 Lawtel AC9100577 Disclosure of document to judge but not to the other party. In the circumstances unlikely to lead to a successful appeal. No Injustice suffered. Application to appeal refused. Auld LJ, Chadwick LJ, Clarke LJ. 1st December 2004

Locabail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd & Anor [1999] EWCA Civ 3004 (17 November 1999) Apparent bias : Test : CA before LCJ; MR; VC.17th November 1999.

London Borough of Southwark v Kofi-Adu [2006] EWCA Civ 281 Natural Justice : It is the job of counsel not the trial judge to conduct examination in chief. CA before Laws LJ; Jonathan Parker LJ : Sir Martin Nourse. 23rd March 2006.

Long Beach Ltd v Global Witness Ltd [2007] EWHC 1980 (QB) Confidentiality : Should documents indicating fraud by public official exhibited in open court in Hong Kong be subject to privilege and confidentiality? Hong Kong Court unusually and inexplicably injuncted publication. s25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982. Third party web-publisher not subject to Hong Kong jurisdiction. Held : No privilege. No explanation for the potentially fraudulent conduct evidenced by the documents. Publication in the public interest. Mr Justice Stanley Brunton. 15th August 2007

Mabey & Johnson Ltd. v Ecclesiastical Insurance Office Plc [2003] EWHC 1523 Jurisdiction ? separate cases : Failures in a bridge prompted revisiting and rectifying design in another : Held Separate contracts so separate causes of action and limitation times. Mr Justice Morison. Commercial Court. 27th June 2003

Magill v. Weeks [2001] UKHL 67 Apparent Bias : Test. H.L.Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Steyn Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough Lord Scott of Foscote. 13th December 2001.

Manchester City Council v Muir & Anor [2006] EWCA Civ 423 Serious irregularity by the court. May LJ; Keene LJ; Walle LJ. 20th March 2006.

Matthews v Metal Improvements Co Inc [2007] EWCA Civ 215 Award of costs where a claimant accepts a payment into court late as a result of new evidence or information indicating that the sum paid into court adequately reflects the value of his claim. Chadwick LJ; Lloyd LJ; Mr Justice Stanley Burnton. 14th March 2007

McGlinn v Waltham Contractors Ltd [2007] EWHC 698 (TCC) Costs : Whether costs should be awarded globally or on an issue by issue basis : Availability of Bullock/Sanderson orders. Judge Peter Coulson QC: TCC. 28th March 2007

McLoughlin v Jones [2006] EWCA Civ 1167 Reasons for decisions reviewed. CA : Pill LJ; Arden LJ; Neuberger LJ. 5th July 2006

Mehnaz v Sabre Insurance Co Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 1525 Successful appeal against a costs penalty by successful claimant on the basis that the pleaded insurable interest arose in a different manner to that arrived at by the court : CA rejected this as a ground to impose a penalty. Underwriters allegations of fraud were defeated. Moore-Bick LJ; Toulson LJ; Ward LJ. 12th December 2007

Mills v Birchall [2008] EWCA Civ 385 Liquidation - suit - costs : Appeal against cost judgment that company in liquidation liable for failed costs of litigation : attempt to render administrator liable for costs : Held : Appeal failed - it was for the defendant to apply for security of costs : failed to do so. Now too late. Mummery LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ; Mr Justice Munby. 18th April 2008.

Morgan v Hanson [2004] EWHC 1778 Application for amendment of statement of claim. HHJ Richard Havery. 22nd July 2004

Nash v Chelsea College of Art and Design [2001] EWHC Admin 538 Late reasons from disciplinary bodies are not well regarded by the Court. Mr Justice Stanley Burnton. QBD. Admin Div. 29th July 2001.

National Westminster Bank Plc v Rabobank Nederland [2006] EWHC 2332 (Comm) Disclosure and legal privilege. Mr Justice Simon. 15th September 2006.

Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp [2007] EWHC 437 (Ch) Seven point test to be applied to applications for summary judgement. Mr Justice Lewison : Chancery Div. 7th March 2007.

Oriakhel v Vickers [2008] EWCA Civ 748 Costs : Failed application for a non-party costs order against a dishonest witness. Held : Protected against costs by witness immunity. Correct procedure was to sue the individual. Sir Anthony Clarke MR; Arden LJ; Jacob LJ. 4th July 2008.

Orton v Collins [2007] EWHC 803 (Ch) How do you accept a Part 36 offer to settle a case if it involves a disposition of an interest in land? settlement of a partnership dissolution dispute. Can it be accomplished via an enforceable Part 36 offer which is accepted? Answer - YES - though old CPR forms do not work that smoothly. New 44th revision will work more smoothly. Mr Peter Prescott QC. 23rd April 2007

O\'Reilly v Mackman [1983] UKHL 1 Judicial Review : Availability of declaration in lieu of failed application for certiorari (quashing order). Held : Abuse of process to attempt to override the prerogative regime. House of Lords before Lord Diplock; Lord Fraser of Tullybelton; Lord Keith of Kinkel; Lord Bridge of Harwich; Lord Brightman. 25th November 1983.

Painting v University of Oxford (2005) CA Lawtel Claimant exageratted claim ?5m for personal injury. Payment in of ?180K rejected. Defendant reduced this to ?10K after seeing video evidence of the claimant's mobility. Claimant recovered 80% of ?30K plus costs. On appeal, costs element post rejection of payment in overturned - in absence of exageration a deal could have been cut. Before Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Maurice Kay. CA. 3rd February 2005

Paragon Finance Plc v Freshfields (A Firm) [1999] EWCA Civ 955 Legal Privilege. Lords Bingham LCJ; Brooke LJ; Chadwick LJ. 11th March 1999.

Pearlman v Keepers and Governors of Harrow School [1978] EWCA Civ 5 Judicial Review : Statutory Ouster Clauses : Distinction between errors of law on the face of the record - non reviewable and Errors of law going to jurisdiction - reviewable. Lords Denning;Geoffrey Lane LJ; Eveleigh LJ. 14th July 1978.

Phipps v General Medical Council [2006] EWCA Civ 397 Reasons for decisions : GMC. CA. Sir Mark Potter; Arden LJ; Wall LJ. 12th April 2006.

Plymouth South West Co-Operative Society Ltd. v ASM [2004] EWHC 2938 The nature and importance of Scott Schedules. HHJ Peter Coulson. 9th December 2004

Preiss v. General Dental Council (GDC) [2001] UKPC 36 Reasons : GDC. Privy Council. Lords Cornhill; Cooke; Millett. 17th July 2001.

Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v McBains Cooper [2000] EWCA Civ 172 Privacy : Can a judge publish a judgement after the parties have settled? CA. Peter Gibson LJ; Brooke LJ; Robert Walker LJ; 23rd May 2000

R (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] EWCA Civ 982 IAT : the failure to give reasons, and proportionality : unjustified complaints by practitioners that are based on an alleged failure to give reasons, or adequate reasons, are seen far too often. This must end. Brooke LJ. VC; Chadwick LJ; Maurice Kay LJ. 27th July 2005.

R v Derby Magistrates Court, ex p. B [1995] UKHL 18 Legal Privilege. Lords Keith : Mustill ; Taylor : Lloyd : Nicholls : Keith. 19th October 1996

R v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex p. The Aga Khan [1992] EWCA Civ 7 Judicial Review - private disciplinary regime - remedy lies in civil law for breach of contract : Sir Thomas Binqham MR. Farquharson LJ; Hoffmann LJ. 4th December 1992.

R v East Berkshire Health Authority, ex p. Walsh [1984] EWCA Civ 6 Judicial Review : Private disciplinary committee - contract of employment : Civil law rights - breach of contract : Not a public law issue : no judicial review. MR : May LJ; Purchas LJ. 14th May 1984.

R v Panel on Take-overs and Mergers, ex p. Datafin Plc [1986] EWCA Civ 8 Judicial Review : Public or Civil Law? Held : Panel performs public functions - procedings amenable to judicial review. Sir John Donaldson MR; Lloyd LJ; Nicholls LJ. 5th December 1986

Racal Communications Ltd, Re [1980] UKHL 5 Judicial Review : Inter-relationship of judicial review to statutory ouster clauses against appeal. Lords Diplock; Salmon; Edmund-Davies; Keith; Scarman. 3rd July 1980.

Reynolds v Stone Rowe Brewer (a firm) [2008] EWHC 497 (QB) Fees : Recovery : Costs spiralling up beyond estimate : 90K to recover 55K at trial. Casual advice to resort to ADR late in the day insufficient to protect lawyers fees. Clear and timely warnings required. Fees capped at 15% above estimate. Mr Justice Tugendhat sitting with Master Simons & Mr Robert Carter.QBD 18th March 2008

Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) [1963] UKHL 2 Judicial Review : Circumstances where there is a public duty to a hearing - extent of hearing - natural justice and due process. House of Lords before Lords Reid; Evershed; Morris of Borth-y-Gest; Hodson; Devlin. 14th March 1963.

Ruttle Plant Hire Ltd v S.S. for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs [2007] EWHC 1773 (TCC) An application for permission to amend, which raises a novel question of principle viz whether the rule in Henderson v Henderson can be invoked as a ground for opposing amendments in existing litigation. This judgment is a sequel to Ruttle v SS for Environment[2006] EWHC 3426 (TCC). Mr Justice Jackson. 16th July 2007

Samengo-Turner v J & H Marsh & McLennan (Services) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 723 (12 July 2007) Application for anti-suit injunction to prevent litigation in New York over contracts of employment goverened by UK Law, aimed at examining breach of solus agreement / non-competition terms regarding ex employees. Tuckey LJ; Longmore LJ; Lloyd L:J. 12th July 2007

Satyam Computer Services Ltd v Upaid Systems Ltd [2008] EWHC 31 (Comm) Anti-suit injunction : Whether actions in Texas were the subject of an entire settlement agreement subject to english Law and jurisdiction. Held : Actions concerened new rights not contemplated by the agreement. Injunction refused. Mr Justice Flaux. 17th January 2008

Sempra Metals Ltd v. Revenue [2007] UKHL 34 Interest : Simple or Compound. Recognition that English Law is out of step with current economic practice. Lords Hope; Nicholls ; Scott ; Walker ; Mance. 16th May 2007

SES Contracting Ltd v UK Coal Plc [2007] EWCA Civ 791 Costs challenge in respect of application for disclosure. Waller VC, LJ; Moore-Bick LJ; Moses LJ. 26th July 2007

Shandong Chenming Paper Holding Ltd v Saga Forest Carriers INTL AS [2008] EWHC 1055 (Comm) Default judgement : Set aside : reasonable chance of establishing a defence that claim time barred under the contract : 1 year under Hague-Visby Rules. Mr Justice Walker. 14th May 2008

Skanska Construction UK Ltd. v Egger (Barony) Ltd. [2005] EWHC 284 Award of costs - costs to follow event - 55% of costs recovered. HHJ David Wilcox. 2nd March 2005

Slot v Isaac [2002] EWCA Civ 481 If an application for permission to appeal is lodged at the High Court in circumstances where a High Court judge has no jurisdiction, it should be rejected quite summarily. Since its rejection will in essence be an administrative act (because the court has no jurisdiction) there will be no necessity for any kind of reasoned judgment. Compare Jolly v Jay [2002] EWCA Civ 277 at [19]. Brooke LJ; Laws LJ; Keene LJ. 12th April, 2002

Smith v Kvaerner Cementation Foundations Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 242 Bias : Recorder was from the same chambers as counsel for one of the parties and had acted for related firms : CA allowed an appeal - setting aside the recorder's decision because of an appearance of bias. Also deals with appeal out of time. CA. Phillips LCJ, Sir Anthony Clarke MR: May LJ. 21st March 2006.

Snookes v Jani-King (GB) Ltd [2006] EWHC 289 (QB) Jurisdiction : Franchise contract specified that claims to be brought before a competent court in London. Claims commenced in Swansea District Registry. Held : Swansea did not have jurisdiction : Claims could not be transferred - they had to be withdrawn and re-commenced in London. The Honourable Mr Justice Silber. QBD. 23rd February 2006.

South East Asia Metal Ltd v Zahoor [2008] EWCA Civ 437 Evidence : Grounds for introducing new evidence on appeal. MR; Longmore LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. 29th April 2008

Stefan v. The General Medical Council (Medical Act 1983) [1999] UKPC 10 Reasons : GMC. Privy Council : Lords Browne-Wilkinson; Steyn; Clyde; Hutton; Hobhouse . 8th March 1999.

Straker v Tudor Rose (a firm) [2007] EWCA Civ 368 Costs : failure to negotiated in compliance with pre-action protocol : A discount for such failure is appropriate but a 100% discount - ie complete loss of costs, where a party recovers more than a payment in is not appropriate. Waller LJ; Tuckey LJ; Jacob LJ. 25th April 2007

Sumners Ltd v London Borough Of Hammersmith & Fulham [2002] EWCA Civ 703 Waiver of right to object to insufficient reasons when following a brief judgement on entitlement the party then proceeded to address quantum issues. CA. Keene LJ; 2nd May 2002

T, R v Independent Appeal Panel for Devon County Council [2007] EWHC 763 (Admin) Reasons : Adequacy : Panel had failed to demonstrate in its decision that it had addressed the criteria set down for statute. The panel could not subsequently provide additional reasons - as opposed to providing clarity - and could not contradict the original decision at a later stage. Mr Justice Walker. 4th April 2007.

Taylor v Lawrence [2002] EWCA Civ 90 Apparent bias : Test : CA. Woolf LCJ; Lord Phillips MR; Ward LJ; Brooke LJ; Chadwick LJ; 4th February 2002

Threlfall v General Optical Council [2004] EWHC 2683 (Admin) Reasons : Duty to give. Mr Justice Stanley Burnton: QBD. Admin Div. 26th November 2004

TJ Brent Ltd v Black & Veatch Consulting Ltd [2008] EWHC 1497 (TCC) Cost application for breach of Pre-Action protocol : Held : In order to award costs 1) there must have been a substantial as opposed to mere technical breach 2) the breach must have prevented a potential settlement of the action. Here, the breach was technical - whilst filed prior to a stay to mediation, and hence a valid application - the only objective was to gain an edge in the mediation. Application refused. Mr Justice Akenhead. 13th June 2008.

Tofik, R (on the application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal [2003] EWCA Civ 1138 No reasons given for refusal of extension of time. Decision quashed and remitted to IAT. CA. Thorpe LJ; Sedley LJ; Sir Anthony Evans. 21st July 2003.

Tonkin v UK Insurance (No 2) [2006] EWHC 1185 (TCC) Payment in : Whilst successful in the litigation, the claimants failed to beat a payment in. Costs - allegations of unreasonable behaviour rejected. Costs to follow the event. HHJ Peter Coulson : TCC. 18th May 2006

Tonner v Reiach & Hall [2007] ScotCS CSIH_48 Sist - inordinate delay in prosecution of case - dismissal of action. Lord Abernethy; Lord Philip; Sir David Edward; Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session. 12th June 2007

Verity Shipping SA v N V Norexa [2008] EWHC 213 (Comm) Anti-suit injunction. Charterparty and bills of lading. Anti-suit refused because it would impact adversely on 3rd party rights where the third parties were not parties with notice to arbitration proceedings. Mr Justice Teare. 13th February 2008

Viggers, R (on the application of) v Pensions Appeal Tribunal [2006] EWHC 1066 (Admin) Brief & inadequate reasons for decision. Mr. Justice Crane. 26th April 2006.

Vitol SA v Capri Marine Ltd [2008] EWHC 378 (Comm) Part 71 of the Civil Procedure Rules is \"Orders to Obtain Information from Judgment Debtors\". The question which arises in this case is whether pursuant thereto the court may permit service out of the jurisdiction of an order requiring an officer of a corporate judgment debtor to attend court to provide information about the judgment debtor\'s assets or any other matter about which information is needed to assist in the enforcement of a judgment. Here the target individual was no longer an officer of the company at the time of the judgement. Held : Order to attend struck out. Mr Justice Tomlinson. 29th February 2008

Wates Construction Ltd. v HGP Greentree Allchurch Evans Ltd. [2005] EWHC 2174 (TCC) Costs on indemnity basis : When applicable. HHJ Peter Coulson. 10th October 2005.

Watkins v Jones Maidment Wilson (a firm) [2008] EWCA Civ 134 (04 March 2008) Limitation Act : Whether action ran from occurrence of a contingency, bringing action for negligent advice on a construction contract within the limitation period. Held : Action time barred. Arden LJ; Longmore LJ; Thomas LJ. 4th March 2008

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd No1 [2008] EWHC 1296 (Comm) Discoveries : Application for disclosure of extent of insurance cover refused : made no difference to question of liability : only value was to determine whether party worth suing - on par with disclosure of assets for similar purpose. Mr Justice David Steel. 9th June 2008.

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd No2 [2008] EWHC 1729 (Comm) Discoveries : Application for disclosure of post incident accident report produced to satisfy requirements of the Control of Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1999, as amended (COMAH). Held : Document subject to legal privilege - for primary use by lawyers in respect of potential claims and defences. Application refused. Mr Justice Beatson. 22nd July 2008.

West v Wilkinson [2008] EWCA Civ 1005 Reasons : Apportionment of liability between 1st & 2nd defendants : Unsuccessful appeal, occasioned because no reasons provided at first instance for equal liability between defendants. If reasons had been provided application to appeal would have failed. Buxton LJ; Keene LJ; Thomas LJ. 3rd July 2008

Youell v Kara Mara Shipping Co Ltd [2000] EWHC 220 (Comm) Anti-suit injunction : application to serve out of jurisdiction. Mr Justice Aikens. 13th March 2000.


 
     
       
Top of page
 
       
      THE NATIONWIDE ACADEMY FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION (UK) Ltd.
     

 
    Copyright © NADR 2000, all rights reserved.