Results: 84

• John Lyon’s Charity v London Sephardi Trust

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

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

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

  STATUTE — Construction — Saving provision
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  4 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

• Loake v Director of Public Prosecutions

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

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  CRIME — Harassment — Insanity
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  3 Case(s) considered

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

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

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

  PRISONS — Discipline — Independent adjudicator
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  4 Case(s) considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• Tchenguiz v Grant Thornton UK llp

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

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

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

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

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  1 Case considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

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

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

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

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2021. Subsequent citations: 18.
  CROWN — Minister — Exercise of prerogative power

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Cancellation of passport
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

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

  11 Case(s) considered

  2 EU Enactments considered

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

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

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

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

  Case index catchwords

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

  DATA PROTECTION — Personal data — Access to

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statute considered

• Asociación Profesional Elite Taxi v Uber Systems Spain SL

  20 Dec 2017 (Case C-434/15); EU:C:2017:364; EU:C:2017:981; [2018] QB 854; [2018] 3 WLR 13; [2018] RTR 12; [2018] WLR (D) 6, ECJ (President K Lenaerts, Vice-President A Tizzano, Presidents of Chambers R Silva de Lapuerta, M Ilešič, JL da Cruz Vilaça, J Malenovský, E Levits, Judges E Juhász, A Borg Barthet, D Šváby, C Lycourgos, M Vilaras, E Regan Advocate General M Szpunar)

  Subsequent citations: 14.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom to provide services — Transport services

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 56 TFEU
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom to provide services — Transport services — Information society services — Defendant operating intermediation service to connect, by means of smartphone application and for remuneration, non-professional drivers using own vehicles with passengers for urban journeys — Whether constituting transport service or information society service or combination of both — Whether prior administrative authorisation required — FEU Treaty, arts 56FEU, 58(1)FEU — Parliament and Council Directive 98/34/EC (as amended by Parliament and Council Directive 98/48/EC), art 1(2) — Parliament and Council Directive 2000/31/EC, art 3 — Parliament and Council Directive 2006/123/EC, arts 2, 9

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom to provide services — Transport services — Information society services — Intermediation service to connect, by means of smartphone application and for remuneration, passengers for urban journeys with non-professional drivers using own vehicles and not holding usual local law licences and authorisations — Whether constituting transport service, or information society service, or combination of both — Whether drivers requiring usual local law licences and authorisations — FEU Treaty, arts 56FEU, 58(1)FEU — Parliament and Council Directive 98/34/EC (as amended by Parliament and Council Directive 98/48/EC), art 1(2) — Parliament and Council Directive 2000/31/EC, art 3 — Parliament and Council Directive 2006/123/EC, arts 2, 9

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 56 TFEU — Article 58(1) TFEU — Services in the field of transport — Directive 2006/123/EC — Services in the internal market — Directive 2000/31/EC — Directive 98/34/EC — Information society services — Intermediation service to connect, by means of a smartphone application and for remuneration, non-professional drivers using their own vehicle with persons who wish to make urban journeys — Requirement for authorisation

  4 EU Enactments considered
• Assens Havn v Navigators Management (UK) Ltd (The Sea Endeavour I)

  13 Jul 2017 (Case C-368/16); EU:C:2017:546; [2018] QB 463; [2018] 2 WLR 250; [2017] WLR (D) 470, ECJ (President of Chamber M Vilaras, Judges M Safjan, D Šváby Advocate General Y Bot)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; 1 negative; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 6.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under European Union Regulation — Insurance

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Jurisdiction under European Union Regulation — Insurance — Insurance policy containing exclusive jurisdiction clause — Victim of insured damage entitled under law of place where damage occurring to bring action directly against insurer — Whether victim bound by exclusive jurisdiction clause — Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, art 13(5)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Jurisdiction in insurance matters — National legislation providing, on certain conditions, for an injured person’s right to bring legal proceedings directly against the insurer of the person responsible for an accident — Agreement on jurisdiction concluded between the insurer and the party which caused the damage

  1 Case considered

  1 EU Enactment considered
• Barkhuysen v Hamilton

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

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 15.
  TORT — Cause of action — False imprisonment

  TORT — Cause of action — Malicious prosecution
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  2 Case(s) considered
• Farrell v Whitty (No 2)

  10 Oct 2017 (Case C-413/15); EU:C:2017:745; EU:C:2017:492; [2018] QB 1179; [2018] 3 WLR 285; [2018] Lloyd's Rep IR 103; [2019] RTR 11; [2017] WLR (D) 659, ECJ (President K Lenaerts, Vice-President A Tizzano, Presidents of Chambers R Silva de Lapuerta, M Ilešič, L Bay Larsen, A Rosas, J Malenovský, Judges E Juhász, A Borg Barthet, D Šváby, M Berger, A Prechal, K Jürimäe, C Lycourgos, M Vilaras Advocate General E Sharpston)

  Subsequent considerations : 5 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 22.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive — Direct effect

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive — Direct effect — Insurance against civil liability in respect of use of motor vehicles — Liability for personal injury caused to passengers other than driver — Organisation responsible for paying compensation for damage caused by unidentified or uninsured vehicle — Whether Directive could be relied on against state — Conditions governing whether private law body deemed emanation of state — Whether provisions of Directive could be relied upon by individuals against body — Council Directive 72/166/EEC, art 3(1) — Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC (as amended by Third Council Directive 90/232/EEC), art 1(4) — Third Council Directive 90/232/EEC, art 1

  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive — Direct effect — Provisions of European Union Directive having direct effect and conferring rights on individuals — Compulsory motor insurance — Organisation responsible for compensating for damage caused by unidentified or uninsured driver — Rule that provisions of Directive could be relied on against organisations which were emanations of state — Whether restricted to organisations which both were subject to control of state and had special powers conferred by state — Whether Directives capable of having direct effect could be relied on against body not displaying both characteristics — Whether individual could rely on provisions against bodies displaying one characteristic — Guidance to courts — FEU Treaty, art 288FEU — Council Directive 84/5/EEC (as amended by Council Directive 90/232/EEC), art 1(4)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Directive — Direct effect — Provisions of Directive having direct effect and conferring rights on individuals — Compulsory motor insurance — Organisation responsible for compensating for damage caused by unidentified or uninsured driver — Rule that provisions of Directive could be relied on against organisations which were emanations of state — Whether restricted to organisations which both were subject to control of state and had special powers conferred by state — Whether Directives capable of having direct effect could be relied on against body not displaying both characteristics — Whether individual could rely on provisions against bodies displaying one characteristic — Guidance to courts — FEU Treaty, art 288FEU — Council Directive 84/5/EEC (as amended by Council Directive 90/232/EEC), art 1(4)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles — Directive 90/232/EEC — Article 1 — Liability for personal injury caused to all passengers other than the driver — Compulsory insurance — Direct effect — Directive 84/5/EEC — Article 1(4) — Organisation responsible for paying compensation for damage to property or personal injury caused by an unidentified or uninsured vehicle — Whether a directive can be relied on against a State — Conditions governing whether a private law body can be deemed to be an emanation of the State and whether provisions of a directive capable of having direct effect can be relied upon against it)

  4 Case(s) considered

  2 EU Enactments considered