Results: 129

• R v Rollins (R v McInerney (Michael))

  09 Oct 2009 [2009] EWCA Crim 1941; [2010] Bus LR 734; [2010] 1 All ER 1183; [2010] 1 Cr App R 14; [2009] WLR (D) 294, CA

  28 Jul 2010 [2010] UKSC 39; [2010] 1 WLR 1922; [2010] Bus LR 1529; [2010] 4 All ER 880; [2011] 1 Cr App R 4; [2010] WLR (D) 210; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; most recently considered: 2023. Subsequent citations: 14.
  FINANCIAL SERVICES — Regulator — Powers

  FINANCIAL SERVICES — Market abuse — Penalties and injunction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  FINANCIAL SERVICES — Regulator — Powers — Institution of proceedings— Financial Services Authority— Whether FSA empowered to institute proceedings for criminal offences under statutes other than Financial Services and Markets Act 2000— Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c 8), ss 401, 402 — Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (c 29), ss 327, 328

  FINANCIAL SERVICES — Market abuse — Penalties and injunction — Institution of proceedings — Financial Services Authority — Whether FSA empowered to institute proceedings for criminal offences under statutes other than Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 — Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, ss 1(1), 401, 402 (as amended by Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, Sch 7(7), para 33(4)) — Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, ss 327(1), 328(1) (as amended by Enterprise Act 2002, Sch 2, para 40(17))

  2 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered
• Copley v Lawn (Maden v Haller)

  17 Jun 2009 [2009] EWCA Civ 580; [2010] Bus LR 83; [2010] 1 All ER (Comm) 890; [2009] RTR 311; [2009] WLR (D) 200, CA

  07 Dec 2009 (appn dis) [2010] Bus LR 157, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 7.
  DAMAGES — Measure of damages — Car hire
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DAMAGES — Measure of damages — Car hire — Claimant entering into agreement for hire of replacement vehicle following accident caused by defendant — Defendant's insurers later offering use of free replacement vehicle — Offer failing to specify cost to insurers of providing vehicle — Claimant declining offer and continuing to use hire vehicle — Claimant seeking recovery of hire charges — Whether refusal to accept insurers’ offer unreasonable — Whether claimant failing to mitigate loss — Whether unreasonable rejection of offer depriving claimant of whole of claim

  4 Case(s) considered

• Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd (No 1)

  31 Mar 2010 [2010] EWHC 660 (Pat); [2010] Bus LR 1244, Ch D (Floyd J)

  29 Mar 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 303; [2011] Bus LR 1510; [2011] WLR (D) 115, CA

  13 Mar 2013 [2013] UKSC 16; [2013] Bus LR 565; [2013] 2 All ER 177; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent citations: 18.
  PATENT — Infringement — Making product
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PATENT — Infringement — Making product — Invention claimed as combination — Whether person who replaces element “makes” patented product — Whether whole inventive concept remaining once element removed — Correct test to be applied — Patents Act 1977, s 60(1)(a)

  5 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered
• Hilmi & Associates Ltd v 20 Pembridge Villas Freehold Ltd

  30 Mar 2010 [2010] EWCA Civ 314; [2010] 1 WLR 2750; [2010] Bus LR 1597; [2010] 3 All ER 391; [2010] WLR (D) 90, CA

  Subsequent considerations : 2 neutral; 1 negative; most recently considered: 2025. Subsequent citations: 8.
  COMPANY — Execution of documents — Signature

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Leasehold enfranchisement — Validity of tenants’ notice
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMPANY — Execution of documents — Signature — Company tenant serving notice of claim to exercise right of enfranchisement — Requirement that notice be “signed by” tenant rather than on its behalf — Whether statutory process by which companies “executed” legal documents satisfying requirement — Companies Act 1985, s 36A(4) (as inserted by Companies Act 1989, ss 130(2))

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Leasehold enfranchisement — Validity of tenants’ notice — Qualifying tenants’ notice to reversioner exercising collective right to enfranchise — Single company director signing notice for corporate tenant — Whether sufficient to satisfy requirement that notice be “signed by” tenant — Whether notice valid — Companies Act 1985, s 36A(4) (as inserted by Companies Act 1989, ss 130(2)) — Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, s 13, 99(5)

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  2 Statutes considered
• Parabola Investments Ltd v Browallia Cal Ltd (formerly Union Cal Ltd)

  06 May 2009 [2009] EWHC 901 (Comm); [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 589, QBD (Flaux J)

  05 May 2010 [2010] EWCA Civ 486; [2011] QB 477; [2010] 3 WLR 1266; [2010] Bus LR 1446; [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 210; [2010] WLR (D) 114, CA (Mummery, Toulson, Rimer LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 2 neutral. Subsequent citations: 73.
  DAMAGES — Deceit — Measure of damages
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DAMAGES — Deceit — Measure of damages — Claimant trading stocks and shares through defendant stockbrokers — Trading resulting in disastrous losses concealed by defendant falsely representing to claimant that trading profitable — Claimant's investment fund much depleted before fraud discovered — Claimant thereafter trading profitably with reduced fund — Claimant bringing action in deceit — Whether entitled to damages for lost opportunity to trade with unreduced fund during period from discovery of fraud up to date of trial — Whether discovery of fraud marking cut-off point for damages claim

  5 Case(s) considered
• Parkinson Engineering Services plc v Swan

  21 Dec 2009 [2009] EWCA Civ 1366; [2010] Bus LR 857; [2009] WLR (D) 378, CA

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 15.
  PRACTICE — Parties — Substitution
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PRACTICE — Parties — Substitution — Defendants appointed administrators of company — Court subsequently discharging administration order and granting defendants release from liability — Company in liquidation bringing claim in negligence against defendants — Defendants pleading release as absolute defence to claim — Statutory provision allowing liquidator with court's permission to seek contribution to company's assets from administrators despite release — Liquidator applying after expiry of limitation period to substitute himself as claimant and to add claim for contribution — Whether substitution necessary to maintain original claim — Whether jurisdiction to allow substitution despite procedural differences between original and new claim — Whether substitution to be allowed and permission granted for contribution claim to proceed — Limitation Act 1980, s 35(1)(2) — Insolvency Act 1986, ss 20, 212 — CPR r 19.5(2)(3)

  1 Case considered

  2 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• Kellogg Brown & Root Holdings (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs Comrs

  24 Mar 2009 [2009] EWHC 584 (Ch); [2009] STC 1359, Ch D

  24 Feb 2010 [2010] EWCA Civ 118; [2010] Bus LR 957; [2010] STC 925; [2010] WLR (D) 53, CA

  Subsequent citations: 4.
  REVENUE — Capital Gains Tax — Disposal of assets

  REVENUE — Capital Gains Tax — Group of persons having control of company
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  REVENUE — Capital Gains Tax — Disposal of assets — Taxpayer company transferring shares in subsidiaries to United Kingdom company owned by United States company owned by taxpayer company's United States parent company — Transaction effected after shares of subsidiaries distributed to parent company's shareholders — Whether transaction between connected persons so that loss on sale of shares not available to set against taxpayer company's gains generally — Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, s 416(2)(3)(6) — Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992, ss 18, 28, 286(5)(b)

  REVENUE — Capital Gains Tax — Group of persons having control of company — Taxpayer claiming to deduct capital loss against chargeable gains — Claim disallowed as loss between “connected persons” only deductible from chargeable gains arising on other disposals between same connected persons — Whether two companies “connected” because of link between their ultimate holding companies — Whether “group” to be given ordinary meaning — Whether requiring common purpose as well as common relation — Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, s 416(2) — Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992, ss 18, 28, 286(5)(b)

  3 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  2 Statutes considered

• R v B (I)

  09 Dec 2009 [2009] EWCA Crim 2575; [2010] Bus LR 748; [2010] 2 All ER 728; [2010] 1 Cr App R 181; [2009] WLR (D) 357, CA

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CRIME — Competition — Restriction or distortion of competition
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Competition — Restriction or distortion of competition — Defendant charged with dishonestly engaging in cartel activity — Whether offence “national competition law” for purposes of Council Regulation — Whether Regulation confining power to impose penalty to designated national competition authority — Whether Crown Court having jurisdiction to impose penalty — Enterprise Act 2002, s 188 — Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, arts 3, 5, 35

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statute considered
• Octagon Assets Ltd v Remblance

  17 Jun 2009 [2009] EWCA Civ 581; [2010] Bus LR 119; [2010] 2 All ER 688; [2009] WLR (D) 196, CA

  Subsequent considerations : 2 negative. Subsequent citations: 13.
  BANKRUPTCY — Debt — Statutory demand
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  BANKRUPTCY — Debt — Statutory demand — Guarantor covenanting that tenant company would comply with obligations to landlord under lease — Tenant becoming indebted to landlord — Tenant's cross-demand preventing landlord bringing insolvency proceedings against tenant — Landlord instead issuing statutory demand against guarantor — Guarantor applying to set aside statutory demand — Whether guarantor's ability to pay tenant's debt good reason for refusing application — Whether co-extensive nature of guarantor's and tenant's obligations under guarantee making it just to set aside statutory demand — Insolvency Rules 1986, r 6.5(4)(a)(d)

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• Best Buy Co Inc v Worldwide Sales Corpn España SL

  08 Jul 2010 [2010] EWHC 1666 (Ch); [2010] Bus LR 1761; [2010] FSR 830; [2010] ETMR 974, Ch D (Floyd J)

  24 May 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 618; [2011] Bus LR 1166; [2011] WLR (D) 173, CA

  01 Nov 2011 (appn dis) [2012] Bus LR 140, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 19.
  EVIDENCE — Privilege — “Without prejudice” communications

  TRADE MARK — Infringement — Groundless threat of proceedings
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EVIDENCE — Privilege — “Without prejudice” communications — Circumstances in which without prejudice communications admissible

  TRADE MARK — Infringement — Groundless threat of proceedings — Statutory provision giving person aggrieved right of action — Claimant contending that letter from proprietor of Community trade mark constituting actionable threat — Proper approach to interpreting letter — Whether letter constituting “threat” — Whether threat to bring proceedings in United Kingdom — Whether directed to acts of infringement excluded by statutory provision — Whether letter protected by without prejudice rule — Whether claimants “person aggrieved” — Trade Marks Act 1994, s 21

  8 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered