Results: 36

• Proceedings concerning Polbud- Wykonawstwo sp z o o (in liquidation) (Proceedings brought by Polbud - Wykonawstwo sp. z o.o.)

  25 Oct 2017 (Case C-106/16); EU:C:2017:351; EU:C:2017:804; [2018] Ch 575; [2018] 3 WLR 529; [2017] WLR(D) 700, ECJ (President K Lenaerts, Vice-President A Tizzano, Presidents of Chambers T von Danwitz, J L da Cruz Vilaça, A Rosas, J Malenovský, E Levits, Judges E Juhász, A Borg Barthet, D Šváby, M Berger, K Jürimäe, M Vilaras Advocate General J Kokott)

  Subsequent citations: 21.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of establishment — Body corporate

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of establishment — Body corporate — Cross-border conversion of company — Transfer of registered office without transfer of real head office — Removal from commercial register dependent on winding up of company after liquidation procedure under national law — Company applying to be removed from commercial register in first member state — Refusal to remove it from register without company filing various documents — Whether restriction on freedom of establishment — FEU Treaty, arts 49FEU, 54FEU

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of establishment — Body corporate — Cross-border conversion of company — Company seeking transfer of registered office to second member state without transfer of actual head office — Removal from commercial register in first member state dependent on winding up of company after liquidation procedure under national law — Company applying to be removed from commercial register in first member state — National authority refusing to remove from register without company filing various documents pertaining to winding up of company — Whether transfer of registered office falling within ambit of freedom of establishment — Whether requirement for liquidation procedure unjustified restriction on freedom of establishment — FEU Treaty, arts 49FEU, 54FEU

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment — Cross-border conversion of a company — Transfer of its registered office without transfer of its real head office — Refusal to remove it from the commercial register — National legislation whereby removal from commercial register is dependent on the winding up of a company after a liquidation procedure — Scope of freedom of establishment — Restriction on freedom of establishment — Protection of the interests of creditors, minority shareholders and employees — Prevention of abusive practices

  4 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

• T v P

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

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  TRUSTS — Variation — Jurisdiction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

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

  2 Statutes considered

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

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

  DEBT — Security — Charge
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  1 Statute considered
• Trustees of the BT Pension Scheme v Revenue and Customs Comrs

  14 Sep 2017 (Case C-628/15); EU:C:2017:687; [2018] Ch 230; [2018] 2 WLR 1405; [2017] STC 2075; [2017] WLR(D) 598, ECJ (President of Chamber M Ilešič, Judges A Prechal, A Rosas, C Toader, E Jarašiūnas Advocate General M Wathelet)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 15.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of establishment — Free movement of capital

  EUROPEAN UNION — Free movement of capital — Revenue

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of capital
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of establishment — Free movement of capital — Revenue — Corporation tax — Pension funds — Dividends arising from foreign income on investment income — Refusal by tax authorities to grant tax credit to shareholders — Whether contrary to EU law — FEU Treaty, art 63FEU

  EUROPEAN UNION — Free movement of capital — Revenue — Corporation tax — Differential tax treatment of nationally-sourced and foreign-sourced dividends by member state having system for preventing or mitigating series of charges to tax — Pension fund trustees exempt from United Kingdom tax — United Kingdom-resident companies distributing foreign-sourced dividends to trustees in relation to which no entitlement to tax credits — Whether contrary to European Union law — Whether shareholders, resident in same member state as distributing company, enjoying European Union right to free movement of capital — Whether domestic law required to provide remedies to shareholders — Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (c 1), s 246C (as inserted by Finance Act 1994 (c 9), s 138, Sch 16, para 1) — FEU Treaty, art 63FEU

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of capital — Article 63 TFEU — Scope — Tax legislation of a Member State — Corporation tax — Tax credit — Pension funds — Refusal to grant the tax credit to shareholders not subject to tax on investment income for dividends arising from foreign income — Interpretation of the judgment of 12 December 2006, Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation (C‑446/04, EU:C:2006:774) — Tax credit unlawfully withheld — Remedies

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 Statute considered

• Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd v RMC FH Co Ltd

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

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  EASEMENT — Light — Right to light by prescription

  EASEMENT — Right of light — Prescription
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

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

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

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

  18 Jul 2017 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given

  Subsequent considerations : 1 negative. Subsequent citations: 27.
  TORT — Cause of action — Unlawful means conspiracy and causing loss by unlawful means

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

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

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

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

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

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

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

  Case index catchwords

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

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

  9 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Lewis v Warner (Warner v Lewis)

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

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

  Subsequent citations: 4.
  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — Maintained by deceased

  FAMILY PROVISION — Dependant — “Reasonable financial provision”
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

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

  4 Case(s) considered

  3 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• Baker v Craggs

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

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

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

  LAND REGISTRATION — Overriding interest — Easement
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

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

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

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

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

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

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

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

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

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 3.
  COMPANY — Debenture — Floating Charge
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

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

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered