Archive for February 1st, 2008

George Wimpey UK Ltd v Tewkesbury Borough Council (MA Holdings Ltd, prospective appellant) – WLR Daily

George Wimpey UK Ltd v Tewkesbury Borough Council (MA Holdings Ltd, prospective appellant) [2008] EWCA Civ 12; [2008] WLR (D) 23

“The Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain an application by, and to grant permission to, someone who had not been a party to the proceedings in the court below, to enable them to appeal against the decision of the court below. The word “appellant” as defined in CPR Pt 52 did not exclude someone who had not been a party to the proceedings below and the rule should be interpreted in order to meet the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Ofulue and another v Bossert – WLR Daily

Ofulue and another v Bossert [2008] EWCA Civ 7; [2008] WLR (D) 22

“The Court of Appeal should follow a decision of the European Court of Human Rights that the law of adverse possession as it stood prior to the Land Registration Act 2002 did not violate the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions, guaranteed by art 1 of Protocol No 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Glaxo Group Ltd v Genentech Inc and another – WLR Daily

Glaxo Group Ltd v Genentech Inc and another [2008] EWCA Civ 23; [2008] WLR (D) 21

“The approach to a stay in European patent cases differed from a stay in ordinary commercial litigation because the possibility of parallel validity proceedings in national courts and in the European Patent Office was inherent in the legal arrangements in the Convention under which the EPO was established.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

A v Hoare; X and another v Wandsworth London Borough Council – WLR Daily

A v Hoare; X and another v Wandsworth London Borough Council; C v Middlesborough Council; H v Suffolk County Council; Young v Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) [2008] UKHL 6; [2008] WLR (D) 20

“A claim for damages for personal injuries caused by a sexual assault fell within s 11 of the Limitation Act 1980, allowing a limitation period of three years from the date when the claimant first considered the injury sufficiently serious to justify proceedings and the possibility of an extension beyond that if it was equitable to do so.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Cinpres Gas Injection Ltd v Melea Ltd – WLR Daily

Cinpres Gas Injection Ltd v Melea Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 9; [2008] WLR (D) 19

“Where an inventor who gave perjured evidence at the trial of his employer’s application for a patent had been more than a mere witness in those proceedings, his fraud should be treated as his employer’s fraud for the purposes of the fraud exception to the doctrine of res judicata.”

WLR Daily, 31st January 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Best Value Tendering & One Case One Fee – The Bar Council

“Desmond Browne QC’s address to the Bar Council on 26 January 2008 regarding the creation of the One Case One Fee (OCOF) Working Party.”

Best Value Tendering and “One Case One Fee” – The Legal Services Commission’s Proposals: Report by Desmond Browne to the Bar Council: Sat 26 January 2008 (Word)

The Bar Council, 31st January 2008

Source: www.barcouncil.org.uk

Revised Protocol for Payment of Fees in the Magistrates’ Courts – The Bar Council

“The Bar Council, in consultation with the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association, has updated the protocol setting out appropriate levels of remuneration for junior barristers acting as unassigned counsel in the Magistrates’ Courts.”

Revised Protocol for Payment of Fees in the Magistrates’ Courts (PDF)

Chairman’s Letter: Revised Protocol for Payment of Fees in the Magistrates’ Courts: 30 January 2008 (PDF)

The Bar Council, 31st January 2008

Source: www.barcouncil.org.uk


February 2008
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829  

Categories