Archive for the 'estoppel' Category

Ing Bank NV v Ros Roca SA – WLR Daily

Ing Bank NV v Ros Roca SA [2011] EWCA Civ 353; [2011] WLR (D) 122

“A shared assumption on the facts surrounding a disputed fee agreement between a company and a bank acting as financial adviser, which was not reflected in the agreement, that the fees would not be calculated with reference to a particular ratio mentioned in the agreement, was enough to found an estoppel by convention so as to prevent the bank claiming a fee based on the disputed ratio.”

WLR Daily, 31st March 2011

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.

Carer who ‘bullied’ elderly auctioneer loses battle for £2.3million share of his fortune – Daily Telegraph

“A ‘dictatorial’ carer who bullied an elderly auctioneer who sold the Duchess of Windsor’s jewellery lost a court battle for a £2.3million share of his fortune after she was condemned as a brazen liar by a judge.”

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 20th January 2011

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Regina (Coke-Wallis) v Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales – WLR Daily

Regina (Coke-Wallis) v Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales [2011] UKSC 1 ; [2011] WLR (D) 3

“The principles of cause of action estoppel applied to successive complaints before a professional disciplinary body. Whether, and in what circumstances, a public interest exception should be recognised to the strict application of those principles in the disciplinary context was a matter for Parliament not the courts.”

WLR Daily, 19th January 2011

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.

Fisher v Brooker and another – WLR Daily

Fisher v Brooker and another [2009] UKHL 41; [2009] WLR (D) 274

“When a claimant did not, for almost 40 years, assert his right to a share of the copyright in intellectual property, his claim could not be defeated by the doctrines of estoppel or laches when the defendants had suffered no detriment by acting in reliance on the assumption that he had no claim but, on the contrary, had derived a financial benefit far outweighing any detriment resulting from the claimant’s delay.”

WLR Daily, 31st July 2009

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.

Dallah Estate and Tourism Holding Co v Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Government of Pakistan – WLR Daily

Dallah Estate and Tourism Holding Co v Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Government of Pakistan [2009] EWCA Civ 755; [2009] WLR (D) 2

“When a court was reviewing an international arbitration award made under ss 100–103 of the Arbitration Act 1996 careful attention was to be accorded to the type of hearing and the standard of proof required to establish that an award was “not valid” for the purposes of s 103(2)(b) of the 1996 Act. Further, when an assertion of estoppel was made, going to the matter of non-validity, the fact that the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal was founded on consent, rather than legislation, could be critical.”

WLR Daily, 21st July 2009

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.

Francois v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd – WLR Daily

Francois v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 405; [2009] WLR (D) 154

“On an application to review a decision rejecting a claim form for procedural non-compliance, where the claimant’s grounds included administrative error and the interests of justice, an employment judge should not limit his consideration to administrative error, but should consider whether, in all the circumstances, the interests of justice required a review.”

WLR Daily, 15th May 2009

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.

Thorner v Major and others – WLR Daily

Thorner v Major and others [2009] UKHL 18; [2009] WLR (D) 111

Oblique assurances by a farmer of an intention to leave a farm to a cousin, who had worked full-time without any remuneration on the farm for 29 years, could constitute a sufficiently clear and unequivocal representation to establish a proprietary estoppel when the farmer ultimately died intestate.”

WLR Daily, 25th March 2009

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.


October 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Categories