Archive for the 'service' Category

Proceedings brought by Peñarroja Fa – WLR Daily

Proceedings brought by Peñarroja Fa (Joined Cases C-372/09 and C-373/09); [2011] WLR (D) 98

“A duty entrusted by a court, in relation to specific matters within the context of a dispute before it, to a professional who had been appointed as a court expert translator constituted the provision of services for the purposes of article 50EC of the EC Treaty (now article 57FEU of the FEU Treaty)). The activities of court experts in the field of translation did not constitute activities which were connected with the ‘exercise of official authority’ for the purposes of the first paragraph of article 45EC of the EC Treaty (now article 51FEU of the FEU Treaty). Article 49 EC (now Article 56 TFEU) precluded (a) national legislation under which (i) enrolment in a register of court expert translators was subject to conditions concerning qualifications but (ii) the interested parties could not obtain knowledge of the reasons for the decision taken and that decision was not open to effective judicial scrutiny enabling its legality to be reviewed, inter alia, with regard to its compliance with the requirement under European Union law that the qualifications obtained and recognised in other member states had to have been properly taken into account; and (b) a requirement that no person might be enrolled in a national register of court experts as a translator unless he could prove that he had been enrolled for three consecutive years in a register of court experts maintained by a particular national court, where such a requirement was found to prevent the qualification obtained by a person and recognised in that another member state from being duly taken into account for the purposes of determining whether that qualification might attest to skills equivalent to those normally expected of a person who had been enrolled for three consecutive years in a register of court experts maintained by the member state in which the expert was seeking enrolment. The duties of court expert translators, as discharged by experts enrolled in a national register were not covered by the definition of ‘regulated profession’ set out in article 3(1)(a) of Parliament and Council Directive 2005/36/EC of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p 22).”

WLR Daily, 17th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

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

Privater Rettungsdienst und Krankentransport Stadler v Zweckverband für Rettungsdienst und Feuerwehralarmierung Passau (Malteser Hilfdienst eV and another, intervening) – WLR Daily

Privater Rettungsdienst und Krankentransport Stadler v Zweckverband für Rettungsdienst und Feuerwehralarmierung Passau (Malteser Hilfdienst eV and another, intervening) (Case C–274/09); [2011] WLR (D) 88

“A contract concerning rescue services under which the operator was fully remunerated by persons other than the contracting authority awarding the contract and which placed a limited operating risk on the operator was classified as a ‘service concession’ within the meaning of article 1(4) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC, as distinct from a public contract or public service contract within article 1(2)(a)(d).”

WLR Daily, 10th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

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

Salazar-Duarte v Government of the United States of America – WLR Daily

Salazar-Duarte v Government of the United States of America [2010] EWHC 3150 (Admin); [2010] WLR (D) 313

“For the purposes of s 103(9) of the Extradition Act 2003, the person whose extradition was sought was deemed to be informed of the extradition order against him when the solicitors acting on his behalf received a letter, whether by post, fax or e-mail, which informed him that the order had been made.”

WLR Daily, 2nd December 2010

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.

Debt Collect London Ltd and another v SK Slavia Praha-fotbal AS – WLR Daily

Debt Collect London Ltd and another v SK Slavia Praha-fotbal AS [2010] EWCA Civ 1250; [2010] WLR (D) 281

“The proviso in art 30.1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the Judgments Regulation) disapplied the general rule that the court was deemed to be seised of proceedings when they were lodged. Its effect, in a case where there had been a continuing failure by the claimant, having lodged proceedings in the court of one member state, to take the further step of paying the court fee which was required before service could be effected, was to enable the court of another member state in which proceedings had later been issued nevertheless to be deemed to have been first seised of proceedings between the same parties.”

WLR Daily, 5th November 2010

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.

Aktas v Adepta; Dixie v British Polythene Industries plc – WLR Daily

Aktas v Adepta; Dixie v British Polythene Industries plc [2010] EWCA Civ 1170 ; [2010] WLR(D) 269

“Negligent failure to serve a claim form in time for the purposes of CPR rr 7.5/7.6 was not in itself an abuse of process. Nevertheless, failure to serve on time had always been dealt with strictly. This was because in England, unlike most civil law jurisdictions, proceedings were commenced when issued and not when served. But it was not until service that the defendant was given proper notice of the proceedings. The additional time between issue and service was thus, in a way, an extension of the limitation period. A claimant could issue proceedings on the last day of the limitation period and still enjoy a further four-month period before service. The strictness with which the time for service was supervised thus had valid public interest underpinnings which were quite separate from the doctrine of abuse of process.”

WLR Daily, 26th October 2010

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.

Andrew Brown v Innovatorone plc and others – WLR Daily

Andrew Brown v Innovatorone plc and others [2009] EWHC 1376 (Comm); [2009] WLR (D) 205

“A claim form was not effectively served on a solicitor where the solicitor had not notified the claimant in writing that the solicitor had been instructed by the defendant to accept service on behalf of the defendant, and, while it did not require exceptional circumstances for exercise of the court’s power to authorise service by an alternative method to those specifically permitted, a rigorous approach was to be taken to the issue whether there was good reason to exercise that power.”

WLR Daily, 22nd June 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.

NML Capital Ltd v Republic of Argentina – Times Law Reports

NML Capital Ltd v Republic of Argentina

Queen’s Bench Division

“A foreign state was not entitled to claim sovereign immunity to avoid enforcement of a judgment validly obtained in another overseas jurisdiction.”

The Times, 11th February 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.


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

Categories