Judgment call: 6 February 2012
For the purposes of service out of the jurisdiction, where a claim was made under or pursuant to a contract, that was the contract “in respect of” which it had to be shown, to the standard of a good arguable case, that it existed and that one of the requirements of CPR PD 6B para.3.1(6) had been met.
Civil procedure
For the purposes of service out of the jurisdiction, where a claim was made under or pursuant to a contract, that was the contract “in respect of” which it had to be shown, to the standard of a good arguable case, that it existed and that one of the requirements of CPR PD 6B para.3.1(6) had been met.
Appeal dismissed
For the appellant
Brickcourt Chambers’ Mark Hapgood QC and Jasbir Dhillon; Ince & Co partner Jonathan Lux
For the respondent
Quadrant Chambers’ Robert Lawson QC and Tim Marland; Gates and Partners partner Daniel Soffin
Human rights
A local authority was entitled to charge a person for his accommodation in a care home while he was detained there under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Judgment for defendant
For the claimant
1 Crown Office Row’s Guy Mansfield QC; Matrix Chambers’ Professor Conor Gearty; Switalskis’ barrister (non-practising) Doug Feery
For the defendant
St Johns Buildings’ Joseph O’Brien; Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council head of legal services
Roger Harvey
For the first interested party Secretary of State for Health
11 Kings Bench Walk’s Jason Coppel; Department of Work & Pensions’ Anastasia Eleftheriades
Police
A decision to contain a substantial crowd of demonstrators, whose behaviour did not of itself justify containment, was justifiable on the ground that containment was the least drastic way of preventing what the police officer responsible for the decision reasonably apprehended would otherwise be imminent and serious breaches of the peace.
Appeal allowed
For the appellant
Blackstone Chambers’ Monica Carss-Frisk QC and David Pievsky; New Scotland Yard’s Sarah Winfield
For the respondents
Blackstone Chambers’ Mike Fordham QC and Iain Steele; Bindmans partner John Halford
Employment
14 December 2011
The reasoning in Johnson v Unisys Ltd (2001) UKHL 13 was a bar to a claim for damages by an employee for loss arising from the unfair manner of his dismissal in breach of an express term of his employment contract.
Appeals allowed
For the appellant Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Old Square Chambers’ Mark
Sutton QC and Marcus Pilgerstorfer; DAC Beachcroft partner Rachael Heenan
For the respondent Edwards
3 Serjeants Inn’s Mary O’Rourke QC and Oliver Williamson; Ryan Solicitors’ principal Michael Ryan
For the appellant MoD
1 Crown Office Row’s Wendy Outhwaite QC; Treasury Solicitors’ Dominic Van Der Wal
For the respondent Botham
Old Square Chambers’ Frederic Reynold QC and Philip Mead; Dean Wilson senior partner Ian Wilson
VAT
Payments of commission to an insurer, pursuant to agreements under which its business was effectively transferred to another insurer, were not exempt from VAT as consideration for the transfer of a business as a going concern nor as payments for the provision of intermediary services by an insurance broker or agent.
Appeal dismissed
For the appellant
Pump Court Tax Chambers’
David Milne QC; Hogan Lovells international partner Greg Sinfield
For the respondent
Matrix Chambers’ Sam Grodzinski QC and Eleni Mitrophanous; GC and solicitor to HM Revenue & Customs Anthony Inglese CB
Real estate
Mortgagees were entitled to possession of properties that had been sold in an equity release scheme and leased back to the vendors where the purchaser of the properties had defaulted on the loan agreements. The contracts of sale provided that the properties were sold with full title guarantee and vacant possession.
Appeals dismissed
For the appellant vendors
Falcon Chamber’s Jonathan Small QC and Daniel Robinson; Garden Court North’s James Stark; Clark Willis Solicitors’ solicitor Kelly Bushby; David Gray Solicitors’ solicitor Sue Grebby
For the respondent The Mortgage Business plc
Wilberforce Chamber’s Jonathan Seitler QC; Hardwicke’s Daniel Gatty; Eversheds partner Richard Pitt
For the respondent Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd
Wilberforce Chambers’ Jonathan Seitler QC; Hardwicke’s Daniel Gatty; TLT partner Gavin Dowell
For the interested party Mortgage Express
Four New Square’s Nicole Sandells; Cobbetts partner Andrew Bennett
Tax
The effect of the UK-Luxembourg Double Taxation Convention art.26(4), as applied by the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 s.788(3), was that the applicant companies were entitled to group relief notwithstanding the fact that the relevant ‘link company’ did not meet the requirement in s.402(3B) of the act of being resident in the UK or a non-resident company carrying on a trade in the UK through a permanent establishment.
Questions determined
For the appellant
Gray’s Inn Tax Chambers’ Philip Baker QC and Nicola Shaw; Ernst & Young LLP in house
For the respondents
Gray’s Inn Tax Chambers’ David Goy QC; Monckton’s Gerry Facenna; GC and solicitor to HM Revenue & Customs Anthony Inglese
