16 July 2012
6 January 2014
7 March 2014
14 October 2013
6 January 2014
20 January 2014
Under the Energy Act 2004 Sch.8 Pt 4, the principal employer under an occupational pension scheme was obliged to ensure that it offered membership in a new scheme it had purchased on the basis of benefits no less favourable than those enjoyed under the previous scheme.
Banking and finance
Urenco UK Ltd v (1) Urenco UK Pension Trustee Co Ltd (as Trustee of the Urenco UK Limited Pension Scheme); (2) Francis Gregory Alleyne Mossop (2012) EWHC 1495 (Ch). Warren J. 31 May 2012
Accordingly, the power of amendment in the new scheme did not extend to an increase in members’ contribution rate, nor to a decrease in the maximum rate of pension increase.
For the claimant Urenco UK Ltd
Outer Temple Chambers’ Richard Hitchcock; Brabners Chaffe Street partner Stephen Brodie
For the defendant (1) Urenco UK Pension Trustee Co Ltd
Outer Temple Chambers’ Naomi Ling; Brabners Chaffe Street associate Simon Morris
For the defendant (2) Francis Gregory Alleyne Mossop
Outer Temple Chambers’ Andrew Short QC; Russell Jones & Walker solicitor Simon Cuthbert
A defamation claim made by a former employee against an NHS trust concerning an employment reference failed because the publication was covered by qualified privilege. There was a strong public interest in NHS employers being able to ask for and receive honest employment references.
Judgment for defendant
For the claimant Thour
Appeared in person
For the defendant Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust
One Brick Court’s Sarah Palin; RadcliffesLeBrasseur partner Dominic Green
(1) Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC; (2) ZBS Capital partners LP; (3) Cypress Way European Asset investors II Sarl v (1) Blue Skye Special Opportunities Fund LP (A Firm); (2) Mr Salvatore Cerchione; (3) Mr Gianluca D’avanzo; (4) Stepstone Acquisition Sàrl; (5) Blue Skye GP Ltd; (6) DBZ Special Investment (Lux) Sàrl (Formerly Blue Skye (Lux) Sàrl); (7) Benlomond Corporation Sàrl; (8) Blue Skye Management Sàrl; (9) Blue Skye Capital Sàrl; (10) Blue Skye Management Sàrl SCS; (11) Greentea SA; (12) Blue Skye Financial Holdings Sàrl; (13) Omega Skye Partners Limited Partnership (A Firm); (14) Omega Partners Sàrl; (15) Mr Mattia Mirko Danese; (16) Mr Francesco Paolo Padula; (17) Mr Giovanni Caslini; (21) BSkye Investors Sàrl (2012) EWHC 1486 (Comm). QBD (Comm). Blair J. 30 May 2012
Defendants which were not parties to a partnership deed but which were mentioned in it, were not to be treated as parties to an arbitration agreement in the deed by virtue of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 s.8 where they did not rely in their defence on a substantive term of the deed.
For the claimant (1) Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC
3 Verulam Buildings’ Ewan McQuater QC, David Quest and David Head; Slaughter and May partner Efstathios Michael
For defendants (2), (3), (5), (7) to (14) and (21)
Brick Court Chambers’ Tim Lord QC, Sarah Abram, Edward Harrison and Craig Morrison; One Essex Court’s Orlando Gledhill; RPC partner Andy McGregor
For the defendants (15), (16) and (17)
One Essex Court’s Daniel Toledano QC; Brick Court Chambers’ Thomas Plewman; Stephenson Harwood partner Paul Phillips
A factual opinion formed pursuant to a provision in a contract of employment that exempted a company from liability to pay death benefits had to be a reasonable one in the sense laid down in Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corp (1948) 1 KB 223, (1947-51) CLY 8107. An employer could not escape contractual liability to pay death benefits where its opinion regarding how an employee had died failed to take into account a relevant matter.
For the claimant Braganza
Quadrant Chambers’ Belinda Bucknall QC; Duval Vassiliades partner Jonny Duval
For the defendant (1) BP Shipping Ltd; (2) BP Maritime Services (Singapore) PTE Ltd
9 Gough Square’s Grahame Aldous QC; Hill Dickinson marine, trade and energy head Maria Pittordis
A claims officer considering whether to waive the two-year time limit for claiming compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme did not have to find special circumstances, but had only to consider whether it was reasonable and in the interests of justice to waive the time limit in the actual circumstances of the particular case.
For the appellant Hutton
4-5 Gray’s Inn Square’s Christopher Buttler (pro bono)
For first respondent First Tier Tribunal
One Crown Office Row’s Owain Thomas, instructed by Treasury Solicitor’s Department
The Supreme Court dismissed an application to reopen its decision that a European arrest warrant issued by the Swedish Prosecution Authority was valid.
For the appellant Assange
Blackstone Chambers’ Dinah Rose QC; Matrix Chambers’ Mark Summers and Helen Law; Birnberg Peirce partner Gareth Peirce
For the respondent Swedish Prosecution Authority
Matrix Chambers’ Clare Montgomery QC and Aaron Watkins; 5 St Andrew’s Hill’s Hannah Pye; Special Crime Division, Crown Prosecution Service
For the interveners Gerard Batten MEP and Vladimir Bukovsky
Paul Diamond, instructed by Chambers of Paul Diamond
For the intervener Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC
Arnot Manderson Advocates’ P Jonathan Brodie QC, instructed by the Appeals Unit, Crown Office