Law Report: Case Summaries (CORRECTED)
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.CORRECTION (PUBLISHED 12 OCTOBER 1992) APPENDED TO THIS ARTICLE
The following notes of judgments were prepared by the reporters of the All England Law Reports.
Children
Re G (minors); CA (Woolf, Butler-Sloss LJJ); 24 September 1992.
An ex parte interim order should only be made in very rare circumstances such as where a child was in danger of being abducted. There might be other exceptional circumstances which could lead to such an order being made but it was not reasonable for the judge to order removal of the children without the mother's knowledge and without her having being heard when the application arose as a result of the children informing the father during an access visit that their mother had been smoking cannabis.
Timothy McLoughlin (Kirk & Partners) for the petitioner; Mark Everall (Russell Steward, Norwich) for the respondent.
Costs
Framework Exhibitions v Matchroom Boxing Ltd and anor; CA (Glidewell, Mann, Leggatt LJJ); 23 September 1992.
When a judge makes a personal costs order against a director of the plaintiff company who had not been a party to the action, the director had to be given proper notice. It was not sufficient that he was in court when counsel for the defendant stated that he might apply for costs against the director. The director could not be said to be on notice unless the judge took sufficient steps to ensure that the director understood what was proposed, was prepared to dispense with any notice in writing and had had the opportunity to be represented.
Peter Martin (Proctor Gillette) for the director; Michael Malone (Fishburn Boxer) for the defendants.
Trill and anor v Sacher and ors; CA (Neill, Glidewell LJJ); 17 September 1992.
Where the Court of Appeal had heard an interlocutory appeal from the dismissal of the defendants' application to strike out the plaintiffs' claim for want of prosecution, it was not necessary to leave the question of costs to the trial judge hearing the main action.
The Court of Appeal had power under s 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, as amended by s 4 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, and O62 r 11, as amended, to make a wasted costs order against the plaintiffs' solicitor if the court considered that the costs had been incurred as a result of any improper, unreasonable or negligent act or omission on the part of a legal representative.
Michael Burke-Gaffney QC and Anthony Connerty (Beor Wilson & Lloyd, Swansea) for the plaintiffs.
Housing
Tower Hamlets LBC v Abai; CA (Glidewell, Mann, Leggatt LJJ); 16 September 1992.
Where a defendant occupied premises as a non-secure licensee in accordance with para 6 of Sch 1 to the Housing Act 1985, a notice to quit was sufficient to end the contractual licence and it was an abuse of process for the defendant to raise by way of defence and counterclaim the suitability of accommodation offered by the local authority for the purpose of ss 65 and 69.
The court reiterated that where an application involved the exercise of judicial discretion, it was the duty of the judge to give reasons, albeit brief, for his decision so that the parties and, if necessary an appellate court, should know the basis on which the decision was made.
Ashley Underwood and Lisa Giovannetti (Borough Solicitor) for the council; Alan Tyrell QC and Mark Loveday (Timmis Desai) for the respondent.
Landlord and tenant
Richurst Ltd v Pimenta and anor; ChD (David Neuberger QC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge); 18 September 1992.
The court has no power to extend the deadline for the service of the landlord's notice under s 27 of the Arbitration Act 1950 since service of the notice under the rent review provisions in the present lease was not a 'step to commence arbitration proceedings'.
Christopher Harrison (Vernon & Shakespeare, Oldbury Warley) for the plaintiff; William Batstone (Hart Reade & Co, Eastbourne) for the defendants.
Sentencing
R v Ogburu and anor; CA (Crim Div) (McCowan LJ, Leonard, Morland JJ); 21 September 1992.
When sentencing two Nigerian nationals for offences of importing heroin into the UK the judge was right to ignore the effect of a decree made by the Nigerian government which rendered any Nigerian citizen convicted of importing drugs into another country liable to five years' imprisonment upon his return to Nigeria.
The courts in England would wish to do nothing to sap the powers of foreign courts in stamping out international drug trafficking.
Andrew Mattison (Registrar of Criminal Appeals) and Andrew McDonald (Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the appellants.
CORRECTION
The title of the case summary published under Housing on 5 October should be Tower Hamlets LBC v Abdi, and Alan Tyrrell QC, was leading counsel for the respondent.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments