The FSA fines Bear Stearns £40,000 for failing to report transactions pursuant to section 206 of FSMA 2000.
|
The appeals would be dismissed. There was no principle that where evidence represented the sole substantial evidence in the case against D, it should never be admissible under s.23 CJA ’88 because the interests of justice test could never be satisfied. It could not be right, where compelling evidence was the sole or decisive evidence, that the admission in evidence had to lead automatically to a D’s right to a fair trial under Art.6 ECHR being infringed. Under ss.23 and 26 of the ’88 Act, althou ...
|
A claim by a bankrupt's wife seeking to challenge the conduct of a trustee during the course of her husband's bankruptcy proceedings had been devoid of any merit, and accordingly an order for judgment in default of defence was set aside and the claim dismissed.
|
Freezing orders would be continued as it had been established that there was at least a triable issue as to whether the parties, which had been subject to the injunctions, had acted dishonestly in a series of transactions aimed at avoiding the payment of VAT by means of acquisition frauds.
|
Big money. Exceptional facts leading to departure from yardstick of equality on the basis of special (or ‘stellar’) contribution. Lambert v Lambert 2002 CA applied.
|
C had sought enforcement of Adjudicator’s decision for payment of final account. Judge had held not enforceable on basis that the C’s contention that JCT contract had been concluded was incorrect. CA granted appeal by C and held that there was a JCT contract in place because tender invitation submitted by B’s quantity surveyor had provided that JCT form would apply and fact that two parties proposed that their agreement should be contained in a formal contract (which was not actually achieved) ...
|
The adjudicator had erred in his approach to the issue of proportionality, by having failed to consider the leading authority of R (on the appln of Razgar) v SSHD (2004) 2 AC 368. By failing to direct himself to the matters set out in Razgar, the adjudicator had fallen into error and the IAT, applying that decision, was entitled to set aside the adjudicator's determination on the grounds that he had erred in law.
|
The court interpreted a right of way through an agricultural estate and in particular held that the right of way permitted the defendant, his invitees and lawful visitors access to go to the estate for purposes of a commercial shoot but not for the purpose of carrying out agricultural or forestry activity.
|
It was held that a former soldier who had suffered PTSD following an incident which occurred whilst he was on a tour of duty should be compensated for the degree to which his symptoms would have been ameliorated if he had been referred to the medical officer and had received treatment. However, he could not receive damages for the degree to which his condition was exacerbated by his subsequent conviction and imprisonment for an offence which, on the balance of probabilities, he would not have co ...
|
A former soldier who was suffering from PTSD was awarded general damages on the basis that if he had been referred for treatment when his psychiatric problems first began he would probably have been able to live a stable domestic and social life; to function sufficiently well to remain in the army, if he had wished to do so; and secure and hold remunerative employment, commensurate with his abilities when he left the army.
|
| 1 |