The Tribunal considered the criteria for allowing non-parties to make submissions under Rule 37(2) of the revised ICSID arbitration rules.
|
The Appellant landlords were unsuccessful in appealing a decision that the Respondent tenant had successfully terminated its lease pursuant to a notice given by the tenant under a break clause. The landlord alleged that the tenant had failed to "materially comply with" its repairing obligations. The judge found that the tenant may have taken reasonable steps to comply however this was irrelevant to the objective question of material compliance. The relevant question was whether, in light of the ...
|
Reasonable foreseeability – Fatal Accident Claim. To succeed in a claim under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 in respect of the death of a person who had been injured in a factory accident, became depressed and then committed suicide, it did not have to be shown that the suicide was reasonably foreseeable as a separate kind of damage.
|
Civil Recovery Orders not penal or in breach of ECHR. Civil recovery orders made pursuant to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 were not penal in nature and did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Art.7.
|
Unfair Dismissal: TUPE and dismissals. The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held in that employees dismissed for misconduct BEFORE a TUPE transfer, but reinstated by the transferor (i.e. seller or outgoing contractor) AFTER the transfer date, are deemed to have been transferred and the dismissals disappear. Accordingly, the transferee (i.e. buyer or incoming contractor) takes over legal responsibility for them.
|
The Housing Act 1985 contained a lacuna in that an assignee of a secure tenancy, who had taken part in the fraudulent misrepresentation that induced the landlord to grant the tenancy to the original tenant, was able to resist an order for possession and thereby take advantage of his own fraud as the common law remedy of rescission of the tenancy was not available to the landlord, but rather they had to follow the code set out in Schedule 2 of the Act.
|
This was a relevant transfer under TUPE – the employees were dismissed for misconduct with internal appeals pending at date of transfer. Appeals were heard by Transferor and allowed reinstatement directed. Question for the EAT was whether they were employed by the Transferor immediately before transfer and their employment transferred to Transferee.
|
Misdiagnosis of celiac disease – Recognised psychiatric injury not established. Where a claimant had been misdiagnosed as suffering from coeliac disease and had been on a gluten free diet for a number of years, the loss claimed for psychiatric injury, which was less than a recognised psychiatric illness, was not recoverable at law. The balance of the claim was for economic loss and was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980.
|
C claimed payment for the construction of a new sports facility at D’s premises. D counterclaimed for unfinished and defective work. C had tendered for the works on a JCT standard form of contract. However, D decided to appoint C to undertake the works under letters of intent, as the execution of certain documents was to be deferred until after the grant of planning permission. After completetion of the main elements of the work, D refused to sign the contractual documents, insisting that it wou ...
|
Misfeasance in Public Office – Not actionable without proof of material damage
|
| 1 |