Insurance cover was provided for (i) damage to buildings caused by theft or attempted theft involving entry into the premises by forcible or violent means; and (ii) theft involving violence or threat of violence to directors or employees of the company. Cover under the first part was subject to a condition that an alarm system was in operation when the premises were unattended. If the system failed a key-holder would remain on-site unless insurers agreed otherwise. After the alarm system had bee ...
|
The terms of a company voluntary arrangement would have been effective to prevent landlords from enforcing guarantees given by a parent company in respect of its subsidiary’s obligations under leases but in the circumstances the CVA unfairly prejudiced the interests of the landlords as creditors of the subsidiary within the meaning of the Insolvency Act 1986 s.6(1)(a).
|
Proceedings in which relief was sought under the Insolvency Act 1986 s. 423 in respect of transactions defrauding creditors could continue without leave of the court where the party against whom relief was claimed was adjudged bankrupt after the commencement of proceedings.
|
The respondent Official Receiver issued an application against the appellant seeking a bankruptcy restriction order pursuant to the Insolvency Act 1986 s. 281A imposing a restriction on him acting as a company director under the Company Director Disqualification Act 1986 s.11. Held that where an undischarged bankrupt had remained a director of a company of which he was a sole shareholder, and had failed to distinguish between the company’s money and his own, the making of a bankruptcy restrictio ...
|
Failure to deliver a statement of case. A Tribunal had not erred in deciding to proceed with an appeal without input from a local education authority where that authority had failed to file a statement of case within the case statement period even though the effect of the decision was to exclude potentially relevant evidence. Regulation 15(1) of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 2001 SI 2001 No 600 was mandatory. It was not permissive. The power to grant an extension of time w ...
|
Clinical Negligence. During a mini-laparotomy to release a cyst and re-attach an ovary to her pelvic wall the Claimant’s bowel had become perforated. A reasonably competent gynaecologist would have carried out an inspection of the area after such a procedure. That inspection would have detected the perforation.
|
Limitation. The Claimant sought to amend his particulars of claim outside of the limitation period. Whilst the new allegations were linked to the same facts, on analysis the newly alleged breaches of duty, the basis upon which financial loss was alleged to have been suffered and the scope of the alleged retainer had all fundamentally changed leading to a wider inquiry into the factual issues of the case. The conditions of s. 35 (5) of the Limitation Act 1980 were not satisfied.
|
Assessment of Damages – Gratuitous Care. The assessment of damages due to a claimant who had suffered severe brain damage that had left him needing lifelong care and support depended on whether he would receive some gratuitous care from his wife who lived in Australia, and would be assessed on the basis that there was only a 20 per cent chance that his application to join her and live in Australia in the long term would succeed.
|
Burden of Proof: In Kuzle v Roche Products Ltd, the EAT considered the burden of proof as to whether the dismissal was due to protect disclosure in whistleblowing cases. It was held that the correct approach was (1) has the claimant shown a real issue as to whether the reason for the dimissal put forward by the Respondent were not the true reason? (2) If so, has the employer proved his reason for dismissal? (3) If not, has the employer disproved the section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 ...
|
There was a close analogy between the court’s powers under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 s.367(3)(b) to wind up a company on the just and equitable ground and the court’s well established jurisdiction to make winding-up orders on the petition of the secretary of state under the Insolvency Act 1986 s.124A.
|
| 1 |