Local Authority: The Claimant was allowed to argue at trial that the local authority owed him a duty in respect of its after-care services after providing him with care in the community even though the case was fraught with difficulties because the law was still developing and the decision in Clunis v Camden and Islington HA was not the last part of that development. The Claimant was also permitted to argue that in light of Artilces 3 and 8 of the ECHR the limitation on liability under s. 117 (2 ...
|
Smoking in the High Secure Hospitals: Although the Health Act 2006 banned smoking in all enclosed public premises in England, there were limited exemptions in the Smoke-free (Exemption & Vehicles) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/765). Amongst the exemptions were designated rooms in prisons and also care homes. But psychiatric hospitals were provided a temporary exemption only until 1 July 2008. Such hospitals include the special hospitals, which are high secure in nature and whose populations have as ...
|
The claimant Shipowner sought to recover increased bunkering costs caused by the defendant Charterers’ change of loading port. The relevant charter was on the Asbatankvoy form. The Court held that clause 4(c) of the Asbatankvoy form did not confer a right on Charterers to re-nominate load and discharge ports. Further clause 4(c) required Charterers to meet additional expenses caused by a change in nomination and this was not restricted to expenses arising by way of deviation. The proper asses ...
|
This was an appeal by Shipowners. At first instance the Shipowners were found to be in breach of charterparty in circumstances where a change in international regulations (MARPOL) resulted in the inability of the chartered vessels to trade certain cargos to certain ports because they were not fully double-sided as required by the new regulations ([2007] EWHC 1890 (Comm); [2008] 1 All ER (Comm) 4979). The Shipowners’ appeal was unsuccessful. The Court of Appeal held that there was no establis ...
|
Claims Co-operation: Reinsurers were entitled to rely on subsequent breach of a claims co-operation clause even where they had previously repudiated liability for the underlying claim as a result of an earlier breach of the claims settlement clause. A claim was made under a property and business interruption claim by a Venezuelan company. Reinsurers took the view that the claim should be refused. Insurers considered otherwise and advise the assured of this. As a result reinsurers refused to inde ...
|
Privacy: Photographing of individual outside AGM for police purposes did not infringe right to privacy: The photographing of a an individual at a public company’s annual general meeting for police purposes, and the subsequent storing of that photograph by the police, did not infringe the individual’s right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and his claim for judicial review of the police officers and photographer’s actions was dismissed
|
Limitation: As the European Court had ruled that protection under the national scheme implementing Directive 84/5 had to be equivalent to that applying to insured drivers, children were entitled to bring claims against the MIB on the same basis as under the Limitation Act 1980 s. 28.
|
A father's application for the summary return of a child to Australia from England was refused. The court held that the father had acquiesced to the removal of the child and whilst this acquiescence had been conditional it was still valid and effective.
|
An appeal was allowed, holding that a swiss-type claim to the use of a known drug, finasteride, in a new dosage to treat a known disorder, was not invalid for lack of novelty and was not obvious. Swiss-type claims were allowed under the EPC where the novelty was conferred by a new dosage regime. Bristol Myers Squibb did not contain a clear ratio that a swiss-type claim lacked novelty if the only difference between it and the prior art was a new dosage regime for a known medical condition, and t ...
|
An appeal of a father against adoption orders made in respect of his youngest children was dismissed. The court held that it had been open to the judge to make these orders notwithstanding the judge's request at an earlier hearing that the LA reconsider it's position and file care plans for long term foster care. In the interim the position of the guardian and of a psychologist had changed.
|
| 1 |