Implied duty to nominate a safe berth? Defendants (“Charterers”) chartered a vessel (“the Vessel”) from the Claimant (“Owners”) on a Gencon form voyage charterparty (“the Charterparty”). The Charterparty was a berth charter. Charterers nominated a berth in the specifically named loading port (Chekka) where the vessel suffered damage by contact with an underwater projection. The matter came before Aikens J by way of a section 69 Arbitration Act 1996 appeal from the decision of a distinguished tri ...
|
A sentence of 15 months' imprisonment for possession of a false identity document contrary to the Identity Cards Act 2006 s.25(1) was inappropriate and would be replaced by a sentence of 10 months' imprisonment where D had used a false passport as a means of identification to obtain something to which she was entitled, namely to cash a cheque.
|
The Claimant was a design and build contractor retained by a building development company to redevelop a hospital. A wholly owned subsidiary of the developer had retained the Defendant consulting engineers to provide structural and building engineering services including major elements of the design of the works. Prior to the Claimant being retained, the Defendant and the Claimant had begun to liaise directly. Negotiations took place with a view to the Defendant’s contract with the developer bei ...
|
Equal Pay Act The claimants alleged that their employer had been in breach of their rights under the Equal Pay Act 1970. They had been transferred pursuant to a TUPE transfer and claimed their equal pay rights some five years later. Their claims relied upon establishing equal pay with comparators who had been employed by the transferor but had not been transferred to the transferee. The employers argued that the claims were out of time and should have been brought within six mo ...
|
Sex Discrimination - Direct The Employment Tribunal dismissed a claim for direct sex discrimination brought by a woman in the Royal Navy Reserve who complained that she had been rejected for the post of Captain and Medical Director by reason of her sex. The claimant appealed, contending that the Tribunal ought to have drawn inferences from the primary facts which shifted the burden of proof in accordance with the well known criteria of Igen v Wong [2005] ICR 931; and that the circumstanc ...
|
High Court declines to refuse jurisdiction: The High Court refused the Defendant’s application to decline jurisdiction on the basis that it could not have a fair trial as Russian law prevented it from identifying a witness when the evidence was that the witnesses’ identity was not so protected and in any event the significance of that was unclear as the Defendant had not identified the nature of its defence.
|
Surveyors: A surveyor would in a normal retainer be under an inherent obligation to inspect and value the right property such that inspection and valuation of a completely different property would be a breach of contract even when this mistake had arisen without any breach of the duty of care. Additionally a certificate of valuation of a particular property amounted to a warranty.
|
Man who Assisted at Accident Scene not a Primary Victim: G Leggatt QC held that the Claimant who had provided assistance to victims of a construction accident was not a primary victim. Although the Claimant had provided significant help to the injured men that was neither peripheral or trivial, and could therefore be regarded per se as a rescuer, the evidence showed that it was improbable that he had believed that in rushing to the scene he was putting his own physical safety at risk. Nor could ...
|
Parents Not Liable for Accident on Bouncy Castle: In a case that had been given a great deal of media attention at first instance, the Court of Appeal overruled the decision of the Queens Bench Division that parents were responsible for injuries sustained when a larger boy collided with a smaller boy on a bouncy castle whilst both children were unsupervised. The Court stated that it was impossible to preclude all risk when children were playing together. The standard of care required was that wh ...
|
Copyright: The producers of the Star Wars films brought an action against Shepperton Studios and its director claiming infringement of copyright in designs for the Stormtrooper helmets and armour. Shepperton had made the original props for the film, based on drawings and a clay model supplied by the claimants. Shepperton had later sold replica helmets and armour to the public. The court found as follows: * The Stormtrooper helmet and armour were not sculptures as they lacked artistic p ...
|
| 1 |