This websites use cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For more details about cookies and how to manage them, see our cookie policy.

Cases Mark Cunningham

Alexis Maitland-Hudson v Solicitors Regulation Authority (2019)

Judgment Date: 24 Jan 2019

There was no blanket rule that, when considering a litigant's ability to participate effectively in proceedings, judges had to ignore what they saw and heard in court and be guided only by medical evidence. Judges were entitled to form their own views and were not bound by expert evidence, even if it was agreed.

View case

Courtwood Holdings SA (a company registered & incorporated under the laws of Panama) v Woodley Properties Ltd (a company registered & incorporated under the laws of Jersey) & 10 Ors (2018)

Judgment Date: 09 Oct 2018

A company which had contracted with a special purpose vehicle to provide advice regarding land acquisition and planning matters also had a fiduciary duty towards the SPV where the practical reality was that the SPV's directors had no expertise in those matters and were entirely dependent on the advice for day-to-day decision-making. A contractual duty to provide services with due skill and care was not inconsistent with the existence of a fiduciary duty.

View case

Kulwant Singh Manak v Solicitors Regulation Authority (2018)

Judgment Date: 31 Jul 2018

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal had been justified in suspending a solicitor for two years for professional misconduct, but had erred in imposing continuing restrictions on his practice for an indefinite period. It had not provided reasons why the restrictions were necessary and appropriate and had not heard submissions from the solicitor on the issue. Where no explanation was given, there was no yardstick against which anyone considering a future application to vary or lift the restrictions could measure his subsequent conduct.

View case

Andrew William Shaw v Solicitors Regulation Authority (2017)

Judgment Date: 07 Aug 2017

Authority (2017) Summary There was no blanket rule in disciplinary proceedings that the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal was bound to exercise its discretion to strike a solicitor off the roll of solicitors because it had found that he had dishonestly misled a court in civil litigation. However, misconduct that involved such behaviour was to be treated with gravity and striking off was generally inevitable.

View case

Courtwood Holdings SA v Woodley Properties Ltd & ors (2017)

Judgment Date: 14 Jul 2017

A proprietary injunction preventing a company from disposing, dealing with or diminishing the value of overage held on trust was varied to allow the company to pay surveyor's fees, incurred for negotiating an advance against the total overage ultimately due, from the money received as a result of the surveyor's successful negotiation.

View case

BTS Specialised Equipment Ltd v Revenue & Customs Commissioners : NTS Specialised Equipment Ltd v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2017)

Judgment Date: 25 Apr 2017

In relation to a missing trader intra-community fraud appeal, although a First-tier Tribunal had erred by committing several procedural irregularities in its decision to uphold HMRC's refusal to allow the deduction of input tax because the appellants knew that the transactions concerned were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT, the errors did not undermine its decision.

View case

National Westminster Bank PLC v Luke Lucas & 5 ORS (2016)

Judgment Date: 27 Jul 2016

The court approved payments from the estate of the late Jimmy Savile in satisfaction of claims made by the victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by him.

View case

Courtwood Holdings SA v Woodley Properties LTD & 11 ORS (2016)

Judgment Date: 18 May 2016

It was not unarguable, nor was there no reasonable prospect of success in establishing, that there had been a breach of fiduciary duty and knowing receipt of profits arising out of that breach by a group of defendants with inter-related corporate vehicles in relation to a farm property development. The court refused their summary judgment and strike-out applications.

View case

Ennismore Fund Management Ltd v Fenris Consulting Ltd (2016)

Judgment Date: 19 Apr 2016

On the proper construction of a "clawback" agreement between a hedge fund and its fund managers, the hedge fund could claw back a discretionary bonus paid to an individual fund manager only if it could establish a causal link between the losses sustained by the funds for which that manager was responsible and a reduction in its own performance fee.

View case

Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA v Director of the Serious Fraud Office & Ors (2015)

Judgment Date: 10 Feb 2015

The court considered applications under CPR r.31.22 and r.32.12 for permission for the collateral use of documents disclosed and witness statements served in proceedings arising out of an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. It observed that the public interest was against the collateral use of documents forming part of a criminal investigation, and it considered the nature of the test to be applied on an application under r.31.22(2) to restore protection against collateral use.

View case

In the Matter of the Estate of Sir James Wilson Savile, Deceased & Ors v Luke Lucas & Ors (2014)

Judgment Date: 16 Dec 2014

A judge had not erred in approving a scheme put forward by the executor of an estate aimed at facilitating the resolution of personal injury claims against the estate. The scheme was neither intrinsically flawed nor one that no reasonable executor could have promoted.

View case

Islamic Investment Company of the Gulf (Bahamas) ltd v Symphony Gems NV & Ors (2014)

Judgment Date: 19 Nov 2014

The lifting of a suspended committal order was set aside where a solicitor who had been instructed by a contemnor had, for over three years, been conducting fictitious litigation which had impeded the contemnor's ability to comply with orders and prepare for the committal hearing, and thereby impacted upon the decision to make an actual order.

View case

Re: Parkwell Investments Ltd & Ors v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2014)

Judgment Date: 16 Oct 2014

Where the Revenue had petitioned for the winding-up of a company on the basis of unpaid VAT assessments, the overall balance of convenience plainly favoured the continuance of the appointment of a provisional liquidator until the effective hearing of the petition where there were real questions as to the integrity of the company's management and record-keeping functions, as well as evidence that the company had been used as a vehicle for the fraudulent evasion of VAT.

View case

In the Matter of the Administration of the Estate of Jimmy Saville (2014)

Judgment Date: 11 Mar 2014

At the request of an executor of an estate, a court sanctioned a scheme which aimed to facilitate the resolution of personal injury claims against the estate in a speedy and inexpensive manner.

View case

In the Matter of the Estate of Sir James Wilson Savile, Deceased & Ors v Luke Lucas & Ors (Mar 2014)

Judgment Date: 11 Mar 2014

At the request of an executor of an estate, a court sanctioned a scheme which aimed to facilitate the resolution of personal injury claims against the estate in a speedy and inexpensive manner.

View case

In the Matter of the Administration of the Estate of Jimmy Saville (Feb 2014)

Judgment Date: 24 Feb 2014

The court determined that two applications in relation to the estate of Jimmy Savile should be heard in public.

View case

Fuglers LLP & Ors v Solicitors Regulation Authority (2014)

Judgment Date: 05 Feb 2014

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal had been justified in imposing a total fine of £75,000 upon a firm and two partners who had been found guilty of misconduct after allowing the firm's client account to be used as a banking facility by a client who was at risk of insolvency. There had been payments through the account of over £10 million and the solicitors had made decisions which involved the favourable treatment of some unsecured creditors over others. The misconduct was sufficiently serious to require the highest level of fine.

View case

Fonecomp Ltd v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2013)

Judgment Date: 05 Dec 2013

The First-tier Tribunal had not erred in law in applying the principle in Kittel v Belgium (C-439/04) [2008] S.T.C. 1537, as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in Mobilx Ltd (In Administration) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2010] EWCA Civ 517, [2010] S.T.C. 1436, when considering whether a trader, who was claiming input VAT, had in some way been involved in or connected with VAT fraud carried out by another person.

View case

Blada Ltd (In Liquidation) v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2013)

Judgment Date: 28 Aug 2013

The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) had the power to make a direction for security for costs in an appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber).

View case

1 2 3 4

Results 1 - 20 of 78