Summary Where the respondent entered into an agreement with the appellants to assist in matters of litigation between the appellants and another party, on a true interpretation of the agreement the respondent was entitled to the payment of a contingency fee on the payment of sums due to the appellants...

Summary There was nothing wrong with the judge's finding that the first defendant was the beneficial owner of a property. Therefore the claimant was entitled to set off rent payments in respect of that property against a debt owed to him by the first defendant; and the bare trustees of...

Summary Applying the standard in Moy v Pettman Smith (A Firm) [2005] UKHL 7 , (2005) 1 WLR 581, a barrister had not been negligent in the advice he had given to a tenant regarding the desirability of serving a protective notice under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. Facts The claimant (J) brought a claim in negligence...

Summary In the circumstances, the language of compromise agreements made between the parties was wide enough to include any claim on the grounds of conspiracy and the judge was right to strike out the claims and award summary judgment in favour of three of the respondents. Facts The appellants (K)...

Summary The rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461 did not prevent the members of a limited liability partnership challenging the validity of the appointment of administrative receivers of the partnership. A power for a financier to appoint an administrative receiver did not amount to "step-in rights" within the Insolvency Act 1986...

Summary A counterclaim alleging breach of contract failed where the counterclaimant knew of and approved the conduct on which the counterclaim was based. Facts The claimant company (T) claimed unpaid commission arising from a business venture between the parties and the defendant (D) counterclaimed for damages for alleged breach of...

Summary Where it was obvious not only that a mistake had been made in formulating the clause of a lease dealing with the right to terminate, but also obvious what that mistake was, the court would correct the mistake as a matter of construction. Facts The appellant tenant (T) appealed...