Angela Jane Dethridge v (1) Daniel Dethridge (2) Miyano Ltd (1999)

Judgment Date: 06 May 99

Peter Korda v ITF Ltd t/a The International Tennis Federation (1999)

Judgment Date: 25 Mar 99

Summary On its proper construction, section (V)3 of the International Tennis Federation Tennis Anti-Doping Programme 1998 did not preclude the ITF from appealing the decision of the Appeal Committee, since that section clearly provided for any dispute arising out of any decision made by the Appeal Committee to be submitted to...

Sun Life Assurance Society plc v Tantofex (Engineers) ltd & Alpha Office ltd (1999)

Judgment Date: 25 Mar 99

Parc Battersea v Hutchinson

Judgment Date: 18 Mar 99

Summary A tenant had assigned the remainder of his own lease and not created a subtenancy which would run beyond that term. Even though there was no written document, under s.53(1)(a) Law of Property Act 1925 an interest in land could be created or disposed of by operation of law...

Locabail (UK) Ltd v (1) Bayfield Properties Ltd (2) Barbara Hagan Emmanuel (1999)

Judgment Date: 09 Mar 99

Locabail (UK) Ltd & Locabail Investment Finance Ltd v Waldorf Investment Corporation (1999)

Judgment Date: 09 Mar 99

Sportoffer Ltd v Erewash Borough Council (1999)

Judgment Date: 05 Mar 99

Summary A council could reasonably refuse to consent to a change of use in relation to a squash club where that change of use might result in competition with other leisure facilities owned and operated by the council from adjoining or nearby properties, and whether or not the council had...

Nationwide Building Society v Thimbleby & Co (1999)

Judgment Date: 01 Mar 99

Summary Whether under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, contributory negligence was available in an action for damages for deceit. Facts This action involved thirteen separate claims against Thimbleby & Co, a two-partner firm of solicitors, now dissolved, by the plaintiff building society ('the Society'). It was part of the managed...

Customs & Excise Commissioners v Anchor Foods Ltd (1999)

Judgment Date: 26 Feb 99

Summary The judge did not accept that because the proposed sale by the defendants of their business was bona fide it prevented the court from interfering. There was no reason in principal or for commercial common sense to fetter the court's jurisdiction to grant the continuation of a Mareva injunction...