Rajendra Chhotabhai Patel v (1) Euro Investments (UK) Ltd (2) Devshi Gami (3) Mohan Pinduria (2005)

Judgment Date: 27 May 05

Summary The claimant failed to show that he was entitled to an interest in a property as a partner or otherwise. Facts The claimant (P) claimed a 25 per cent share of the profits realised as a result of the development and sale of a property on the basis that he...

Attorney-General v Trustees Of The British Museum (2005)

Judgment Date: 27 May 05

Summary The express prohibition in the British Museum Act 1963 s.3(4), on the disposal of objects in the collections of the British Museum, prevented the defendant trustees from returning drawings to their owners. The fact that the trustees were under a moral obligation could not justify a disposition in breach of...

Crestfort Ltd v Tesco Stores Ltd (2005)

Judgment Date: 25 May 05

Summary Where a commercial lease was designed to ensure that the tenant had like rights and protection against an underlessee to those the landlord had against the tenant regarding repairs, the absence of such a repairing covenant in the underlease meant that the condition precedent to any obligation on the...

Peekay Intermark Ltd & Harish Pawani v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2005)

Judgment Date: 25 May 05

Summary By signing, without reading, terms and conditions relating to an investment that was fundamentally different to the investment product that had been orally explained to him, a company director had not shown that he was content to contract on those terms irrespective of any prior misrepresentation or that he...

The Newgate Stud Co & Newgate Stud Farm LLC v Anthony Penfold & Penfold Bloodstock Ltd (2005)

Judgment Date: 25 May 05

Summary The absence of informed consent was a necessary part of a claim alleging self-dealing by a company director. Accordingly, the absence of such consent was a material fact of the claim for the purposes of a waiver clause that did not apply to waive all claims a company might...

Harley Street Capital v Tchigirinsky & Ors (2005)

Judgment Date: 24 May 05

Summary The defendants had not disclosed a sufficient risk of loss during the relevant period to justify the fortification of a cross-undertaking from a claimant who had obtained a freezing injunction against them. Facts The first, third and fourth defendants applied for the fortification of a cross-undertaking in damages and...

Patel v Brent London Borough Council (2005)

Judgment Date: 23 May 05

Summary A claim for the return of a deposit paid to the local authority pursuant to an agreement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.106 amounted to seeking a modification or discharge of a planning obligation within the meaning of s.106, so that return of the deposit could only...

Keydon Estates Ltd v Eversheds LLP (2005)

Judgment Date: 20 May 05

Summary In assessing the appropriate measure of damage for loss arising from negligent legal advice, in respect of the purchase of a commercial property, the diminution in value rule could be departed from if the facts demonstrated that its application would work an injustice to a claimant, contrary to the...

MacKinnon v The Regent Trust Company Limited (2005)

Judgment Date: 19 May 05