Cases by Area of Law


Gedge v Cresswell

Barrister: James Pearce-Smith
Area of Law: Partnership

Summary: James acted for a shareholder in unfair prejudice petition concerning a family company formed to invest in property.

V8 Club v Seraly

Barrister: James Pearce-Smith
Area of Law: Commercial Dispute Resolution

Summary: Acting for a group of businessmen suing the directors of a company on their guarantees. 7-day trial in the County Court.

Dunford v Cogent

Barrister: James Pearce-Smith
Area of Law: Commercial Dispute Resolution

Summary: Acting for four farmers against a supplier of defective bull semen. James appeared for the farmers in a 10-day trial at the Mercantile Court in Bristol.

Betterment Properties (Weymouth) Ltd v James Carthy & Co Ltd

[2010] EWCA Civ 1401, [2010] All ER (D) 210 (Dec)

Barrister: Guy Adams
Area of Law: Commercial Dispute Resolution

Summary: Acted for a property investment company at trial in the High Court and on appeal in a dispute over a ransom strip involving issues of contractual construction and highways law.

Jones v North Somerset Council

Barrister: David Fletcher
Area of Law: Planning
Summary: appeal re land at East Failand (2010)

Section 76 appeal against a refusal of planning permission for a major housing development at a Green Belt location which, according to the local planning authority (North Somerset), contravened all existing and emerging policies in housing location.  The appeal was determined by the Secretary of State in view of its importance, and turned heavily on the interpretation and weight to be given to the then emerging RSS (now abolished by the new government).  The appeal was decided in favour of the local planning authority shortly after the change of government.

Bristol City Council v Information Commissioner and Portland & Brunswick Square Association

Barrister: David Fletcher
Area of Law: Environment
Summary:
This is an important decision of the Information Tribunal for all planning authorities required to decide under the Environmental Information Regulations whether to make public sensitive commercial information in viability appraisals.  The Information Tribunal decided that a viability report disclosed in confidence to Bristol City Council was provided to protect a legitimate interest, but since the report was necessary to enable the Council to decide whether retention of a building in a Conservation Area was viable, the public interest in disclosure outweighed the interest in maintaining confidentiality.  The Tribunal made clear however that this does not mean that planning authorities must disclose all commercially sensitive information provided in confidence by a developer.

Re A (suspended residence order)

[2010] 1 FLR 1679 (Fam Div)

Barrister: Christopher Sharp QC
Area of Law: Children

Summary: Change of residence in light of intractable opposition to contact, suspended pending compliance. Orderupheld by CA (and eventual change of residence subsequently upheld by CA).

Hinchliffe v Corus UK Ltd

[2010] EWHC 1573

Barrister: Andrew McLaughlin
Area of Law: Personal Injury

Summary: Asbestos

RWE Npower plc v Alstom Power Limited, Alstom Norway AS, Alstom Power Sweden AB and Amec Group Limited

[2010] EWHC 3061 (TCC)

Barrister: Andrew Kearney
Area of Law: Construction & Engineering

Summary: A decision on preliminary issues under CPR Part 8 relating to a major dispute on Aberthaw power station.

Rok Building Ltd v Bestwood Carpentry Ltd

[2010] EWHC 1409 (TCC)

Barrister: Andrew Kearney
Area of Law: Construction & Engineering

Summary: Unusually, adjudication enforcement by a Part 7 trial with cross-examination of witnesses, which showed that not all of the terms agreed had been recorded in writing (s107 HGCRA 1996).


PreviousNext