Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67: the demise of Ghosh and Twinsectra
|
|
- Abraham Richardson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67: the demise of Ghosh and Twinsectra 1. All paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, refer to Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC In recent years, the concept of dishonesty in law has caused considerable confusion and uncertainty. In criminal proceedings, the leading authority was R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053, which set out the following infamous two-stage test: (1) whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest; and if so (2) whether the defendant himself realised that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest 3. The extent to which Ghosh applied beyond the criminal law has always been unclear. In Twinsectra v Yardley [2002] 2 AC 164, the House of Lords appeared to endorse the Ghosh test for civil proceedings as well. However, Twinsectra was sandwiched by two Privy Council decisions (Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan [1995] 2 AC 378 and Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Eurotrust International Ltd [2006] 1 WLR 1476), both of which apparently endorsed an exclusively objective test for dishonesty. In regulatory proceedings, the confusion was greater still (see Kirshner v The General Dental Council [2015] Med LR 317 [9] [22], where Mostyn J analysed the previous inconsistent case law and called presciently for one single test for dishonesty which applied in all proceedings). 4. Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67 has now resolved the debate. By a unanimous judgment given on 25 October 2017, the Supreme Court has ruled that Ghosh itself was wrong and ought no longer to be followed ([74]). The test for dishonesty in all ([63]) legal proceedings is whether, objectively judged, the relevant party s conduct was contrary to the objective standards of ordinary, decent people ([74]): that party s genuine beliefs as to the honesty of her own conduct are no longer definitive (if indeed they ever were).
2 Ivey: the facts and arguments 5. In Ivey, the claimant/appellant, professional gambler Phil Ivey, had played a game of Punto Banco in the defendant s casino. Ivey had employed a technique known as edge sorting, which had given him an advantage over the casino. He did this by falsely representing to the dealer that he was superstitious and thereby manipulating her into turning the cards in a way that allowed him to employ the technique. Ivey won 7.7 million, but upon realising what he had done, the casino refused to pay out ([4] [27]). 6. At trial, Ivey accepted that his contract with the casino included an implied term not to cheat. He further accepted that, if he had cheated, the casino was entitled to withhold his winnings. The central argument thus centred on whether or not he had actually cheated. Mitting J s key substantive conclusions can be summarised as follows: (1) Dishonesty was not a necessary ingredient of cheating; (2) Ivey s conduct objectively constituted cheating; (3) Ivey was genuinely convinced that he is not a cheat. [2014] EWHC 3394 (QB), [45], [50] [51] 7. On appeal, Ivey s key argument was as follows: (1) Dishonesty is a necessary ingredient of cheating; (2) Ivey was not dishonest, since his genuine beliefs about his conduct (as found by Mitting J) negatived the second limb of the Ghosh test; (3) Thus, Ivey did not cheat. ([37]). 8. By a 2-1 majority, the Court of Appeal dismissed Ivey s appeal, rejecting limb (1) of his argument ([2017] 1 WLR 679, ).
3 The Supreme Court judgment 9. The Supreme Court (in line with both lower courts) found that cheating does not require dishonesty, thus rejecting limb (1) of Ivey s argument ([49] [50]). There the appeal could have ended. However, clearly unimpressed with Ivey s reliance on the Ghosh test, their Lordships then assessed limb (2), finding that Ivey actually was dishonest in any event ([75]). Lord Hughes analysis (accepted unanimously by the remaining Justices) is stark, clear and unambiguous: the second leg of the test propounded in Ghosh does not correctly represent the law and directions based upon it ought no longer to be given. The test of dishonesty is as set out by Lord Nicholls in Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan and by Lord Hoffmann in Barlow Clowes. ([74]). 10. His Lordship then confirmed the resulting implications: When dishonesty is in question the fact-finding tribunal must first ascertain (subjectively) the actual state of the individual s knowledge or belief as to the facts. The reasonableness or otherwise of his belief is a matter of evidence (often in practice determinative) going to whether he held the belief, but it is not an additional requirement that his belief must be reasonable; the question is whether it is genuinely held. When once his actual state of mind as to knowledge or belief as to facts is established, the question whether his conduct was honest or dishonest is to be determined by the fact-finder by applying the (objective) standards of ordinary decent people. There is no requirement that the defendant must appreciate that what he has done is, by those standards, dishonest. ([74]). 11. Judging Ivey by this test, rather than by Ghosh, the Supreme Court found his conduct to be dishonest ([75]).
4 Discussion 12. Two key points lay at the heart of the Supreme Court s analysis. Firstly, the second limb of the Ghosh test assumed a clear distinction between the party s own moral standards and the objective standards of ordinary honest people. In Ivey, the Supreme Court realised that this distinction was largely one of form only: by definition, if an individual genuinely does not consider conduct dishonest (by his own personal standards), then it probably follows that he does not consider it contrary to the standards of ordinary honest people either ([59]). 13. Secondly, the Supreme Court realised that the first limb of the Ghosh test already involves the necessary subjective analysis. The court need only assess (objectively) the honesty of the party s conduct, provided that it applies that objective assessment to the party s actual (subjective) beliefs. 14. Put another way, the court must first ascertain the party s actual, genuine beliefs and then ask itself objectively whether, given those beliefs, her conduct was honest or not. The Supreme Court persuasively noted that courts/juries already undertake a very similar exercise in cases of self-defence ([66]): in such cases, the tribunal first determines what the party genuinely believed and then objectively assesses whether or not her conduct, given those beliefs, was reasonable and proportionate. 15. The Supreme Court further explained this analysis by applying it to the key example cited in Ghosh to justify the Ghosh test itself. That example was as follows: Take for example a man who comes from a country where public transport is free. On his first day here he travels on a bus. He gets off without paying. He never had any intention of paying. His mind is clearly honest; but his conduct, judged objectively by what he has done, is dishonest. ([60]).
5 16. The court in Ghosh thus concluded that the second limb of the Ghosh test was necessary to save such a man from a finding of dishonesty. However, the Supreme Court realised that, properly understood, the first limb saved that man without any need for the second limb at all: But the man in this example would inevitably escape conviction by the application of the (objective) first leg of the Ghosh test. That is because, in order to determine the honesty or otherwise of a person s conduct, one must ask what he knew or believed about the facts affecting the area of activity in which he was engaging. In order to decide whether this visitor was dishonest by the standards of ordinary people, it would be necessary to establish his own actual state of knowledge of how public transport works. Because he genuinely believes that public transport is free, there is nothing objectively dishonest about his not paying on the bus. ([60]). Conclusions 17. Ivey is now the leading authority on the definition of dishonesty in any legal proceedings, be they criminal, civil, regulatory, or otherwise. No longer can a party seek to evade dishonesty merely by arguing (as Ivey did) that he genuinely did not consider his conduct dishonest. 18. However, while a party s beliefs as to her own honesty are now clearly side-lined, this does not mean that all subjective belief is now irrelevant. Such belief is still relevant in that the objective test must be applied to the beliefs that she actually held. The relevance of those beliefs will depend on the precise, individual factual circumstances. A man who genuinely believes that UK public transport is free, having come from a country where the same is free, does not act dishonestly. A man who deceives a casino into giving him an advantage in a gambling game by falsely representing superstition, genuinely believing that such conduct is fair game, does ([75]). MICHAEL PATRICK
PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 15/08/ /08/2018. GMC reference number:
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/08/2018-17/08/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Zholia Alemi GMC reference number: 4246372 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct MB ChB 1992 University
More informationHEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC MARQUEZ LOPEZ, Daniel Registration No: 260732 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JULY 2018 OUTCOME: Fitness to Practise Impaired. Reprimand Issued Daniel MARQUEZ LOPEZ, a dentist, Grado
More informationDISHONEST ASSISTANCE. Gilead Cooper QC 3 Stone Buildings, Lincoln s Inn
DISHONEST ASSISTANCE Gilead Cooper QC 3 Stone Buildings, Lincoln s Inn Articles Sir Anthony Clarke MR Claims against professionals: negligence, dishonesty and fraud (2006) 22 Professional Negligence 70-85
More informationHEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC UPTON, Natalie Jane Registration No: 110087 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JULY 2018 Outcome: Suspension for 12 months with immediate suspension (with a review) Natalie UPTON, a
More informationBristol Alumni Association Lecture 2018 Dishonesty Lady Hale, President of The Supreme Court 23 February 2018
Bristol Alumni Association Lecture 2018 Dishonesty Lady Hale, President of The Supreme Court 23 February 2018 Being a Supreme Court Justice is a serious business but on occasions it can also be great good
More informationPUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 19/03/ /03/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Vytautas LIESIS
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 19/03/2018 20/03/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Vytautas LIESIS GMC reference number: 7193897 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct MD 2001 Vilniaus Universiteto
More informationLondon Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 QB MARTIN FERGUSON
London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 QB MARTIN FERGUSON 1 London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield
More informationTGC Fraud Update. The Newsletter of the TGC Fraud Team. EDITOR: James Henry ASSOCIATE EDITORS: Tim Sharpe, Marcus Grant Issue VII February 2018
EDITOR: James Henry ASSOCIATE EDITORS: Tim Sharpe, Marcus Grant Issue VII February 2018 TGC Fraud Update The Newsletter of the TGC Fraud Team LONDON 1 Harcourt Buildings Temple, London, EC4Y 9DA T +44
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11207-2013 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and JOANNE ELIZABETH COUGHLAN Respondent Before: Mr R. Nicholas
More informationHEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE*
HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE* *The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from this text. GRAHAM, Lisa Marie Registration
More informationAPPEARANCES Mr B Brown QC and Mr M Treleaven for the Standards Committee Mr G Illingworth QC and Mr D Wood for the Practitioner
NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZLCDT 16 LCDT 020/12 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 and the Law Practitioners Act 1982 BETWEEN WAIKATO BAY OF
More informationBe Careful and Honest in What You Say: Fraud in Arbitration
Be Careful and Honest in What You Say: Fraud in Arbitration by Vincent Moran QC Vincent Moran QC acted for the successful Claimant in Celtic v Knowles, the first reported decision under the 1996 Arbitration
More informationBefore : MR JUSTICE LEGGATT Between : LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES. - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Civ 3292 (QB) Case No: QB/2012/0301 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE KINGSTON COUNTY COURT HER HONOUR JUDGE JAKENS 2KT00203 Royal
More informationMontgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board: Dr, No
A CONFESSION I represented the defenders in this case. I drafted the Defences in May 2006. After a Procedure Roll, a Proof that lasted 15 days, a Summar Roll that lasted 8 days and 2 days in the Supreme
More informationTFF Conference Interviewing Fraudsters
TFF Conference 2017 Interviewing Fraudsters Mike Neumann Director ITS Training (UK) Ltd. ITS Training (UK) Ltd 2001-2017 1 Contents Part one What s it all about Part two To follow PACE or not That is the
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
On 19 November 2012, Ms Afolabi appealed against the Tribunal s decision on sanction and costs. The appeal was dismissed by Lord Justice Moore-Bick and Mr Justice Cranston. Aminat Adedoyin Afolabi v Solicitors
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11360-2015 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and JEAN ETIENNE ATTALA Respondent Before: Mr D. Glass (in
More informationTHE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CONTRACTUAL DECISION MAKING: IMPLICATIONS OF BRAGANZA FOR PROPERTY LAWYERS. Landmark Chambers
THE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CONTRACTUAL DECISION MAKING: IMPLICATIONS OF BRAGANZA FOR PROPERTY LAWYERS Tom Weekes QC Landmark Chambers November 2016 1. Over the past couple of decades, an important issue has
More informationTHE ILLEGALITY DEFENCE FOLLOWING. Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42
THE ILLEGALITY DEFENCE FOLLOWING Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42 Ronelp Marine Ltd & others v STX Offshore & Shipbuilding Co Ltd & another [2016] EWHC 2228 (Ch) at [36]: 36 Counsel for STX argued that once
More informationHEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE
HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from the text. ROBERTSON, Harry Gordon Registration
More informationLitigation and Dispute Resolution
Litigation and Dispute Resolution Review November 2017 Contents Company 2 UK parent company liability to parties affected by operations of a UK or foreign subsidiary: Dominic Liswaniso Lungowe & ors v
More informationLegal Truth where the duties to the Court and the Client Collide Professor Alan Paterson OBE
Legal Truth where the duties to the Court and the Client Collide Professor Alan Paterson OBE Director, Centre for Professional Legal Studies Strathclyde University Outline of Presentation 1. Introduction
More informationThe clause (ACAS Form COT-3) provided:
THE CONSTRUCTION OF COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS The leading case is Bank of Credit and Commerce International SAI v Ali [2001] UKHL 8; [2002] 1 AC 251. It was also an extreme case where the majority of the House
More informationPermission for committal application Public interest threshold requirements (JTR v NTL)
Permission for committal application Public interest threshold requirements (JTR v NTL) 27/08/2015 Dispute Resolution analysis: Warby J has dealt with an application for permission seeking to commit one
More informationThe Duty to Give Reasons
PRACTICE NOTE The Duty to Give Reasons This Practice Note has been issued by the Institute for the guidance of Disciplinary and Appeal Panels and to assist those appearing before them. Introduction 1.
More informationFreedom of Information and Closed Proceedings: The Unavoidable Irony
[2014] JR DOI: 10.5235/10854681.19.2.119 119 Freedom of Information and Closed Proceedings: The Unavoidable Irony Jamie Potter Bindmans LLP The idea of a court hearing evidence or argument in private is
More informationBefore: MR RECORDER BERKLEY MISS EASHA MAGON. and ROYAL & SUN ALLIANCE INSURANCE PLC
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON Case No: B53Y J995 Court No. 60 Thomas More Building Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Friday, 26 th February 2016 Before: MR RECORDER BERKLEY B E T W
More informationAPPLICATION FOR RESTORATION TO THE ROLL OF SOLICITORS
No. 10544-2010 On 1 December 2011, Ms Thobani appealed against the Tribunal s decision not to restore her name to the Roll of Solicitors. The appeal was dismissed by Mr Justice Burnett. Thobani v Solicitors
More informationJUDGMENT. R v Sally Lane and John Letts (AB and CD) (Appellants)
REPORTING RESTRICTIONS APPLY TO THIS CASE Trinity Term [2018] UKSC 36 On appeal from: [2017] EWCA Crim 129 JUDGMENT R v Sally Lane and John Letts (AB and CD) (Appellants) before Lady Hale, President Lord
More informationPUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 25/06/ /07/2018. GMC reference number:
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 25/06/2018-02/07/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Kashif SAMIN GMC reference number: 6058386 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct Review - Conviction /
More information-and- SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
IN THE SUPREME COURT NIMBY Appellant -and- THE COUNCIL Respondent INTRODUCTION SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT 1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal dismissing Nimby
More informationCASE SUMMARY by Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi
CASE SUMMARY by Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi Recognition of Common Law defences in defamation claims in Malaysia: Reynolds Privilege and Lucas Box Federal Court Civil Appeal No.: 02(f)- 31-03/2014(W) : Syarikat
More informationEdwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP
Edwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP The Legal 500 & The In-House Lawyer Legal Briefing Corporate and commercial Kimberley Cottrell, Trainee KCottrell@edwardswildman.com Christopher Pease, Associate CPease@edwardswildman.com
More informationDates: 27/09/ /10/2017, 16/01/ /01/2018, 5/02/2018 6/02/2018
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 27/09/2017 20/10/2017, 16/01/2018 19/01/2018, 5/02/2018 6/02/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Tichafaseyi MTETWA also known as Dr Gordon MTETWA GMC reference number: 3033966 Primary
More informationDOG-LEG CLAIMS KICKED INTO TOUCH: BENEFICIARIES EXPOSED?
THE DENNING LAW JOURNAL Denning Law Journal 2009 Vol 21 pp 119-130 CASE COMMENTARY DOG-LEG CLAIMS KICKED INTO TOUCH: BENEFICIARIES EXPOSED? Gregson v HAE Trustees Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 1006 (Ch) Rowena
More information[2015] EWHC 854 (QB) 2015 WL
Dr Saima Alam v The General Medical Council Case No: CO/4949/2014 High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Administrative Court 27 March 2015 [2015] EWHC 854 (QB) 2015 WL 1310679 Before: Mr Justice
More informationDilapidations Representations
Dilapidations Representations Keith Firn BSc(Hons), MRICS, MFPWS Chartered Surveyor, Datum Building Consultancy Ltd Michael R. Watson Partner, Property Litigation, Shulmans Solicitors Dilapidations; Dishonesty;
More informationBurdens of Proof and the Doctrine of Recent Possession
Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 1, Number 2 (April 1959) Article 6 Burdens of Proof and the Doctrine of Recent Possession J. D. Morton Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional
More informationA short introduction TO
A short introduction TO The civil law of bribery A Practical Guide from the 2TG Commercial Fraud Team Winter 2018 Introduction This Short Introduction considers the civil causes of action for bribery.
More informationJUDGMENT. R (on the application of AA) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)
Trinity Term [2013] UKSC 49 On appeal from: [2012] EWCA Civ 1383 JUDGMENT R (on the application of AA) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) before Lord Neuberger,
More informationProportionality and Legitimate Expectation Jonathan Moffett. Introduction
Proportionality and Legitimate Expectation Jonathan Moffett Introduction 1. This paper seeks to summarise the key points that emerge from the recent case law on proportionality and legitimate expectation.
More informationOPINION. Relevant provisions of the Draft Bill
OPINION 1. I have been asked to advise as to whether sections 12-15 (and relevant related sections) of the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill are constitutional, such that they are compatible with the UK
More informationTHE FRAUD ACT 2006 SCOPE, DEPLOYMENT & EFFECTIVENESS. Andrew Langdon QC, Guildhall Chambers
THE FRAUD ACT 2006 SCOPE, DEPLOYMENT & EFFECTIVENESS Andrew Langdon QC, Guildhall Chambers (wide) scope of false representation s2 Fraud by false representation (1) A person is in breach of this section
More informationSubmission on Theft, Fraud and Bribery and related offences in the Criminal Code
Submission on Theft, Fraud and Bribery and related offences in the Criminal Code Simon Bronitt and Miriam Gani Faculty of Law, ANU 31 October 2003 In broad terms, we are supportive of the ACT government's
More informationPUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 15/01/ /01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Baldeep AUJLA
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/01/2018 23/01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Baldeep AUJLA GMC reference number: 7084996 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution New - Misconduct
More informationHEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HOUGHTON, Nicola Louise Registration No: 130502 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 2015 Outcome: Erasure (with immediate order) Nicola Louise HOUGHTON, Verified competency
More informationCriminal Liability Hong Kong s Auditors in the Firing Line
Accountants August 2012 Update Criminal Liability Hong Kong s Auditors in the Firing Line On 12 July 2012, the Companies Bill was passed by the Legislative Council marking a significant milestone in the
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 10971-2012 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and TIMOTHY JAMES PENNY Respondent Before: Mr D. Green (in
More informationTrustee exculpation the law, the quirks and the business sense
Trusts & Trustees, Vol. 20, No. 9, November 2014, pp. 933 942 933 Trustee exculpation the law, the quirks and the business sense Lawrence Cohen QC and Thomas Seymour Abstract Trustee exculpation clauses:
More informationPrivately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions
Privately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions Updated October 2017 The Bar Council frequently receives enquiries from barristers and clerks in relation to Conditional Fee Agreements
More informationDirectors' Duties in Guernsey
Directors' Duties in Guernsey March 2018 1. OVERVIEW 1.1 This note provides a brief synopsis of the common law duties owed by directors of companies ("companies") incorporated in the Island of Guernsey
More informationJUDICIAL SITTINGS FOR TRINITY TERM (PROVISIONAL LIST)
(PROVISIONAL LIST) Date The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Courtroom 1 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Courtroom 3 5 th June 6 th June 7 th June Court will sit @ 2.00pm until 4.00pm Benkharbouche
More informationPUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 10/12/ /12/2018. GMC reference number: Summary of outcome Erasure
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 10/12/2018-20/12/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr David NZEGBULEM GMC reference number: 4340881 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct MB BS 1991 University
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationUniversity of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research. Peer reviewed version. Link to published version (if available): /S
Bjorge, E., & Williams, J. (2016). How different is proportionality in the EU context from proportionality in other contexts? Cambridge Law Journal, 75(2), 186-189. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008197316000386
More informationTIME TALK (UK) Ltd Defendant/Appellant
Neutral Citation No: [2003] EWCA Civ 402 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (Leeds District Registry) His
More informationThe Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law, 2011
The Prejudice Test The Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law, 2011 Published: January 2015 Brunel House, Old Street, St.Helier, Jersey, JE2 3RG Tel: (+44) 1534 716530 Email: enquiries@dataci.org 1 The Prejudice
More informationDuties of Roads Authorities recent cases. Robert Milligan QC
Duties of Roads Authorities recent cases Robert Milligan QC Introduction The willingness of the courts to impose liability on local authorities generally and roads authorities in particular has waxed and
More informationImpaired Impaired. instructed
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/05/2018 21/05/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Martin GEORGE GMC reference number: 6094870 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution New - Misconduct
More informationLAW04: Criminal Law (Offences against Property) Fraud and Making off without Payment
LAW04: Criminal Law (Offences against Property) Fraud and Making off without Payment 1. Fraud by false representation. This is defined in s. 2 Fraud Act 2006 as "The offence of fraud by false representation
More informationBefore: THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES LADY JUSTICE BLACK and LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Civ 931 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION Andrew Edis QC, sitting under s.9(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 Before:
More informationInsight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #78 19 April 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to
More informationTHE ANTHONY GRAINGER INQUIRY FAMILY S NOTE ON THE LAW ON THE TEST FOR SELF-DEFENCE
THE ANTHONY GRAINGER INQUIRY FAMILY S NOTE ON THE LAW ON THE TEST FOR SELF-DEFENCE 1. For convenience, this note repeats the submissions the family make regarding the test for self-defence at an inquiry,
More informationGalliford Try Construction Ltd v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/14
JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Coulson : TCC. 14 th March 2008 Introduction 1. This is an application by the Defendant for an order that paragraphs 39 to 48 inclusive of the witness statement of Mr Joseph Martin,
More informationBefore : LADY JUSTICE ARDEN LORD JUSTICE LEWISON LADY JUSTICE ASPLIN Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 62 Case No: A3/2017/2781 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, COMMERCIAL COURT Mr Richard Salter QC sitting as a Deputy
More informationJUDGMENT. Assets Recovery Agency (Ex-parte) (Jamaica)
Hilary Term [2015] UKPC 1 Privy Council Appeal No 0036 of 2014 JUDGMENT Assets Recovery Agency (Ex-parte) (Jamaica) From the Court of Appeal of Jamaica before Lord Clarke Lord Reed Lord Carnwath Lord Hughes
More informationCollins, J., & Ashworth, A. (2016). Householders, Self-Defence and the Right to Life. Law Quarterly Review, 132,
Collins, J., & Ashworth, A. (2016). Householders, Self-Defence and the Right to Life. Law Quarterly Review, 132, 377-382. Peer reviewed version License (if available): CC BY-NC Link to publication record
More informationJUDGMENT. Meyer (Appellant) v Baynes (Respondent)
Hillary Term [2019] UKPC 3 Privy Council Appeal No 0102 of 2016 JUDGMENT Meyer (Appellant) v Baynes (Respondent) From the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Antigua and Barbuda) before
More informationBEFORE THE IMMIGRATION ADVISERS COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. Decision No: [2015] NZIACDT 79. Reference No: IACDT 020/14
BEFORE THE IMMIGRATION ADVISERS COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL Decision No: [2015] NZIACDT 79 Reference No: IACDT 020/14 IN THE MATTER of a referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing
More informationEQUITABLE REMEDIES IN COMMERCIAL LITIGATION: Concurrent session 1A Constructive trust
EQUITABLE REMEDIES IN COMMERCIAL LITIGATION: Concurrent session 1A Constructive trust LIMITATION PERIODS, DISHONEST ASSISTANCE, KNOWING RECEIPT AND CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS Thursday, 5 March 2015 for the Joint
More informationTHE SECOND LIMB OF BARNES V ADDY
THE SECOND LIMB OF BARNES V ADDY Introduction The second limb of Barnes v Addy 1 provides a cause of action against persons who provide knowing assistance to a trustee or fiduciary who dishonestly and
More informationKing s Research Portal
King s Research Portal Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Chambers, R. N. (2016).
More informationClinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University
Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Address: Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Horlock Building
More informationJudicial Review, Competence and the Rational Basis Theory
Judicial Review, Competence and the Rational Basis Theory by Undergraduate Student Keble College, Oxford This article was published on: 5 February 2005. Citation: Walsh, D, Judicial Review, Competence
More informationCHIEF EXAMINER COMMENTS
CHIEF EXAMINER COMMENTS WITH SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2018 LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW Note to Candidates and Learning Centre Tutors: The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide candidates and learning
More informationWordie Property Co. v Secretary of State for Scotland 1983 SLT (LP Emslie) Somerville v Scottish Ministers 2008 SC (HL) 45
Wordie Property Co. v Secretary of State for Scotland 1983 SLT 345 @ 347-8 (LP Emslie) A decision of the Secretary of State acting within his statutory remit is ultra vires if he has improperly exercised
More informationCourse breakdown 1) Theory 2) Offences 3) Extended liability 4) Defences 5) Procedure
Course breakdown 1) Theory a. Principles, classic model & criminal method b. Element analysis 2) Offences a. Dishonesty b. Unlawful killing c. Non-fatal offences against the person d. Sexual offences 3)
More informationTHE IMPACT OF PRE-AND POST-CONTRACTUAL CONDUCT ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION
THE IMPACT OF PRE-AND POST-CONTRACTUAL CONDUCT ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION 1. Where there is a dispute as to the meaning of a provision in a contract, the role of the court is to determine the meaning
More informationTrade mark Protection Law and Strategy in Hong Kong
Trade mark Protection Law and Strategy in Hong Kong By Barry Yen, So Keung Yip & Sin, Hong Kong First published on Bloomberg BNA I. Introduction Although officially part of China since 1997 Hong Kong maintains
More informationThe Reasonable Person Test An Objective/Subjective Dichotomy
Is it always true that the reasonable person test eliminates the personal equation (Glasgow Corp v Muir, per Lord MacMillan)? In particular, how do you reconcile Philips v William Whiteley with Nettleship
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review NORMAN CHARLES RODRIGUEZ
CLAIM NO 275 OF 2014 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD 2014 IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review AND IN THE MATTER of section 13 of the Belize City Council Act, Cap 85
More informationBefore : MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 4222 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/8318/2013 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Before
More informationRectification Wills and Trusts
Rectification Wills and Trusts Amanda Hardy QC Tax Chambers 15 Old Square Lincoln s Inn Recent cases: Rectification of a will Marley v Rawlings and another [2014] UKSC A husband and wife each executed
More informationGood Faith and Honesty: Bhasin v Hrynew
Good Faith and Honesty: Bhasin v Hrynew June 9, 2015 Toronto, Ontario Marc Kestenberg, Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP Marlo Kravetsky, Senior Counsel, TD Bank Group Deborah Reine, Senior Counsel,
More informationBusiness intelligence. Medical on i-law. July 2017 highlights the best of i-law.com and picompensation.com
i-law.com Business intelligence Medical on i-law July 2017 highlights the best of i-law.com and picompensation.com Contents Written by experts in medical law and clinical negligence, Medical on i-law.com
More informationGARDEN COURT CHAMBERS CIVIL TEAM. Response to Consultation Paper CP25/2012: Judicial Review: proposals for reform
GARDEN COURT CHAMBERS CIVIL TEAM Response to Consultation Paper CP25/2012: Judicial Review: proposals for reform Introduction 1. This is a response to the Consultation Paper on behalf of the Civil Team
More informationNursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing
Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 1 December 2017 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Part(s) of the register:
More informationHEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BAPU, Raisha Registration No: PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2015 Outcome: Erasure and immediate suspension
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BAPU, Raisha Registration No: 110944 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2015 Outcome: Erasure and immediate suspension Raisha BAPU, a dental nurse, NVQ L3 Oral Health Care:Dental
More informationGuidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017)
Guidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017) 1 Introduction 1. Since 1 November 2016, the GDC s Registrar has had the power to review decisions to close cases without referring them to
More informationLondon Tramways v London City Council (1898) AC 375. Their Lordships regard the use of precedent as an indispensable foundation
English Common Law: Structure and Principles Week Four : Judicial Precedent and the role of Judges Additional Notes, Quotes, Case Citations and Web Links for Week Four Lectures London Tramways v London
More informationBefore: LORD JUSTICE GROSS and MR JUSTICE NICOL Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 2737 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/2700/2016 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 03/11/2016
More informationLEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2012
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2012 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationRe: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin
Appeals Circular A11/13 14 06 2013 To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Investigation Committee Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations
More informationTHE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 2014
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 2014 Introduction The consumers now stand in need of greater protection. The consumers fifty years ago needed only a reasonable modicum of skill and knowledge to recognize the
More informationIn accordance with Rule 41 of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004 the hearing was held in public.
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 27/11/2018-29/11/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Stamatios OIKONOMOU GMC reference number: 6072884 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct Ptychio Iatrikes
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 - CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2011
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 - CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2011 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationNew Cap Reinsurance Corporation Ltd v General Cologne Re Australia Ltd and others [2004] NSWSC 781 (26 August 2004)
New Cap Reinsurance Corporation Ltd v General Cologne Re Australia Ltd and others [2004] NSWSC 781 (26 August 2004) Last Updated: 30 August 2004 NEW SOUTH WALES SUPREME COURT CITATION: New Cap Reinsurance
More informationFundamental Dishonesty. Brian McCluggage 3 March 2016
Fundamental Dishonesty Brian McCluggage 3 March 2016 Purpose of talk Clarity as to the 2 species of Fundamental Dishonesty Analysing the nature of the dishonesty in your case Analysing the evidence: is
More informationAdverse possession and Article 1 of the European Convention Panesar, S. and Wood, J. Author post-print (accepted) deposited in CURVE March 2012
Adverse possession and Article 1 of the European Convention Panesar, S. and Wood, J. Author post-print (accepted) deposited in CURVE March 2012 Original citation & hyperlink: Panesar, S. and Wood, J. (2009)
More informationClaimant illegality as a defence to negligence: Gray v Thames Trains and others
Claimant illegality as a defence to negligence: Gray v Thames Trains and others WILLIAMS, K. Available from Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/1003/ This document
More information