|
Sir John Chadwick
Sir John Murray Chadwick PC (born 20 January 1941) is a retired English Lord Justice of Appeal. He also served as the President of the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands, and as a judge of the Dubai International Financial Centre court. Sir John was also standing Counsel to the DTI, and sat as a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey. He also works as an arbitrator. Biography He was born in Cheltenham to Hector George Chadwick and Margaret Corry Laing. He was educated at Rugby School and Magdalene College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar aged 25 in 1966 as a member of the Inner Temple; he became a Queen's Counsel in 1980. He was appointed as a High Court judge in 1991 and received the customary knighthood. He then sat in the Chancery Division for 6 years. He was promoted to the Court of Appeal in 1997, where he was appointed to the Privy Council. He retired from the English Court of Appeal in November 2007. Notable decisions Notable decisions of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
The Right Honourable
''The Right Honourable'' ( abbreviation: ''Rt Hon.'' or variations) is an honorific style traditionally applied to certain persons and collective bodies in the United Kingdom, the former British Empire and the Commonwealth of Nations. The term is predominantly used today as a style associated with the holding of certain senior public offices in the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and to a lesser extent, Australia. ''Right'' in this context is an adverb meaning 'very' or 'fully'. Grammatically, ''The Right Honourable'' is an adjectival phrase which gives information about a person. As such, it is not considered correct to apply it in direct address, nor to use it on its own as a title in place of a name; but rather it is used in the third person along with a name or noun to be modified. ''Right'' may be abbreviated to ''Rt'', and ''Honourable'' to ''Hon.'', or both. ''The'' is sometimes dropped in written abbreviated form, but is always pronounced. Countries with common or ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Rugby School
Rugby School is a public school (English independent boarding school for pupils aged 13–18) in Rugby, Warwickshire, England. Founded in 1567 as a free grammar school for local boys, it is one of the oldest independent schools in Britain. Up to 1667, the school remained in comparative obscurity. Its re-establishment by Thomas Arnold during his time as Headmaster, from 1828 to 1841, was seen as the forerunner of the Victorian public school. It was one of nine prestigious schools investigated by the Clarendon Commission of 1864 and later regulated as one of the seven schools included in the Public Schools Act 1868. The school's alumni – or "Old Rugbeians" – include a UK prime minister, several bishops, prominent poets, scientists, writers and soldiers. Rugby School is the birthplace of rugby football. [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Kent V Kavanagh
is an English land law case, concerning easements. It concerns physically shared amenities with physically divided ownership as to the land or surface on which they rest. Facts Constructed in 1907, numbers 56 and 58 in a semi-detached housing estate were built with a path between them, giving access from a road to the back gardens. The boundary between the two was the mid line of the path. On 14 May 1976 the estate owners sold number 56 to the tenants under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 section 8 i.e. the lessees (tenants) exercised their rights to leasehold enfranchisement (purchase the freehold underlying their house). The tenants had not required an express right of way be included under LRA 1967, section 10(3)(a). In October 1976 number 58 was also enfranchised. In 2003, the occupants of number 56 sued number 58 for a right of way. The learned judge at first instance rejected the claim that any right appertained to number 56 under the Law of Property Act 1925, section 62(2) ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ropaigealach V Barclays Bank Plc
''Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc'' [2000] QB 263 is an English land law case, concerning mortgage arrears and a rare mortgage over a family home which had a right to enter a home (temporarily vacant) and sell it without a court order."No court order needed to take possession" Kate O'Hanlon ''The Independent'' 15 January 1999 Facts On 8 October 1996, the bank informed Mr Ropaigealach by letter that it was taking steps to realise its security. A letter in the same terms was sent to Mrs Ropaigealach at a different address. The bank wrote again, on 7 November to Mr and Mrs Ropaigealach at their home, the security, 16 Windsor Esplanade. Before the end of the year the bank sold it at auction. The Ropaigealachs did not receive the last letter from Barclays (with final demand for payment, as earlier, warning the property would be sold but more imminently) because they were having it renovated and were away. They heard of the impending nature of the sale through a neighbour. Judgment C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Manchester Airport Plc V Dutton
is an English land law case, concerning licences in land. It confirmed the court will attach to licences, even where narrowly drawn to avoid giving away title, a right to occupy provided it meets with the clear commercial purposes of the contract. This means those third parties, in this case protestors, who interfered with such rights must be removed. Facts A second runway was being built and trees had to go on National Trust land. The National Trust gave Manchester Airport plc authority to let subcontractors enter. Mr Dutton and environmental protestors tried to stop the work in protest, and occupied the land. Manchester Airport plc had not put any people on site yet, but still claimed an injunction under Order 113 of the Rules of the Supreme Court for their removal. Judgment Laws LJ held that although the licensee could remove the protestors, ejectment (court bailiffs to assist) under settled law could only be claimed by someone with title or an estate in land. Also, the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Oxley V Hiscock
is a widely-reported English land law and family law case, concerning cohabitants' constructive trusts and their quantification in a home's equity value. Facts Mrs Elayne Oxley had been living, renting in public housing in Page Close, Bean, near Dartford and under the Housing Act 1985 before leaving had lived there long enough to have the statutory right to buy. She quit the tenancy losing this valuable right, which on her own the court found she likely in a few years would have exercised. Instead she formed a new home with Mr Allan Hiscock, a First Iraq War soldier who had been captured in September 1987 at 35 Dickens Close. She paid 28%, he paid 48% of £25,200, a mortgage the balance. They both contributed to household expenditure, improvements, maintenance and paying off the mortgage. The parties fell out. Oxley claimed 50% of the proceeds. Hiscock claimed 22% to her would be appropriate taking into account also improvements he had made. At trial in the Bromley County Court, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Midland Bank Plc V Cooke
''Midland Bank plc v Cooke'' 995is an English land law case, concerning constructive trusts; and at first instance (never appealed) proven undue influence in law as to a secured business loan and later refinance. First, it clarified the law as to wedding gifts. Second, it held that so long as some financial contribution, however, small can be identified as going to the purchase of a home, the court may quantify that contribution in a greater amount than initially given. It opted for a 50:50 division looking at both spouses' conduct in the round. Third, it clarified that if proven the spouses had never discussed any details of joint ownership, where one spouse legally owns the whole family home then the court often should from equitable principles infer agreement as to proportions of their beneficial interests. [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Morphitis V Bernasconi
is a UK insolvency law and company law case, concerning fraudulent trading. Facts TMC Transport (UK) Ltd’s former directors were Mr Bernasconi and Mr Monti. Mr Morphitis was the liquidator. They hired a group of solicitors who advised that the Insolvency Act 1986 rules on trading while insolvent could be circumvented by setting up a new company, resigning, and transferring the assets but not the liabilities there. The case turned on whether knowingly failing to pay a final instalment to their landlord was enough to constitute fraudulent trading under the Insolvency Act 1986, section 213. Judgment Chadwick LJ held that there was not enough to constitute fraud in this case on this single instance. Not every fraudulent transaction makes the business a business carried on with intent to defraud. Moreover, there must be a causal connection between the fraud and the loss, or ‘some nexus between (i) the loss which has been caused to the company’s creditors generally by the c ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Wilson V Secretary Of State For Trade And Industry
is a United Kingdom human rights, consumer protection and contract law case. It made a decision on the applicability of Art 1, Prot 1 of the ECHR and some important observations on the relevance of Hansard in litigation. It also raised a small point on unjust enrichment claims under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Facts Mrs Penelope Wilson pawned (or "pledged") her BMW 318 convertible for £5000 to a two-person company called First County Trust Ltd (i.e. she gave her car as security for a loan of £5000). She had to pay £304.50 per month in interest (a 94.78% pa interest rate). There was also a £250 "document fee", but because Mrs Wilson could not pay it, the fee was added to the loan. Six months later she had to redeem the car by paying the full amount of £7,327, or the car would be sold. She did not pay six months later. When the pawnbroker asked her for the money, instead of paying, she brought an action against him under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to get her car back ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judicial Committee Of The Privy Council
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the highest court of appeal for the Crown Dependencies, the British Overseas Territories, some Commonwealth countries and a few institutions in the United Kingdom. Established on 14 August 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King-in-Council, the Privy Council formerly acted as the court of last resort for the entire British Empire, other than for the United Kingdom itself.P. A. Howell, ''The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 1833–1876: Its Origins, Structure, and Development'', Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1979 Formally a statutory committee of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, the Judicial Committee consists of senior judges who are Privy Councillors; they are predominantly Justices of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and senior judges from the Commonwealth of Nations. Although it is often simply referred to as the 'Privy Council', the Judicial Committee is only one cons ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Court Of Appeal (England And Wales)
The Court of Appeal (formally "His Majesty's Court of Appeal in England", commonly cited as "CA", "EWCA" or "CoA") is the highest court within the Senior Courts of England and Wales, and second in the legal system of England and Wales only to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Court of Appeal was created in 1875, and today comprises 39 Lord Justices of Appeal and Lady Justices of Appeal. The court has two divisions, Criminal and Civil, led by the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls and Records of the Chancery of England respectively. Criminal appeals are heard in the Criminal Division, and civil appeals in the Civil Division. The Criminal Division hears appeals from the Crown Court, while the Civil Division hears appeals from the County Court, High Court of Justice and Family Court. Permission to appeal is normally required from either the lower court or the Court of Appeal itself; and with permission, further appeal may lie to the Supreme Court. The C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Knight Bachelor
The title of Knight Bachelor is the basic rank granted to a man who has been knighted by the monarch but not inducted as a member of one of the organised orders of chivalry; it is a part of the British honours system. Knights Bachelor are the most ancient sort of British knight (the rank existed during the 13th-century reign of King Henry III), but Knights Bachelor rank below knights of chivalric orders. A man who is knighted is formally addressed as "Sir irst Name urname or "Sir irst Name and his wife as "Lady urname. Criteria Knighthood is usually conferred for public service; amongst its recipients are all male judges of His Majesty's High Court of Justice in England. It is possible to be a Knight Bachelor and a junior member of an order of chivalry without being a knight of that order; this situation has become rather common, especially among those recognized for achievements in entertainment. For instance, Sir Michael Gambon, Sir Derek Jacobi, Sir Anthony Hopkins, Sir ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
_(cropped).jpg "Click for more on -> The Right Honourable")
