You are here

Bloomsburry Family law

Law Brief

Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission [2005] UKHL 73

A minister of the Church of Scotland was employed under a contract personally to execute work within the meaning in s 82(1), Sex Discrimination Act 1975. The minister’s sex discrimination claim against the church did not constitute a spiritual matter under s 3 Church of Scotland Act 1921, and accordingly the church did not have exclusive jurisdiction to deal with the claim.

R v Neil Jones; R v Amandip Singh Chandi; R v Hardeep Singh Multani; R v Sukhjiwan Singh Khangura; R v Jaswinder Singh Dosanjh; R v Joseph Clifford Ashman; R v Mark Hobson [2005] EWCA Crim 3115

The scheme of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, Sched 21 was that the trial judge had first to determine the starting point and then consider whether it was appropriate to adjust the sentence upwards or downwards to take account of aggravating or mitigating factors. That approach was not possible in respect of a whole life order. A whole life order should be imposed where the seriousness of the offending was so exceptionally high that just punishment required the offender to be kept in prison for the rest of his life.

Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd v Larnell (Insurances) Ltd (In Creditors' Voluntary Liquidation) [2005] EWCA Civ 1408

A claim by a third party against an insolvent debtor in order to establish the liability of the insured for the purposes of the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 was one to which the normal principles of limitation in insolvency applied, namely that if it was not statute-barred at the commencement of the winding up it did not become statute-barred by the passage of further time thereafter.

Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v Walker-Fox [2005] EWCA Civ 1441

The principles of law enunciated in Emmott v Minister of Social Welfare (1991) ECR I-5475 should be confined to very exceptional circumstances, namely, where in some unconscionable way the state had obstructed the exercise of the individual's judicial remedy or contributed to his failure to exercise it. Such conduct would make it a breach of the principle of effectiveness. The secretary of state in the instant case had not behaved unfairly in denying winter fuel payments to an individual.

A (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] EWCA Civ 1438

The jurisdiction of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal was more flexible than that of the appellate courts but in relation to an appeal by the secretary of state, even if an obvious point had been missed, it would be wrong to allow it to be taken for the first time on appeal if it depended on the finding of further facts that were left uncertain by the decision. But if the facts were clear then it was the duty of the tribunal to ensure that the correct legal test was applied.

Channon v Perkins (a Firm) (2005)

Where a will was valid on its face and the witnesses to it accepted that the signatures that appeared on it were their own, but had no recollection of the execution of the will, taking the evidence as a whole a judge could not properly have reached the conclusion that such evidence satisfied the high test to rebut the presumption of due execution.

Wilderbrook Ltd v Oluwu [2005] EWCA Civ 1361

To rebut the presumption that time was not of the essence in rent review clauses, the contra-indications had to be clear and explicit. Where a paragraph was inserted in the lease that was plainly intended to limit deeming provisions that would otherwise be clear contra-indications, its effect was to deprive the contra-indications relied on of the clarity required to rebut the presumption, which accordingly operated.