This websites use cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For more details about cookies and how to manage them, see our cookie policy.

Cases Timothy Evans

(1) John Anthony Popely (2) Andrew Popely v (1) Ronald Anthony Popely (2) Cosmos Trust Ltd (3) Casterbidge Properties Ltd (2019)

Judgment Date: 13 Jun 2019

A "double derivative" claim by the beneficiaries of the trust which held a minority shareholding in a company failed where the claimants could not show that the defendant had acted as a de facto director of the company or that he had acted fraudulently.

View case

Sueda Yusuf (Claimant) v (1) Tanju Yusuf (2) Pekalp Properties Ltd (Defendants/Part 20 Claimants) & Ors (2019)

Judgment Date: 28 Jan 2019

In a dispute relating to a family-owned property company, the court granted an unfair prejudice petition and determined issues on the evidence, including the individual shareholdings of the respective family members and whether any were held on trust, and the status of purported share transfer and trust documentation.

View case

Gary Joseph McDonald v Michelle Rose & 8 Ors (2019)

Judgment Date: 15 Jan 2019

The Court of Appeal gave guidance on the procedure to be followed by parties wishing to seek permission from a lower court to appeal to an appeal court.

View case

(1) John Anthony Popely (2) Andrew Popely v (1) Ronald Albert Popely (2) Cosmos Trust Ltd (3) Casterbridge Properties Ltd (2018)

Judgment Date: 21 Feb 2018

Where a master heard an application in 2017 for permission to continue a claim as a derivative action, CPR PD 19C had not required him to refer the application to a judge. The application to continue the claim as a derivative action had originally been made in 2006, before the Practice Direction's introduction; the Practice Direction's transitional provisions provided that the old rules, which had not required transfer to a judge, would continue to apply to pre-existing derivative claims.

View case

D Ltd v A & Ors (2017)

Judgment Date: 28 Jul 2017

A judge's decision to stay private criminal proceedings as an abuse of process could not stand where there was an error of law and principle in her approach in reaching the decision she reached, and in consequence her ruling was one which it was not reasonable for her to have made.

View case

Jonathan Smyth v St Andrew’s Insurance Plc (2012)

Judgment Date: 17 Sep 2012

Insurers were liable to indemnify a home-owner under the terms of an insurance policy for fire damage to his property where the likely cause of the fire was a cigarette accidentally discarded by a lodger, as opposed to the home owner's spouse deliberately starting the fire.

View case

Philip Norman McCall v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2008)

Judgment Date: 07 Apr 2008

Although the tending and letting of fields to graziers constituted a business, it was one which consisted wholly or mainly of the holding of an investment and so the land was not a relevant business property for the purposes of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 s.105.

View case

Grace Ellen Carr & Ors v Jacqueline Isard & Ors (2006)

Judgment Date: 23 Nov 2006

The fact that a wife had made a will which appeared to deal with her share of the matrimonial home was not enough to give rise to an inference that the joint tenancy of the property had been severed.

View case

Hill (As Trustee In Bankruptcy Of Nurkowski) v Spread Trustee Company Ltd & Anor (2006)

Judgment Date: 12 May 2006

The limitation period in respect of a claim by a trustee in bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 1986 s.423 ran from the date of the bankruptcy order.

View case

Richard John Hill v Spread Trustee Company & Ors (2005)

Judgment Date: 11 Feb 2005

One of the purposes of making a settlement of land on trust was to prejudice the interests of the Inland Revenue within the Insolvency Act 1986 s.423.

View case