Without prejudice: opening shots and negotiating documents

Reviews case law which has provided guidance on the law relating to without prejudice communications in landlord and tenant disputes. Considers: (1) the extent to which without prejudice communications are inadmissible in subsequent litigation; (2) exceptions to the without prejudice rule; (3) the specific context in which the rule applies; (4) the need for a dispute or negotiation to have arisen; (5) the prohibition on using "without prejudice" as an opening shot; and (6) the effect of changing the negotiating basis.

Beneficial ownership and detriment

Considers the factors which contribute to a court finding that a cohabitee has a beneficial interest in property, in particular the detriment which is required to establish a constructive trust, with reference to the Chancery Division decision in Levi v Levi and previous case law. Outlines the provisions on express or inferred common intention. Considers whether a loan of money from the non-owning to the owning cohabitant, made at a lower level than commercial loans, towards the purchase the property was sufficient detriment to entitle her to proceeds of sale from the property.

Resulting trusts, joint borrowers and beneficial share

Reviews case law illustrating the courts' approach to beneficial ownership of property purchased in joint name by means of a joint mortgage but without any declaration of beneficial interest, the resulting trust and joint beneficial interest presumptions. Contrast the approach adopted in cases where one party made no contribution to the mortgage payments with those where both parties made a contribution. Highlights the courts' treatment of the right to buy discount afforded tenant purchasers and property purchased as a commercial venture rather than a home.

Paying the price for loss of light

Considers the Court of Appeal ruling in Forsyth-Grant v Allen on the principles to be applied in assessing damages for the loss of light. Outlines the method for calculating damages for loss of right to light, the type of amenity which will be included in calculations for loss of amenity and the process applied in this case for assessing damages arising from the loss of profits that would have been made by the owner of the right to light if they had negotiated to relax the covenant, with reference to case law. Notes the limits to damages available for hypothetical loss and the difference between this award of profits and an account of profits.

Expectations and promises

Discusses the Chancery Division judgment in Thorner v Curtis on a claim by an unpaid farm worker, who was led to expect that he would inherit the farm. Examines whether proprietary estoppel could be proved even if the deceased landowner made no express promise. Reviews case law on proprietary estoppel.

Return of deposits

Explores case law illustrating the circumstances in which the courts are likely to order the return of a deposit in the event of a buyer's default. Notes the unwillingness of the courts to apply the rule on penalties to deposits and discusses the court's discretion under the Law of Property Act 1925 s.49(2) to order repayment. Focuses on the Chancery Division ruling in Aribisala v St James Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Ltd giving guidance on the circumstances in which the discretion under s.49(2) should be exercised.

Testamentary promises

Comments on the Court of Appeal ruling in Thorner v Curtis on whether, where the owner of a farm died intestate, the claimant, who had worked on the farm for years and had come to believe that he would inherit the farm, could rely on proprietary estoppel based on hints and remarks made over the years by the deceased, even though the deceased had made no express promise. Reviews case law on proprietary estoppel.

The legal pendulum swings back

Comments on the Court of Appeal judgment in Abou-Rahmah v Abacha on liability for dishonest assistance to a breach of trust. Discusses whether an objective standard should apply to determine whether the accessory acted dishonestly. Reviews case law, examining whether the combined test proposed in the House of Lords judgment in Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley is still good law.

Estoppel and the interests of the prospective beneficiary

Reviews case law concerning proprietary and testamentary estoppel. Examines two cases in which an elderly person made certain comments and encouraged an understanding between themselves and the claimants, that on death properties would be left to them, but where the requisite legal formalities were not undertaken. Illustrates the contrasting courts' approach, once estoppel has been established, in finding the appropriate remedy to satisfy and considers the challenges faced by the courts in differentiating between constructive trust and proprietary estoppel. [From Legal Journals Index]

What's exceptional?

Outlines the factors which the court needs to consider when deciding whether to grant an application for the sale of a property where the owner becomes bankrupt. Considers the different priorities to be given to the claims of trustees in bankruptcy and to secure lenders, with reference to the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 ss.14 and 15, the Insolvency Act 1986 s.355A, and the exceptional circumstances in which claims will not be granted. Explores case law, in particular the Court of Appeal ruling in Avis v Turner, and the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998. [From Legal Journals Index]

Constructive notice and independent legal advice: a study of lending institution practice

Cases on when lending institutions will be put on inquiry as to circumstances giving rise to presumption of undue influence, and results of research on lending practice of residential mortgage lenders in light of case law. [From Legal Journals Index]

A connection too far

Examines the test for vicarious liability for intentional torts laid down by the House of Lords in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd requiring a close connection between an employee's tort and his employment. Reviews subsequent case law, highlighting inconsistencies in the courts' approach as to whether a close connection existed. Asks whether the cases suggest that the courts are applying a separate test based on the fairness of holding the employer liable. [From Legal Journals Index]

Removing children from the care of adults with diagnosed mental illnesses - a clash of human rights?

Health and social services providers throughout Europe are increasingly aware of the possibility of litigation from service users arising from the application of a human rights perspective to public service provision. The substantial body of case law that has emerged from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is used regularly as the basis for this litigation at national and European levels. This paper presents an analysis of ECHR cases related to breaches of human rights that occurred when children were taken into care from families in which one or both parents had a diagnosed mental illness. The issues raised by these cases include the following: how to ensure that the right to family life is protected for adults with mental illnesses; how to ensure access and opportunities for parents to continue bonding with children in care; and how to avoid damaging children while giving time for a proper assessment of the care situation.

Cinderella comes to the Ball: Article 14 and the right to non-discrimination in the ECHR

Article 14 ECHR has often been derided as a Cinderella provision, but during the last few years, this has started to change. This article examines how Article 14 has developed, and may live up to its potential as a powerful non-discrimination principle. The case law developments in relation to the “ambit” requirement in Article 14, the development of indirect discrimination case law, and the approval of positive action, all point to a more substantive conception of equality, which offers protection to disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.

Personal Injury Liability in Sport: Emerging Trends

Violent play during the course of a game or sport is not a new phenomenon; accompanying legal proceedings are. This article considers personal injury liability for injuries inflicted by a participant upon an opponent during a sporting pursuit. The jurisdictional focus is on England and Wales. The sporting emphasis of the article is on competitive, body contact games. The legal emphasis is on the tort of negligence. Analogous to the law of criminal assault, breach of "implied sporting consent" or the volenti of the claimant will be seen as central in application, as assessed through a number of objective criteria, including the skill level of the injuring party and whether that defendant was acting in "reckless disregard" of the claimant's safety. These criteria or evidential guidelines, which emerge from a careful doctrinal analysis of the relevant case law, are seen as crucial to the examination of the appropriate degree of care in negligence within the prevailing circumstances of sport. The article also searches for some theoretical coherency within the case law, premising it on Fletcher's idea of reciprocal risk-taking. In addition, the underlying policy-related issue of sport's social utility is discussed, as are practical matters relating to vicarious liability, insurance and the measure of damages for "lost sporting opportunity". Moreover, it will be shown that personal injury claims relating to sports participant liability now extend to a consideration of the duties of coaches, referees, sports governing bodies and schools. Finally, this article is set against the backdrop of an apparently spiralling "compensation culture" and the concomitant threat that that "blame culture" poses for the future promotion, operation and administration of sport.