B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE DAVIS MR JUSTICE CRANSTON
|
|
- Berenice Long
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 2937 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION DIVISIONAL COURT CO/3452/2007 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Thursday, 31 July 2014 B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE DAVIS MR JUSTICE CRANSTON Between: GREGORY Claimant v CITY UNIVERSITY LONDON & OTHERS Defendant Computer-Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of WordWave International Limited A Merrill Communications Company 165 Fleet Street London EC4A 2DY Tel No: Fax No: (Official Shorthand Writers to the Court) The Claimant did not appear and was not represented Mr P Gott, QC (instructed by Solicitors Regulation Authority) appeared on behalf of the Interested Party J U D G M E N T (As approved by the court) Crown copyright 1. LORD JUSTICE DAVIS: By the provisions of Rule 3.3 of the Civil Procedure Rules the court is empowered, broadly speaking, to make orders of its own motion. The court is further empowered by the provisions of Rule 3.11, which in effect incorporates the
2 provisions of practice direction 3C, to make a civil restraint order in the terms and on the bases there provided. 2. At the beginning of June 2014, the court wrote to Mr Kevin Gregory indicating that it was minded to make a civil restraint order against him with regard to various matters which had been before the court and which were the subject of a schedule which was in due course provided to Mr Gregory. He was given the opportunity to respond to this proposal at a hearing listed for 12 June In the event an adjournment was requested by Mr Gregory and was granted, the matter being rescheduled for re-hearing on 8 July In the meantime, similar letters had been sent to entities closely connected with Mr Gregory, being Charles Henry & Co, which is the trading name of a charity called Legal Action, a company limited by guarantee of which Mr Gregory is currently a trustee, and Augustine Housing Trust, also a registered charity and also in respect of which Mr Gregory is currently a trustee. In the event, the hearing was scheduled for 8 July was further adjourned and has since been listed for hearing today before this court. 4. In the interim period Mr Gregory has again written letters to this court seeking an adjournment. Amongst other things, he said that he had been in communication with his legal expenses or indemnity insurers, who he says were asking for details which he claims he was unable to provide in the absence of further details being provided by the court itself. Notwithstanding a request from the court, Mr Gregory declined to name those insurers. In the event, and very courteously, those insurers have attended before us today, not to address us through counsel or solicitors or anything like that, but by Mr Court, and he has identified them as Plexus Law. We understand that they provide certain trustee indemnity insurance for Legal Action and Augustine Housing Trust, and also professional indemnity insurance for Charles Henry & Co, the trading name of Legal Action. 5. Yesterday and today, yet further letters have been received from Mr Gregory seeking an adjournment. Initially he had written on 25 July setting out why he wanted an adjournment and claiming that, in effect, he had not been provided with enough details enabling him to know the case he had to meet. We are entirely unimpressed by that. Mr Gregory, as we will come on to account, is a person well-versed in the ways of the law and of the courts. He has had the schedule, he has had the communications of the court, he knows perfectly well the case he has to meet respectively. 6. By letter dated 30 July, Mr Gregory wrote a further letter to the court saying: "No disrespect is intended and I request that my attendance be excused as I am suffering from stress and anxiety because of this matter and will be seeing a doctor about my condition." He then goes on to say that this has been compounded by, as he says, his fiancée having
3 received a distressing letter concerning the medical condition of their child. 7. Reasons for making his request, that is his request that he be excused from attendance, further included his assertion that he had not received various documents and other information. In his previous letters he also made a suggestion that his Article 6 and Article 14 rights were being violated or were at least engaged and he said that various other matters should be taken into account. He also said that he had been advised that various cases in the list had been taken back by the clients now acting in person. He also says: "Moreover, again, I wish you to note that our insurers have said that they are unable to act for us in a representative capacity as they just do not know what this is about. I have not seen any orders mentioned in the schedule and have seen any documents in court in regard to this matter." Mr Gregory repeats his suggestion that the court has not provided sufficient information to him, a suggestion which, speaking for myself, I would reject. 8. A yet further detailed letter, notwithstanding the stress and anxiety he claims to be suffering, was sent by Mr Gregory today. This now encloses a medical certificate. The certificate is from a medical practice in Romford. It is signed by a doctor, albeit he is not one of the partners named as being partners in the practice. It says that Mr Gregory is suffering from stress and anxiety. The certificate is dated 30 July but, perhaps rather oddly, the dates of incapacity are given as 31 July to 4 August. 9. In addition to relying on that, Mr Gregory in effect repeats his previous requests, which are to be taken as a request for an adjournment and not simply a request to be excused for his non-attendance, relying not only on his asserted ill-health but also making points about proposals that trustees, or new trustees, are being appointed in respect either of Legal Action or of Augustine Housing Trust or both; and it is said there has been no time for the trustees of Legal Action to convene the necessary meetings and, likewise, it is to be inferred, nor have Augustine Housing Trust. Various other points are made in support of his request for an adjournment of the hearing today. 10. So far as Mr Gregory himself is concerned, I am not impressed by these grounds for an adjournment. As I have said, he knows perfectly well the case he has had to meet. He has never, until very recently, suggested that he was suffering from any kind of medical incapacity such that he cannot attend. I am not persuaded that the materials he has now put forward are sufficient to warrant an adjournment and he has always been in a position to instruct, for himself, solicitors and/or counsel to appear on his behalf. I am not prepared to grant an adjournment so far as he is concerned. 11. So far as the two charities are concerned, the position does, in the light of what Mr Gregory says, potentially stand on a somewhat different footing: although I must say I have a degree of scepticism about what is said. However, so far as those two bodies are concerned, we do stand on a different footing; and, having regard to what Mr Gregory
4 has asserted and having regard also, as I will come on to say, to their somewhat lesser involvement in applications which have been certified as totally without merit, I think the right course is to adjourn this matter so far as they are concerned to a later date to be fixed. But that is not the position with regard to Mr Gregory, I repeat, and this hearing today will as against him therefore proceed and has proceeded. I should add that the names of Mr Gregory, as well as the names of the two charities, were called outside court and none has responded. 12. The background shortly put is this. Mr Gregory undoubtedly has had a longstanding involvement, both directly and indirectly, in legal disputes and litigation and, as I have already indicated, he is plainly well-versed in court proceedings. He has also been connected with various other entities or firms, including one for example called Mahoney Mea, which had acted in the context of litigation with which he has been connected. But I do not think I need dwell further on that particular aspect. 13. At all events, what did happen was that Mr Gregory in 2006 was required to appear before a panel of a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in proceedings brought under s.43 of the Solicitors Act The Tribunal, after a hearing, decided on 17 July 2006 that no solicitor or other relevant practice should employ Mr Gregory without permission of the Law Society and subject to the conditions there specified. (I am not setting out the precise terms of the order made but that was broadly the gist of it.) It was found by the Tribunal, and again, I summarise, that Mr Gregory had falsely represented that he was a solicitor, or a trainee solicitor, or acting as a solicitor, although the Tribunal did not find that he had been positively dishonest in this regard. A further allegation found to be proved was that he had endeavoured to claim excessive legal costs in a particular case. Various other allegations were not ruled on for want of jurisdiction. 14. There was an appeal which came before a Divisional Court comprising Hughes LJ and Treacy J, as he then was. In giving the first judgment, which was dated 28 June 2007, Treacy J, with whom Hughes LJ agreed albeit adding certain observations, said this: "26. I have come to the conclusion that the Tribunal was entitled to decide that a section 43 order was appropriate. I do not consider that it was wrong or unreasonable to have done so, even having regard to the mitigating circumstances it identified. The Tribunal was looking at an accumulation of conduct which led it to conclude it would not be desirable for Mr Gregory to be employed by a solicitor in connection with his practice. The reckless use of inappropriate descriptions of himself in allegation 1, coupled with the pursuit of the claim of costs which had never been the subject of any agreement, in circumstances where he used the vehicle of a solicitor's firm to pursue that unjustified claim against his former girlfriend, are capable of falling within the subsection. This is particularly so when the appellant had been party to the assignment to the solicitors, which is a document which appears to be highly questionable
5 and to contain one, if not two, material false statements, and when the invoice which was alleged to evidence the agreement between himself and his ex-girlfriend was also questionable in nature. 27. In the end, this was a matter for the Tribunal to assess. The level of misconduct on the part of the appellant was, to my mind, established, notwithstanding the fact that he had deluded himself into the impossible assertion which he put forward. The overall circumstances were such that a need was demonstrated, by reason of his conduct, for this individual to work under closer supervision if he is to work in the future in the employment of a solicitor. For those reasons, I would dismiss this appeal." We understand that the s.43 order is still in force. 15. So far as Legal Action which uses the trading name of Charles Henry & Co is concerned, it is registered as a charity under number and Mr Gregory is, as I have said, one of the trustees. It appears that the objects of the charity are, in effect: "... To relieve impecunious persons by providing them with legal facilities, particularly in connection with a possible or actual claim or defence before a Tribunal in England and Wales for which they could not otherwise obtain by reason of their impecuniously." 16. It appears to be the case that, as a charity, Legal Action has the benefit, as it were, of operating by reference to s.23 of the Legal Services Act 2007 under the current transitional provisions. As a charity Legal Action is, it would appear, entitled to carry on reserved legal activities as defined and as such it is not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority although is subject to the supervision of the Charity Commission. Mr Gott, QC has very helpfully appeared on behalf of the SRA before us today and has explained the general position: which has also helpfully been set out in a letter previously sent by the solicitors for the SRA to this court. 17. It thus seems that Legal Action as a registered charity is not required to conduct litigation with the authorisation of the SRA or to operate under its supervision or control. Further, it seems to be the case, and at all events I am prepared to accept for present purposes, that in so acting there is no infringement of the s.43 order made on 17 July 2006 insofar as it relates to Mr Gregory. 18. We have been told that the activities of Legal Action have been referred to the Charity Commission. This was, indeed, some years ago and it is somewhat disconcerting that even now, in the middle of August 2014, no firm or decisive action seems to have matured or accrued as a result: although it apparently has been said that an action plan has been proposed, albeit it may be that it has not thus far been complied with. It should perhaps also be added that it has been said that a number of individuals have been working as solicitors for Charles Henry & Co. Those solicitors do prospectively
6 come under the auspices of the SRA and we gather that letters have been sent to them requesting information and documentation. Those letters have not been productive. It is not necessary to go into further details today; but that remains a matter for the SRA to pursue as it sees fit. 19. Turning to Augustine Housing Trust, as we have said, that is a charity and Mr Gregory is one of the trustees. Its objects apparently include "relieving hardship, distress and need of those threatened with homelessness". Accounts for the last two years are overdue. 20. The schedule which has been provided and which has been sent to Mr Gregory as well as to Charles Henry & Co and Augustine Housing Trust show a great number of cases in which the names of Charles Henry & Co, Mr Gregory himself and Augustine Housing Trust appear and, in respect of which, numerous proceedings or applications have failed and sometimes badly so. A copy of that schedule is to be taken as appended to this judgment of mine. It also seems quite plain that Charles Henry & Co have on occasion been retained to act on behalf of the various parties named as claimants in the relevant proceedings. 21. There are numerous defects identified. These, amongst other things, include failure to comply with court orders, failure to provide proper updates to court staff on request, serious procedural deficiencies, and the like. 22. The terms of the practice direction, insofar as it relates to the power of the court to make a general civil restraint order, are set out in paragraph 4.1 and following of the practice direction. In the relevant respects, it provides: "A general civil restraint order may be made by... where the party against whom the order is made persists in issuing claims or making applications which are totally without merit, in circumstances where an extended civil restraint order would not be sufficient or appropriate." 23. Going through the schedule one can identify at least four cases in which Mr Gregory himself has been involved as party in claims or applications which have been so certified. The first can be taken as number 11 from that schedule. These were proceedings under title heading CO/8279/2006 and the defendant was the Department of Constitutional Affairs. By those proceedings, putting it shortly, Mr Gregory sought permission to challenge what he said had been a decision dated 10 July 2006 by the Department in response to an sent relating to s.43 of the Solicitors Act It is not necessary to go into details. Suffice it to say that the application was refused by Gibbs J on the papers on 27 February 2007 and certified as totally without merit, the judge saying that the Department's letter had not been a decision even amenable to judicial review. 24. There is then another matter, which is number 38 on the schedule. Again, Mr Gregory was the party and the defendant there was the Press Complaints Commission. Sullivan
7 J refused permission on the papers and certified as totally without merit on the 12 October More recently, this is number 51 in the schedule, an application was made in proceedings of which Mr Gregory was party, the defendant being the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis. It was refused by Swift J on 11 June This related to an appeal against the decision of Master Yoxall not to grant an application for a jury trial in proceedings against the Metropolitan Police in which Mr Gregory was alleging false arrest and malicious prosecution. The application notice was refused by the judge as totally without merit was an application notice seeking to stay an appeal and pending proceedings in other cases. 26. Then, number 52 on the schedule, in proceedings brought by Mr Gregory against a Mr Benham and others on 10 June 2014, Swift J refused an application notice corresponding to the previous one and, again, certified as totally without merit. 27. It may be noted that these applications and proceedings involved a broad range of litigation against various differing parties. This also, in my view, is to be put in the background of Mr Gregory's extensive involvement, either directly or indirectly, in an amount of other litigation which had come to grief. 28. I should add that, in a number of instances, proceedings or applications have been dismissed as totally without merit involving an individual called Mr Keith Gregory. There has been some suggestion by a High Court Judge in a previous case that Mr Keith Gregory is one and the same as Mr Kevin Gregory. Mr Kevin Gregory has disputed that: although of course he has not been before us to explain himself on this. In the circumstances, for present purposes I proceed on the footing that Mr Keith Gregory is not to be quoted with Mr Kevin Gregory, although there may hereafter need to be a degree of enquiry as to that. 29. In my view the materials available indicate that this is a proper case for making a general civil restraint order against Mr Gregory. The facts and the schedule speak for themselves. He has persisted over a very lengthy period of time in issuing claims or making applications of various kinds which are totally without merit. He was doing that in 2007, he has been doing that in the course of this year. Plainly, in my view, the circumstances are such that an extended civil restraint order would not be sufficient or appropriate. In my view, therefore, it is appropriate to make a general civil restraint order against Mr Gregory in the terms as provided for under the Rules. Any application for permission in consequence thereof should be directed to Cranston J, I propose, as the nominated judge. So far as Augustine Housing Trust and Legal Action are concerned, as I have indicated, I would adjourn the matter for a later date, pending developments in their obtaining new trustees as Mr Gregory has indicated will occur. 30. I would only add this. Mr Gott has reminded the court that there are of course various other powers and remedies available to various bodies with regard to conduct and activities of the kind which seem to be evidenced here. But, for today's purposes, this
8 court is only concerned with its powers to make a civil restraint order as previously notified to Mr Gregory. I would make an order accordingly. 31. MR JUSTICE CRANSTON: I agree.
Before: LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN and - THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER
Case No: A2/2010/2941 Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Civ 592 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Before: LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN Royal Courts of Justice
Before: LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE and LORD JUSTICE LLOYD Between: The QUEEN on the Application of RS.
Case No: C4/2008/3131 Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWCA Civ 688 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT (MR STUART ISAACS) Royal Courts
B E F O R E: LORD JUSTICE SEDLEY LORD JUSTICE LATHAM LORD JUSTICE WALL JOVAN SHKEMBI. -v-
Neutral Citation Number: [2005] EWCA Civ 1592 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT C5/2005/0960 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London,
Before: SIR TERENCE ETHERTON, MR LADY JUSTICE RAFFERTY and LADY JUSTICE SHARP Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 78 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT MR JUSTICE WALKER CO/4607/2014 Before: Case No: C1/2015/2746
No: D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL. B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE MOSES
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Crim 2055 No: 201102990 D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL Thursday, 14 June 2012 B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CO/3716/2000 QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (DIVISIONAL COURT) Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2.
Neutral Citation Number: [2001] EWHC Admin 107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CO/3716/2000 QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (DIVISIONAL COURT) Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Monday 12 February 2001 B e
HEARING DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Jawad Raza Heard on: Thursday 7 and Friday 8 June 2018 Location: ACCA Head Offices,
Appellant s notice (All appeals except small claims track appeals and appeals to the Family Division of the High Court)
Appellant s notice (All appeals except small claims track appeals and appeals to the Family Division of the High Court) Appeal Court Ref.. Date filed For Court use only tes for guidance are available which
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG. Between MR ABDUL KADIR SAID. and. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent
IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00950/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Oral determination given immediately following the hearing
Before: THE HONOURABLE SIR STEPHEN STEWART MR GODWIN BUSUTTIL DR. ROSEMARY GILLESPIE
APPEAL TO THE VISITORS TO THE INNS OF COURT ON APPEAL FROM THE DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL OF THE COUNCIL OF THE INNS OF COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 09/10/2013 Before: THE HONOURABLE
ALBON ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING LIMITED. - and - Sitting in public at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2A 2LL on 16 June 2017
[17] UKFTT 60 (TC) TC06002 Appeal number:tc/14/01804 PROCEDURE costs complex case whether appellant opted out of liability for costs within 28 days of receiving notice of allocation as a complex case date
TC05838 Appeal number: TC/2013/05285
[17] UKFTT 0373 (TC) TC0838 Appeal number: TC/13/028 INCOME TAX penalty for failure to make returns - Whether reasonable excuse for late submission of self-assessment tax return-yes FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
The Panel found Dr Brew s fitness to practise was impaired and determined to erase his name from the Register.
Appeals Circular A 04 /15 08 May 2015 To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations Employer Liaison Advisers
DAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985 AND S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. IN THE
Before : MASTER GORDON-SAKER Senior Costs Judge Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC B13 (Costs) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE Case No: AGS/1503814 Royal Courts of Justice, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 17 th August 2015 Before :
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Dawson v Jewiss; Thompson v Jewiss [2004] QCA 374 PARTIES: STUART BEVAN DAWSON (plaintiff/respondent) v HENRY WILLIAM JEWISS also known as HARRY JEWISS (defendant/appellant)
B e f o r e: MR JUSTICE KING. HIS HONOUR JUDGE WARWICK MCKINNON (Sitting as a judge of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division) R E G I N A
Neutral Citation Number: [2007] EWCA Crim 2715 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION No: 200704326 A4 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL Thursday, 25th October 2007 B e f o r e: MR JUSTICE
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Stephen Jeremy Bache Heard on: 27 July 2015 Location: Committee: Legal Adviser: Persons
Before : LORD JUSTICE GOLDRING LORD JUSTICE AIKENS and LORD JUSTICE McCOMBE Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWCA Civ 585 Case No: C1/2012/1950 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN S BENCH (ADMINISTRATIVE COURT) MR JUSTICE HOLMAN [2012] EWHC 1303 (Admin)
Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE BIDDER QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge Between: - and -
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWHC 2943 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/7149/2010 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 10/11/2011
Part II: Handling Conflicts of Interest between Insured and Insurer: The Lawyer s Dilemma
Handling Professional Indemnity Coverage Issues in Cases of Suspected Fraud Part II: Handling Conflicts of Interest between Insured and Insurer: The Lawyer s Dilemma Alison Padfield Devereux A. Introduction
Before: LORD JUSTICE LAWS LORD JUSTICE LLOYD and LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN Between: SM ( IRAN ) - and -
Case No: C5/2009/2183 Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWCA Civ 371 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL ( CIVIL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL [AIT NO: AA/05321/2008; AA/05323/2008] Before:
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) PA/08153/2017 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) PA/08153/2017 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 15 March 2018 On 11 May 2018 Before DEPUTY UPPER
ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL
RS and SS (Exclusion of appellant from hearing) Pakistan [2008] UKAIT 00012 ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Date of Hearing: 18 December 2007 Before: Mr C M G
B e f o r e: MR JUSTICE JEREMY BAKER MR JUSTICE GOSS R E G I N A ISAAC OLARINOYE
Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Crim 1503 No: 2015/2745/A3 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL Friday, 7 August 2015 B e f o r e: MR JUSTICE JEREMY
Before : LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE LORD JUSTICE PATTEN and MR JUSTICE ROTH Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Civ 717 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CHANCERY DIVISION, COMPANIES COURT MR RICHARD SHELDON QC (SITTING AS A DEPUTY
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 12 January 2016 On 27 January Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE I A LEWIS. Between
IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 12 January 2016 On 27 January 2016 Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL
Before: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 1966 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/2656/2017 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 27/07/2018
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DC/00014/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DC/00014/2016 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Bradford Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 12 March 2018 On 27 April 2018 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL
Mr S complains about Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited s decision to withdraw funding for his claim.
complaint Mr S complains about Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited s decision to withdraw funding for his claim. background I issued a provisional decision on this complaint in December 2015. An extract
Before : MR JUSTICE FANCOURT Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 48 (Ch) Case No: CH-2017-000105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES CHANCERY APPEALS (ChD) ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT
Ombudsman s Determination
Ombudsman s Determination Applicant Scheme Respondent(s) Mr X Police Injury Benefit Scheme (Northern Ireland) Northern Ireland Policing Board (NIPB) Complaint summary Mr X has complained that the NIPB
JUDGMENT ON AN AGREED OUTCOME
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11755-2017 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and ANDREW JOHN PUDDICOMBE Respondent Before: Mr D. Green
Income tax pensions late notification of claim for enhanced protection whether reasonable excuse on the facts, yes appeal allowed.
[12] UKFTT 291 (TC) TC01979 Appeal number: TC/11/02298 Income tax pensions late notification of claim for enhanced protection whether reasonable excuse on the facts, yes appeal allowed FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
Judgment As Approved by the Court
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 335 Case No: B2/2013/2291 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE CENTRAL LONDON COUNTY COURT His Honour Judge Hand QC (Case No. 2CL 20031) Royal
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 13 March 2018 On 19 March Before
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: HU/00402/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 13 March 2018 On 19 March 2018 Before THE HONOURABLE
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2013] NZEmpC 15 ARC 84/12. VULCAN STEEL LIMITED Plaintiff. KIREAN WONNOCOTT Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2013] NZEmpC 15 ARC 84/12 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN AND VULCAN STEEL LIMITED Plaintiff KIREAN WONNOCOTT
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 12 th April 2018 On 14 th May Before
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: EA/02223/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 12 th April 2018 On 14 th May 2018 Before DEPUTY
- and - TRATHENS TRAVEL SERVICES LIMITED
Case No: 9PF00857 IN THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT Leeds Combined Court The Courthouse 1 Oxford Row Leeds LS1 3BG Date: 9 th July 2010 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE S P GRENFELL Between : LEROY MAKUWATSINE - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWCA Civ 339. B e f o r e : LORD JUSTICE DYSON LORD JUSTICE LLOYD and SIR SCOTT BAKER. Between: Thorpe - and - HMRC
Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWCA Civ 339 Case No : A3/2009/1383 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION (SIR EDWARD EVANS-LOMBE) Royal Courts
Before: VIVIEN ROSE (Chairman) - v - RULING ON DISCLOSURE
Neutral citation [2010] CAT 12 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB Case Number: 1121/1/1/09 28 April 2010 Before: VIVIEN ROSE (Chairman) Sitting as a Tribunal
Directors And Officers Liability Reimbursement Insurance Fund
Directors And Officers Liability Reimbursement Insurance Fund Schedule Policy No: Fund: Address: Period of Insurance: From: To: (both dates inclusive) Limit of Indemnity: Retentions: Premium: i) Claims
Before : MRS JUSTICE PATTERSON Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWHC 3483 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/8618/2013 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 06/12/2013
The First-tier Tribunal established under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
Legal services compensation scheme regulations General Authority and commencement 1.1. These regulations are made by the Council of ICAEW, pursuant to Clause 16 of the Supplemental Royal Charter of 1948.
- and THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS. Sitting in public at the Rolls Building, Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1NL on 6 July 2017
[2017] UKUT 0290 (TCC) Appeal number UT/2016/0156 Income Tax Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme compliance statement completed using form for Enterprise Investment Scheme by mistake whether compliance statement
Mr B Archer, solicitor
VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT REFERENCE NO. D916/2006 CATCHWORDS Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 s 109 - application for an
New Provision in the 2 nd Edition of the BSB Handbook (New Text in Bold)
Effective from 30 April 2015 Reference ri7.8 ri12 gc30.3 gc31.3 Previous Provision in the 1 st Edition of the BSB Subject to paragraphs ri8 to ri11 below, this applies to the following categories of person:
Reasons for Decision. Harness Racing New South Wales ( HRNSW ) Steward s Inquiry Mr Greg Bennett
Reasons for Decision Harness Racing New South Wales ( HRNSW ) Steward s Inquiry Mr Greg Bennett Stewards Panel: R Sanders (Chairman), M Prentice & C Paul The Charges: 1. On 7 February 2014, Mr Bennett
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Stubberfield v Lippiatt & Anor [2007] QCA 90 PARTIES: JOHN RICHARD STUBBERFIELD (plaintiff/appellant) v FREDERICK WALTON LIPPIATT (first defendant/first respondent)
- and - Sitting in public at Fox Court 14 Grays Inn Road London on 7 January 2015
[] UKFTT 0269 (TC) TC04461 Appeal number: TC/14/0293 CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME - penalties - late filing of returns - Appellant asserted that he was not obliged to file returns because subcontracts
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEMINGWAY. Between ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER. and
IAC-AH-SAR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Bradford Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 27 th October 2015 On 6 th November 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE
MH (pending family proceedings-discretionary leave) Morocco [2010] UKUT 439 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before SENIOR IMMIGRATION JUDGE JARVIS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) MH (pending family proceedings-discretionary leave) Morocco [2010] UKUT 439 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House On 20 September 2010 Determination
Focus Underwriting. Policy Summary Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance A PARTNER YOU CAN TRUST
Focus Underwriting Policy Summary Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance A PARTNER YOU CAN TRUST The purpose of this Policy Summary is to help You understand the insurance by setting out the significant features,
Royal Courts of Justice London. 7 th April Regina v Maurice Kirk
Criminal Court of Appeal Royal Courts of Justice London Case Number 20104016C1 7 th April 2011 Regina v Maurice Kirk 12 th April 2011 Appeal for a Contempt of Court conviction in Cardiff Crown Court on
CIVIL EVASION PENALTY - Importation of cigarettes appeal dismissed. - and - TRIBUNAL: JUDGE JENNIFER DEAN MR MICHAEL ATKINSON
[16] UKFTT 0292 (TC) TC006 Appeal number: TC//062 CIVIL EVASION PENALTY - Importation of cigarettes appeal dismissed FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL TAX CHAMBER SHAZAD ANJUM Appellant - and - THE COMMISSIONERS FOR
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY DEAN MCDOWELL
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY DEAN MCDOWELL 1. Mr McDowell a licensed trainer, has lodged an appeal against the decision of 12 March 2015 of the Stewards appointed under
Rawofi (age assessment standard of proof) [2012] UKUT 00197(IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WARR. Between SAIFULLAH RAWOFI.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Rawofi (age assessment standard of proof) [2012] UKUT 00197(IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Before LORD JUSTICE McFARLANE UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WARR Between Given
THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ORS Respondents
NOTE: ORDER OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND OF THE HIGH COURT PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH RESPONDENTS AND THE SECOND RESPONDENT'S
Commercial legal expenses. Summary of Cover AXA Business Insurance
Commercial legal expenses Summary of Cover AXA Business Insurance Summary of cover About this document Some important facts about your Commercial Legal Expenses insurance policy are summarised below. This
Before : - and - TARGETFOLLOW (BIRMINGHAM) Ltd & anor
Neutral Citation Number: [2005] EWCA Civ 1355 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Hon Mr Justice Lewison [2004] EWHC 2547 (Ch) Before
Conditional Fee Agreement Explanation Leaflet. What you need to know about the CFA
Conditional Fee Agreement Explanation Leaflet. What you need to know about the CFA 1) Explanation of words used (a) Appeal - Any action taken to challenge a final or interim decision of the court (b) Applicable
TC05750 [2017] UKFTT 0272 (TC) Appeal number: TC/2013/05587
[17] UKFTT 0272 (TC) TC070 Appeal number: TC/13/087 INCOME TAX Whether reasonable excuse for late payment of an amount detailed in a partner payment notice - No. FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL TAX CHAMBER WILLIAM
PROCEDURE application for stay in proceedings - refused. - and - TRIBUNAL: JUDGE HARRIET MORGAN
Appeal number: TC/13/06946 PROCEDURE application for stay in proceedings - refused FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL TAX CHAMBER JUMBOGATE LIMITED Appellant - and - THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S REVENUE & CUSTOMS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) IA/35017/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 10 January 2018 On 11 January Before
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) IA/35017/2015 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision Promulgated On 10 January 2018 On 11 January 2018 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 2 September 2015 On 18 September Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE GRUBB. Between
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: AA/03525/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Columbus House, Decision & Reasons Promulgated Newport On 2 September 2015 On 18 September 2015
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Ioannis Andronikou Heard on: Tuesday, 25 July 2017 and Wednesday, 26 July 2017 Location:
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS. -and- Tribunal: JUDGE HOWARD M. NOWLAN
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL TAX Appeal Number: TC/2014/01582 THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS -and- Applicants C JENKIN AND SON LTD Respondents Tribunal: JUDGE HOWARD M. NOWLAN Sitting at
VAT nature of business were taxable supplies made?- no decisions to refuse input tax claims and de-register Appellant for VAT purposes confirmed.
[14] UKFTT 2 (TC) TC03242 Appeal number: TC/12/170 VAT nature of business were taxable supplies made?- no decisions to refuse input tax claims and de-register Appellant for VAT purposes confirmed. FIRST-TIER
B e f o r e: MR JUSTICE SALES. Between: THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF PEOPLE AND PLANET Claimant
Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWHC 3020 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CO/5323/2009 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Tuesday, 20th
ROYAL INSTITUTION OF CHARTERED SURVEYORS DISCIPLINARY PANEL HEARING. Case of
ROYAL INSTITUTION OF CHARTERED SURVEYORS DISCIPLINARY PANEL HEARING Case of Mr David Gurl FRICS [0067950] DAG Property Consultancy (F) [045618] Avon, BS21 On Wednesday 29 April 2015 At Parliament Square,
TC04086 [2014] UKFTT 974 (TC) Appeal number: TC/2014/00845
[14] UKFTT 974 (TC) TC086 Appeal number: TC/14/00845 CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME failure to deduct tax from payments made to sub-contractors Regulations 9 and 13 Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme)
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KOPIECZEK. Between AH (ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE) and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
AA/06781/2014 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 13 April 2016 On 22 July 2016 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL
Before : MR JUSTICE MORGAN Between : - and - THE ROYAL LONDON MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY LIMITED
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 319 (Ch) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION Case No: CH/2015/0377 Royal Courts of Justice Rolls Building, Fetter Lane, London, EC4A1NLL Before : MR JUSTICE
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WARR. Between I L (ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE) and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/12026/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 24 May 2016 On 1 June 2016 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS. 29 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2A 3EE
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Adrian David Neave Thompson Heard on: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 Location: Committee:
PROCEDURE Costs of interlocutory proceedings Application for Further and Better Particulars. - and - TRIBUNAL: JUDGE JOHN BROOKS
[2017] UKFTT 0509 (TC) TC05962 Appeal numbers: TC/2014/05870 TC/2015/00425 PROCEDURE Costs of interlocutory proceedings Application for Further and Better Particulars FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL TAX CHAMBER AWARD
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PLIMMER. Between MR (ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE) and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: HU/09301/2017 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Manchester Civil Justice Decision and Reasons Centre Promulgated On: 9 April 2018 On: 12 th April
Auditor Regulatory Sanctions Procedure
Procedure Financial Reporting Council April 2016 Auditor Regulatory Sanctions Procedure The FRC is responsible for promoting high quality corporate governance and reporting to foster investment. We set
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY NEIL DAY
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY NEIL DAY 1. Mr Day a licensed trainer, has lodged an appeal against the decision of 13 March 2015 of the Stewards appointed under The Australian
- and - TRIBUNAL: JUDGE JOHN BROOKS. Sitting in public at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London on 11 November 2016
[2016] UKFTT 772 (TC) TC05499 Appeal number: TC/2012/08116 PROCEDURE Appeal against discovery assessment - Case management directions for progress of appeal Whether appellant or respondents should open
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HUTCHINSON. Between BN (ANONYMITY ORDER)
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06347/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision and Reasons Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January 2016 Before DEPUTY
Touchstone Underwriting POLICY SUMMARY Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance
Touchstone Underwriting POLICY SUMMARY Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance The purpose of this Policy Summary is to help you understand the insurance by setting out the significant features, benefits,
1 January 2010 (as amended 1 January 2015) Table of contents
Terms of Reference 1 January 2010 (as amended 1 January 2015) Table of contents Section A: Preliminary Matters 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose of the Service 1.2 Principles that underpin FOS operations and
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights Appeal Reference: EA/2016/0243. Before DAVID FARRER Q.C. Judge. and HENRY FITZHUGH
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights Appeal Reference: EA/2016/0243 Heard at Cambridge County Court On 15 th. February, 2017 Before DAVID FARRER Q.C. Judge and HENRY FITZHUGH
DISCIPLINE CASE DIGEST
DISCIPLINE CASE DIGEST Member: Jurisdiction: John Slawko Petryshyn Winnipeg, Manitoba Case 17-07 Called to the Bar: June 29, 1971 Particulars of Charges: Professional Misconduct (28 Charges): Breach of
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 30 October 2006 On 10 January Before SENIOR IMMIGRATION JUDGE WARR. Between. and
Asylum and Immigration Tribunal SA (Work permit refusal not appealable) Ghana [2007] UKAIT 00006 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 30 October 2006 On 10 January 2007
Guidance for cost orders
Guidance for cost orders Published by Association of Chartered Certified Accountants On 1 January 2019 2 Contents Section 1 4 Introduction 4 Purpose of Guidance 4 Use of Guidance 4 Section 2 5 Power to
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Girish Patel Heard on: Wednesday, 25 October 2017 Location: The International Dispute
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Ibttsam Hamid Heard on: Thursday 18 August 2016 Location: The Chartered Institute
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN. ALAN DICK AND COMPANY LIMITED [Improperly sued as Alan Dick and Company] AND FAST FREIGHT FORWARDERS LIMITED AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL No. 214 of 2010 BETWEEN ALAN DICK AND COMPANY LIMITED [Improperly sued as Alan Dick and Company] APPELLANT AND FAST FREIGHT FORWARDERS
Austrian Arbitration Law
Austrian Arbitration Law CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PART SIX CHAPTER FOUR ARBITRATION PROCEDURE FIRST TITLE GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 577. Scope of Application (1) The provisions of this Chapter apply if
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE FRANCES. Between [S A] (ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE) and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 24 th July 2017 On 17 th August 2017 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE FRANCES Between
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Nemchand Proag Heard on: Thursday, 15 September 2016 and Thursday 30 March 2017 Location:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 10922-2012 On 28 June 2013, Mr Moseley appealed against the Tribunal s decision on sanction. The appeal was dismissed
Matrix Underwriting Management POLICY SUMMARY Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance
Matrix Underwriting Management POLICY SUMMARY Commercial Legal Expenses Insurance The purpose of this Policy Summary is to help you understand the insurance by setting out the significant features, benefits,
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 4 th April 2018 On 17 th April Before
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: HU/18141/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 4 th April 2018 On 17 th April 2018 Before DEPUTY
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS In the matter of: Mr Karim Khan and Parker Lloyd Limited Heard on: 8, 9, 10 March 2016 Location: The Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam
CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS DISCLOSURE (NRS )
CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS DISCLOSURE (NRS 113.135) This Construction Claims Disclosure is made as required by NRS 113.135 in contemplation of a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Agreement") which may be entered
Before: LORD JUSTICE LLOYD LORD JUSTICE LEWISON and LADY JUSTICE GLOSTER Between: - and -
Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWCA Civ 669 Case No: B5/2012/2579 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE WANDSWORTH COUNTY COURT HIS HONOUR JUDGE WINSTANLEY Royal Courts of Justice
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) HU/09516/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) HU/09516/2016 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 29 September 2017 On 13 October 2017 Before DEPUTY