Blog
Kingsley Napley’s Medical Negligence Team ‘walks together’ with the Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity
Sharon Burkill
Earlier this week, the High Court considered a claim for compensation pursuant to a cross undertaking in damages in relation to a freezing order which was subsequently discharged. The court confirmed the principle previously set out in Hoffmann-La Roche & Co v Secretary of State [1975] AC 295 at 361; that damages in injunctive proceedings should be assessed in the same way as damages for breach of contract.
With one year to go until the 2012 Games many businesses are already looking forward to benefiting from the expected economy boost, particularly around London, but beware – there may be problems ahead...
Each party was ordered to bear their own costs following a failure either to mediate or settle a small building dispute which ended up reaching the Court of Appeal.
A landlord must bear the costs of almost £270,000 for repairs to a block of flats after failing to recover these from the tenants due to non compliance with the statutory requirements to consult the tenants over the proposed costs.
The Court of Appeal in Tiensa v Vision Enterprises Ltd has decided that a landlord will not be penalised as long as he has protected the tenant’s deposit by complying with the initial requirements and given certain prescribed information to the tenant by the date of any court hearing rather than 14 days after receiving the deposit.
Sharon Burkill
Natalie Cohen
Caroline Sheldon
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility