Dispute Resolution

Case updates quarterly round-up (1st quarter 2022)

The English High Court, in Mr Dollar Bill Limited v Persons Unknown and Others [2021] EWHC 2718 (Ch), has once again come to the rescue for victims of fraud – this time armed with a Norwich Pharmacal Order to be served outside the jurisdiction.

I have been compiling quarterly round ups of fraud-related cases since 2016. One of the insights this gives me is an idea of trends in the types of fraud that end up before the Courts of England and Wales. In addition to this, my business is often contacted by victims of fraud seeking redress, which provides a closer understanding of what fraudsters are up to and the impact of those actions.

The death of a loved one is an incredibly sad and difficult time for any family, and in the vast majority of cases those closest to the deceased are able to arrange an appropriate “send-off” which gives everyone the opportunity to pay their respects and say goodbye. Unfortunately however, there may be situations where the relevant parties cannot agree on the funeral arrangements, or what should happen to the deceased’s body. This blog considers who is legally responsible for deciding what happens to the body and how the Court has approached disputes in recent cases.

As family lawyers we help clients through challenging times when they may struggle to manage the overwhelming emotional impact of divorce. Until recently, they could be entitled to assume that any court proceedings would be heard in private and it would be highly unlikely for them to be reported in the media or for any documents to be available for any third party to inspect.

When a family member or loved one dies, sometimes the terms of their will, if they made one during their lifetime, can come as a surprise to those who survive them. For example the will might include unexpected beneficiaries, or certain beneficiaries might receive a greater or lesser share of the estate than others. Under the laws of England and Wales, a person has the freedom to leave their estate to whoever they choose and there is no legal obligation to provide for any particular family member or other individual. Therefore, whilst family members or individuals might regard the terms of the will as unfair or unexpected, the law will generally uphold the wishes of a testator set out in their will, if it has been validly made.

It is now two years since the first case of COVID-19 was reported, and the virus still continues to have a devastating impact around the world. As history shows us all too well, such times of crisis and economic downturn provide fertile ground for fraudsters and criminal opportunists. The current pandemic is no exception. From bogus COVID-19 cures to phishing emails and phony websites, scammers are taking advantage of peoples' fears as the pandemic persists. Unfortunately, the past few months have also seen a stark increase in instances of fraud against charities.

Data released by the Office of National Statistics 17 January 2022 show that Fraud offences reported in England & Wales grew substantially in the year to September 2021.

Being an avid tennis fan, in the small hours of 16^th January 2022, I checked my phone to see if Novak Djokovic was going to be able to compete for his 21^st Grand Slam title (surpassing Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal as the most decorated male tennis player in Grand Slam history) or whether his appeal would in fact be rejected leading to his deportation.

A Civil Fraud quarterly round-up (4th quarter 2021)

In the recent case of Apollo Ventures Co Ltd v Manchanda [2021] EWHC 3210 (Comm) an extension of time of almost five years was granted in the Defendant’s application for a stay under Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”) Part 11 – disputing the Court’s jurisdiction.

Last month, the High Court handed down judgement in R (on the application of T M Eye Ltd) v Southampton Crown Court reinforcing the correct approach to applications for an award from central funds for the costs of a private prosecution. Despite clear ‘Jurisdictional error’ on the part of the Crown Court, the appellant court took the opportunity to warn private prosecutors; applications will not be approved ‘on the nod’.

The Supreme Court has closed the door to ‘opt out’ style class action claims for breaches of data protection legislation, in a unanimous judgment that rejected an attempt to make Google liable for ‘loss of control’ over users’ personal data without having to prove any loss.

The Supreme Court of England & Wales has this morning unanimously decided against the CPS in the Aquila case. The ruling confirms that a company’s property rights are not trumped by a criminal confiscation order.

The Court of Appeal has recently handed down its judgment in the case of Hirachand v Hirachand, concerning an appeal against an order made in May 2020 in proceedings brought by Sheila Hirachand for provision from the estate of Navinchandra Hirachand, her late father, under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”).

World Menopause Day was held on 18 October 2021. It is an opportunity to break the stigma and taboo that still exists around menopause and to encourage open dialogue about what is a natural and very significant transition in a woman’s life.

A Civil Fraud quarterly round-up (3rd quarter 2021)

In the recent case of Re Motion Picture Capital Limited [2021] EWHC 2504 (Ch), the Court greenlit an unfair prejudice petition presented by a minority shareholder who no longer held shares in the relevant company at the time his petition was heard. The petitioner’s position was "Show me the money!", requesting an order that the company purchase his shares at a price reflecting the company’s value, even though his shares had already been transferred into the names of the company’s nominees.

Several stories have recently been published about the ‘legal battle’ commenced in the High Court relating to the estate of actor Terry Jones, who was well known and loved for his role in Monty Python and who died in January 2020. His adult children from his first marriage have reportedly commenced proceedings against their father’s estate and his second wife Anna Söderström (who is thought to be the main beneficiary of the estate), claiming that the Will their father made in 2016 is invalid because he lacked capacity when he made it. As a matter of law, a Will made by someone who lacks the required mental capacity at the time they made the Will is not valid.