Source: http://www.windsorchambers.com/reported-cases/
Timestamp: 2019-06-20 01:41:46
Document Index: 522472648

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art 6', 'Art 47', 'Art 14', 'EWCA ', 'Art 10', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 47', 'Art. 6', 'art 6', 'art 23']

Reported & Notable Cases | Windsor Chambers
Windsor Chambers > Reported & Notable Cases
These cases are listed by category and in reverse date order:
Regulatory & Disciplinary Proceedings (by sub-category)
Julian Smith, barrister v Bar Standards Board, Collins J (costs) (2017) Jan
(Severe criticisms of Bar Standards Board reflected in large costs order in favour of Marc Beaumont’s client; Baxendale-Walker principle; costs awarded on basis of serious failings by BSB and by the Disciplinary Tribunal itself)
Julian Smith v BSB (2016) November, Administrative Court, Collins J.
(alleged misbehaviour of off-duty barrister at a social function; whether BSB prosecution violated ECHR Articles 8 (privacy) or 10 (freedom of expression))
Disciplinary tribunal panel member time expired. Whether unlawful & whether tribunal compliant with ECHR, Art 6, EU Charter, Art 47; whether panel member a de facto judge or whether de facto judge principle unlawful by virtue of Art 14 of the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights.
Reg (M, a barrister) v Legal Ombudsman High Court, Nov 2014
Successful application for relief from sanction of automatic strike out, applying Denton v White, arising from non-payment of court fee in JR
Bar Standards Board v O’Connor (a Barrister) [2012] 17th August, Visitors to the Inns of Court (Sir Andrew Collins and 2 others);
(Judicial review of BSB decision to prosecute a Barrister; “sponsor” Barrister failed to advise BSB Complaints Committee of professional context of Barrister’s actions; Committee did not read Barrister’s full response to complaint before deciding to prosecute him; failure of due process).
Bar Standards Board v S [2008] July
Solicitors, Legal Executives, costs draftsmen
CILEX v P (2015) December
(Alleged breaches of Solicitors Accounts Rules; Solicitor a junior partner with no access to the firm’s Accounts; breaches committed by senior partner; SRA adjudicator held junior partner in breach of SARs due to strict liability; whether rule 6 of the SARs imports a presumption of mens rea; meaning of must “ensure” compliance).
(Solicitor’s role in unregulated insurance business).
Kaur v ILEX [2011] EWCA Civ 1168 (Ground-breaking decision of the Court of Appeal on the law of apparent bias and automatic disqualification in disciplinary proceedings; Vice President of ILEX unlawfully sat on disciplinary tribunal; Marc Beaumont, (on Public Access), defeated ILEX, (represented by Leading Counsel), securing the reversal of the decision of 4 previous senior Judges).
Wilde v Wilsons Solicitors [2011] April, Manchester County Court
Doctors, Dentists, Nurses, Paramedics
GMC v Winehouse (2015) 14th April, Manchester.
(Successfully arguing that the GMC had no jurisdiction to review undertakings offered by a surgeon, due to the effect of s.35D of the Medical Act 1983 and Rule 37A(3)(b) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules, 2004).
(nursing home; allegations of neglect against senior nurse; case part-heard after 2 days with evidence yet to be given; tribunal issued a letter purporting to make a final determination of issue of misconduct and fitness to practise; application by Marc Beaumont to recuse entire panel on grounds of predetermination and apparent bias; application granted).
(OISC investigation; written representations by Marc Beaumont. Complaints dismissed)
RICS v Wells (2018) RICS, Birmingham
XYZ Ltd (2017) April
(Marc Beaumont won XYZ’s 2016 case; months of litigation about defence costs; confidential settlement at Mediation)
(re-trial at which RICS’ main witnesses failed to appear to be cross-examined; successful application by Marc Beaumont that unless they appear on the next occasion, their evidence shall be inadmissible; charges then withdrawn by RICS).
RICS v Trust Property Management (2016) February
(10 allegations of improper charging of management fees and negligence dismissed on Marc Beaumont’s submission of no case to answer; balance of charges discontinued;)
RICS v Nash (2015) August; RICS appeal panel
(successful RICS appeal against finding of improper entry into referral fee arrangement; strike off set aside).
(Allegations concerning judge sending salacious but humorous text messages; Marc Beaumont kept up pertinent and strong submissions during the disciplinary investigation with a positive outcome)
(Allegations that ML importuned a female teacher; ML’s case was that they had had an affair and he reacted badly, but entirely out of character, when it was terminated by the woman: Tribunal ignored this defence and imposed a life time ban despite there being no violence, no dishonesty, no sexual misconduct and no evidence of any serious effect on pupils; appeal pending in the High Court).
McFadden v UNITE the Union [2019] April
(Complaint to Certification Officer by M about disciplinary proceedings of trade union brought against leading member of the union movement; M acquitted in first prosecution; whether doctrine of cause of action estoppel and principle in Henderson v Henderson applied to bar a second set of union disciplinary proceedings based on the same facts).
Martin Rushton v RICS (2017) October; Court of Appeal
Re a Special Forces Soldier (2017) summer
(Right of former SAS serviceman to publish memoirs; ECHR Art 10 right to freedom of expression)
(Judicial review arising from failures of due process in the Bar’s disciplinary arrangements discovered by a report by COIC in 2012; time expired disciplinary judges – whether a tribunal “established by law” under ECHR Art. 6 and Art. 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; whether laid down selection process of disciplinary judges had to be followed at all; whether prosecutor could partake in selection process of disciplinary judges; whether a disciplinary judge could properly receive an undisclosed salary from the prosecutor; whether logjam in Visitorial appeals process caused unlawful delay; whether proper Art. 6 security of tenure when BSB sits on committee (COIC) with the power to remove disciplinary judges from the “pool” at will; whether “discreditable” conduct should be defined).
(school exclusion, fights and serious injury; bullying of assailant; Governors reinstated excluded child; victim (the bully) sought JR of that decision; Governors capitulated; excluded child arguing that in its discretion court should not order a re-hearing by Governors as alternative remedy and hardship to him as a third party; absence of reasons of Judge below).
Reg v Rotherham MBC ex parte Tomlinson & Ors [1999] ELR 500, [2000] ELR 76, Court of Appeal
(s. 411(5) Education Act 1996, lawfulness of catchment areas, Greenwich decision, out-catchment applicants)
Commercial, business & property litigation
Paull v Paull [2019] 3 May Morgan J
(Contested application for permission to appeal; Marc Beaumont procured refusal of permission)
(Elderly father transferred his home to his son; subsequent claim of presumed undue influence brought in the High Court; claim successful; Marc Beaumont exercised his conduct of litigation rights and conducted the case from start to finish, exercising all the functions of barrister and solicitor)
Munnelly et al v David O’Sullivan et al (2018) June Companies Court (Chief Registrar Briggs)
(Marc Beaumont acts as an expert on English law in foreign proceedings. In 2017, he advised on the law of frustration of contracts in a dispute in Moscow over a disputed loan of 156 million Euros in the context of the annexation of Crimea by Russia).
I v E Aug 2015
Norseman Holdings Ltd v Warwick Court Management Co Ltd, Coulson J. 5.3.15
X Bank v M – Dec 2012, Mediation
(Defence of undue influence with third party claim in negligence against a firm of solicitors; successful London Mediation at which wife of debtor received enough in damages to secure re-housing).
W v W Solicitors, [2011] April, Manchester County Court
(Costs; Solicitors Act 1974, statute bills, enforceability of invoices, solicitor’s lien over client funds).
(14 day trial; Construction contract; project management; claims alleging fraudulent misappropriation, deceit, breach of fiduciary duty, dishonest assistance and professional negligence against designers/project managers; claim for an account; all serious allegations against Marc Beaumont’s client dismissed).
Santander Bank v M [2011], Croydon County Court
(Application to strike out averment of constructive notice in Etridge defence; application successfully opposed by Marc Beaumont).
(Insolvency, transaction at undervalue, transfer of commercial property to pension scheme with in specie contribution, sections 212, 238, 239 of the Insolvency Act 1986, whether Directors’ misfeasance).
(Chauffeur of a celebrity; restraint of trade, whether covenant enforceable, whether damages for “reflected loss” being claimed, whether s. 2 of the Competition Act 1998 applicable, whether an account of profits available in a claim for breach of contract).
Whiteaway Laidlaw Bank v R [2009] 11 August, Bankruptcy Registry, Birmingham.
(Insolvency. Successful defence to Petition on the basis of : (a) an arguable breach of section 86C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, (b) triable issues of fraud and (c) a mis-statement in the Petition about security; whether “security” in rule 6.25 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 includes an arguably valueless Legal Charge; whether “running-account credit” can arise by implication where overdraft facilities are extended retrospectively).
Talley Group v NHS [2008] December
(Procurement; NHS Trust; £1 million contract for supply of pressure mattress systems; threatened withdrawal by Trust; I negotiated with the Trust to rescind their withdrawal; settled case within 48 hours of dispute erupting).
(Conflict of laws; supply of biofuel from the USA; service out of the jurisdiction; CPR Part 6 r. 20(5); whether e-mail contract made in England or Tennessee; convenience of forum; material non-disclosure in ex parte application; Proper Law of the contract; Rome Convention).
(Insolvency; construction dispute; appeal against bankruptcy order; interaction of bankruptcy jurisdiction and CPR Part 23.11; abuse of process; circumvention of rule in Heath v Tang)
(conveyancing; purchaser paid too little to vendor as vendor’s solicitor mistakenly asked for too little to effect completion, mistakenly accepted the lower sum and mistakenly paid the correct, larger sum to the vendor out of other client funds; vendor sued in damages for balance of purchase price, but had already received it, by mistake, from his negligent solicitor; defence of “no loss;” vendor then repaid the overpayment to his negligent solicitor having retained it for 5 months in order to contrive a loss; whether vendor could recover that loss)
(Gift of land; presumption of undue influence; whether rebutted by donor’s confession that not placed under any pressure; whether third party transferee of land had constructive notice).
Dr T.S Goel v R. Pick (Trustee in Bankruptcy) [2007] 1 All ER 982 Ch D;
(Insolvency; assignment of choses in action; disposition of property; number plates; preferences; purported transfer of vehicle registration mark; ownership of mark; s.340 Insolvency Act 1986; Retention of Registration Marks Regulations (1993)
GE Capital Bank Ltd v Rushton & Jenking [2006] 1 WLR 899, Court of Appeal.
R (Energy Financing Team Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office, GML International Ltd (Interested Party) [2005] All ER 285, Lawtel 8th August.
Shah v Lamberts Solicitors [2004] All ER (D) 66 (Mann J 6.10.04)
Di Placito v Slater [2004] 1 WLR 1605 CA
Di Placito v Slater [2003] NLP 20th March, Lawtel 24th March
Thornberry v Coleman [2001] All ER (D) 357, [2001] LTL 28/9/01, CA
(Slander by officer of Local Government, exemplary and aggravated damages, whether slander of Company Director is slander of the Company)
Birmingham Midshires v Sabherwal [2000] 80 P & CR 256, CA
(following FNB v Ann and Hustanger Ltd v Ricketts below, strike out/limitation period for extortionate credit bargain claim)
Abbey National plc v Tufts [1999] 2 FLR 399, CA; [1999] EGCS 24
(personal insolvency; mortgage fraud; agency; setting aside statutory demand, nature of appeal to single Judge of the Chancery Division)
Hill Samuel Personal Finance v Grundy [1997] All ER (D) 81, CA
Hurstanger Ltd v Ricketts [1998] CCLR 5, [1997] 1 CLY 962
(following FNB v Ann above, strike out/limitation period for extortionate credit bargain claim/issue estoppel/abuse of process)
Popat v Shonchhatra [1997] 1 WLR 1367, CA, [1997] 3 All ER 799
First National Bank v Ann [1998] CCLR 1, [1997] 1 CLY 963, February,
S v W [1995] 1 FLR 862, CA
Abbey National B.S. v Cann [1991] 1 AC 56, HL, [1989] 2 FLR 265 CA
(a leading case on overriding interests, LRA s. 70(1)(g); equitable subordination)
Doble v Haymills [1988] The Times, 5th July, CA, [1988] Sol Jo 1063