Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: house of lords Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.015 seconds)

Dec 15 2005 (FN)

Percy (Ap) (Appellant) Vs. Church of Scotland Board of National Missio ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Dec-15-2005

..... there was a case to answer, and the presbytery began making preparations for holding a trial by libel, that is, trying a formal disciplinary charge against ms percy. at a mediation meeting arranged by the church ms percy was counselled to resign and demit status as a minister. in december 1997 she demitted status, that is, she resigned as an ordained ..... has happened, such an agreement would be possible, even with the help of a skilled and independent mediator. in hoping that it might be, i have in mind that mediation is a process to which each party comes on equal terms, in which the mediator is able to detect and redress any imbalance in their bargaining powers, and through which they are assisted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2005 (FN)

Campbell (Appellant) Vs. Mgn Limited (Respondents)

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Oct-20-2005

..... in which an agreement on costs had been agreed between personal injury lawyers and liability insurers. the civil justice council offered mediation services, although the consultation paper correctly observed that mediations work only if both sides want to try to find a mediated solution (see para 49). 36. there are substantial differences between the costs in personal injury litigation which are the subject .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2005 (FN)

Gregg (Fc) (Appellant) Vs. Scott (Respondent)

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Jan-27-2005

lord nicholls of birkenhead my lords, 1. this appeal raises a question which has divided courts and commentators throughout the common law world. the division derives essentially from different perceptions of what constitutes injustice in a common form type of medical negligence case. some believe a remedy is essential and that a principled ground for providing an appropriate remedy can be found. others are not persuaded. i am in the former camp. 2. this is the type of case under consideration. a patient is suffering from cancer. his prospects are uncertain. he has a 45% chance of recovery. unfortunately his doctor negligently misdiagnoses his condition as benign. so the necessary treatment is delayed for months. as a result the patient's prospects of recovery become nil or almost nil. has the patient a claim for damages against the doctor? no, the house was told. the patient could recover damages if his initial prospects of recovery had been more than 50%. but because they were less than 50% he can recover nothing. 3. this surely cannot be the state of the law today. it would be irrational and indefensible. the loss of a 45% prospect of recovery is just as much a real loss for a patient as the loss of a 55% prospect of recovery. in both cases the doctor was in breach of his duty to his patient. in both cases the patient was worse off. he lost something of importance and value. but, it is said, in one case the patient has a remedy, in the other he does not. 4. this would make .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2005 (FN)

Davidson (Ap) (Appellant) Vs. Scottish Ministers (Respondents) Scotlan ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Dec-15-2005

lord nicholls of birkenhead my lords, 1. english courts have power to make coercive orders, prohibitory and mandatory, against ministers of the crown. this was decided authoritatively by your lordships' house in m v home office [1994] 1 ac 377. the question raised by this appeal is whether, in the context of judicial review proceedings, scottish courts have similar jurisdiction in respect of scottish ministers, that is, members of the scottish executive. 2. it would be surprising if this were not so. but on this appeal the scottish ministers contend that the crown proceedings act 1947 leads inescapably to the opposite conclusion. the proceedings 3. the proceedings have an unusual history. for present purposes the essential facts are simple indeed. scott davidson spent 18 months in barlinnie prison, glasgow, between april 2001 and august 2002. initially he was there on remand and later as a convicted prisoner. while there he complained to the prison governor about prison conditions: gross overcrowding, inadequate sanitary facilities and poor regime activities. he said detention in these conditions was inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to article 3 of the european convention on human rights. 4. on 24 october 2001 he presented a petition for judicial review in the court of session. he sought a declarator that he was being detained in conditions incompatible with article 3, an order ordaining the scottish ministers to secure his transfer to prison conditions compliant with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 2005 (FN)

Regina Vs. Soneji and Another (Respondents) (on Appeal from the Court ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Jul-21-2005

lord steyn my lords, 1. the central question of law arising on the appeal before the house is whether the court of appeal acted on the correct legal principle when it quashed two confiscation orders made by the crown court pursuant to the criminal justice act 1988, as amended by the proceeds of crime act 1995: r v soneji and bullen [2004] 1 cr app r(s) 219. 1. the confiscation regime. 2. parliament has firmly adopted the policy that in the fight against serious crime, apart from ordinary sentences, a high priority must be given by the courts to the making of confiscation orders against defendants convicted of serious offences. the purpose of confiscation proceedings is to recover the financial benefit that the offender obtained from his criminal conduct. in england and wales the confiscation regime was introduced by the drug trafficking offences act 1986. it was extended by the criminal justice act 1988 to cover other indictable offences and specified summary offences. since its introduction this legislation has been amended from time to time. the approach reflected in this legislation has been reinforced by the united kingdom's ratification on 28 june 1991 of the united nations convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances 1988 and ratification on 28 september 1992 of the convention on laundering, search, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds from crime 1990. 3. the most recent statute is the proceeds of crime act 2002, which came into .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2005 (FN)

Moy Vs. Pettmann Smith (a Firm) (Original Respondents and Cross-appell ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Feb-03-2005

lord nicholls of birkenhead my lords, 1. i have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches of my noble and learned friends lord hope of craighead, baroness hale of richmond and lord carswell. for the reasons they give, with which i agree, i would allow this appeal. lord hope of craighead my lords, 2. i have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech of my noble and learned friend lord carswell. i agree with it and for the reasons that he has given i too would allow the appeal. i should like to add these comments. competency of the appeal 3. section 1(5) of the civil liability (contribution) act 1978 refers to a judgment in any part of the united kingdom. the phrase "in any part of the united kingdom" did not appear in clause 3(7) of the draft civil liability contribution bill which was annexed to the law commission's report, law of contract, report on contribution (9 march 1977, no. 79). the law commission concentrated on the position in england and wales. it recommended that, for the purposes of contribution proceedings in this jurisdiction, neither party should be allowed to challenge a finding of non-liability made in favour of the other in an action brought against the other by the plaintiff, provided that the finding was made after a trial on the merits: para 81(g). it did not discuss the possibility that the finding which was not to be challenged was one that had been obtained from a court in another part of the united kingdom. but reference is made in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 2005 (FN)

Regina Vs. Rimmington (Appellant) (on Appeal from the Court of Appeal ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Oct-27-2005

lord bingham of cornhill my lords, 1. these appeals, heard together, raise important and difficult questions concerning the definition and ingredients, today, of the common law crime of causing a public nuisance. the appellants contend that, as applied in their cases, the offence is too imprecisely defined, and the courts' interpretation of it too uncertain and unpredictable, to satisfy the requirements either of the common law or of the european convention on human rights. a question also arises on the mens rea which must be proved to establish the offence. 2. the facts of the two cases are quite different. mr rimmington was charged in an indictment containing a single count of public nuisance, contrary to common law. the particulars were that he "between the 25th day of may 1992 and the 13th day of june 2001, caused a nuisance to the public, namely by sending 538 separate postal packages, as detailed in the schedule , containing racially offensive material to members of the public selected by reason of their perceived ethnicity or for their support for such a group or randomly selected in an attempt to gain support for his views, the effect of which was to cause annoyance, harassment, alarm and/or distress." no evidence has yet been called or facts formally admitted, but it is not effectively in dispute that mr rimmington sent the packages listed in the schedule to the identified recipients, some of them prominent public figures, between the dates specified. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2005 (FN)

<td class=btext bgcolor=#FFFFFF><span class=boldtxt>Parties :</span> ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Jan-27-2005

lord nicholls of birkenhead 1. i have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches of my noble and learned friends lord rodger of earlsferry, baroness hale of richmond and lord brown of eaton-under-heywood. for the reasons they give, with which i agree, i would dismiss these appeals. lord hoffmann my lords, 2. i have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech of my noble and learned friend baroness hale of richmond. for the reasons she gives, with which i agree, i would dismiss these appeals. lord rodger of earlsferry my lords, 3. i have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches to be delivered by my noble and learned friends, baroness hale of richmond and lord brown of eaton-under-heywood. i agree with them and would accordingly answer the certified questions as lady hale proposes and dismiss the appeals. 4. the provisions of section 21 of the youth justice and criminal evidence act 1999 ("the 1999 act") have the effect that, save in exceptional circumstances, the evidence of witnesses under 17 years of age in relation, inter alia, to sexual offences and crimes involving violence must be given by a live television link and, where available, by a suitable video recording. (for the sake of brevity, i shall refer to these particular measures as "special measures".) 5. as can be seen from section 16(5), the theory underlying these provisions is that the use of the special measures will maximise the quality of the children's evidence in terms of its .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 2005 (FN)

Regina Vs. Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Healt ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Oct-13-2005

lord bingham of cornhill my lords, 1. in december 2002 the appellant, the mersey care national health service trust, as managers of ashworth hospital, implemented a written policy governing the seclusion of patients detained at the hospital. the issue in this appeal is whether that policy is unlawful, either because it is inconsistent with the domestic law of england and wales or because it fails to comply with the european convention on human rights. sullivan j at first instance held the policy to be lawful in both respects: [2002] ewhc 1521 (admin). for reasons given in a judgment of the court delivered by hale lj, the court of appeal (also including lord phillips of worth matravers mr and latham lj) declared the policy to be unlawful: [2003] ewca civ 1036, [2004] qb 395. in this appeal the trust challenges that decision. its legal submissions are supported by the secretary of state for health as an interested party. mr colonel munjaz seeks to uphold the court of appeal decision. his submissions are supported and elaborated by the national association for mental health (mind). the mental health act commission makes written submissions in support of mr munjaz. 2. ashworth hospital is one of three hospitals (the others are broadmoor and rampton) which provide high security hospital accommodation and services for persons liable to be detained under the mental health act 1983. the secretary of state is bound by sections 1 and 4(1) of the national health service act 1977 to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 2005 (FN)

Regina Vs. Secretary of State for Foreign and Common Wealth Affairs (A ...

Court : House of Lords

Decided on : Oct-13-2005

lord bingham of cornhill my lords, 1. to fish for patagonian toothfish in the maritime zone adjacent to south georgia and the south sandwich islands ("sgssi") it is necessary to hold an annual licence. licences are granted by the director of fisheries of sgssi. they are a valuable commercial asset, since the fishing is very profitable. quark fishing limited, a falkland islands company, obtained such a licence for its motor vessel jacqueline in each year from 1997-2000. in 2001 it applied again. but the secretary of state for foreign and commonwealth affairs on 7 june 2001 formally instructed the commissioner of sgssi to direct the director of fisheries of sgssi to allocate licences for the 2001 season in a way which precluded the grant of a licence to quark for jacqueline. the instruction was followed and the licence withheld. quark challenged the lawfulness of the secretary of state's instruction on conventional public law grounds, and succeeded both in the high court and on appeal: [2001] ewhc admin 1174; [2002] ewca civ 1409. there is no further appeal on that aspect of the case. but an issue remains whether quark is entitled to damages. on that issue, raised by an application to strike out, decisions adverse to quark have been made by collins j at first instance ([2003] ewhc 1743 (admin)) and the court of appeal (pill, thomas and jacob ljj, [2004] ewca civ 527, [2005] qb 93). it is now accepted that quark can recover damages against the secretary of state only if it can .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //