You are here

Filter content

Bloomsburry Family law


R (Bermingham) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2006] EWHC 200 (Admin)

Although the judge conducting an extradition hearing under the Extradition Act 2003 possessed an implied jurisdiction to hold that the prosecutor was abusing the process of the court, no finding of abuse could be justified (in a case where the category 2 territory had been designated for the purpose of s 84 of the 2003 Act) by the prosecutor’s refusal or failure to disclose evidential material beyond what was contained in the extradition request, since under the statutory scheme the prosecutor did not have to establish a case to answer.

Tarlochan Singh Flora v Wakom (Heathro) Ltd [2005] EWHC 2822 (QB)

Although the courts had not yet given practical effect to the Damages Act 1996, s 2(9) as inserted by the Courts Act 2003, s 100, when awarding periodical payments for future loss whereby the amount of payments would vary otherwise than by reference to the retail prices index, there was no relevant jurisprudence according to which it could be said that a statement of case based on s 2(9) was bound to fail.