Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2017 #168This was a trial of the preliminary issue of whether claims made by the joint liquidators of two Jersey-incorporated companies against the respondents were time-barred as a matter of Jersey law.
In the proceedings, the applicants claimed that between 10 April 2007 and 10 June 2008 payments were made of €16m and €18m from ‘Level One’ and ‘Special Opportunity’ respectively, to or for the benefit of the first respondent or companies owned beneficially by him. Those payments were claimed not to have been made in good faith for a legitimate commercial purpose of the companies, and the ...
Adam Dyl highlights the importance of foreseeability in the context of determining liability following the recent decision from the Court of Appeal in Scott v Gavigan [2016] ‘While a defendant is not liable for damage that was not reasonably foreseeable, it does not follow that he is liable for all damage that was reasonably foreseeable.’Drivers …
Continue reading "Road Traffic Accidents: Stop, look, listen"
This post is only available to members.
Brenna Conroy outlines the distinction between appreciation of an accident and witnessing a victim’s injuries for secondary victim claims ‘One of the key themes that emerges from recent authorities is that a secondary victim claim will fail where the primary victim has received treatment such as to make that scene sufficiently different to that at …
Continue reading "Secondary Victims: A race between the claimant and the ambulance?"
This post is only available to members.
Steven Akerman examines the conflict between the new striking out powers and the Human Rights Act, in part one of this article he looks at the legislation ‘There is already authoritative UK case law that has determined that the legislation is not compatible with the said human rights provisions.’ The full effect of the Jackson …
Continue reading "Human Rights: Section 57? Incompatible… as decided by the Supreme Court"
This post is only available to members.
