Reported & Notable Cases

These cases are listed by category and in reverse date order:  

Regulatory & Disciplinary Proceedings (by sub-category)

Barristers

Damian McCarthy v Bar Standards Board [2017] EWHC (Admin) 969 

(Barrister tried and disbarred before judge x; overturned decision on appeal; re-trial before judge y; judge x was judge y’s former Pupilmaster and Head of Chambers; parts of decision of judge y identical to decision of judge x; whether apparent bias). 

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.

(Finding and sentence of disciplinary tribunal quashed on appeal; ruling at trial that BSB could rely on a written statement of the complainant, despite having taken no steps whatsoever to ask him to attend trial; that ruling described as “jejune”; held that JS did not have a fair trial as he was deprived of any opportunity to cross-examine the complainant, but for no good reason).

BSB v C (2016) September

(successful defence of senior barrister accused of practising without a practising certificate for 15 months; Bar Council computer glitch; Bar Council omitted to serve  demand or reminder; application of test of seriousness in Walker v BSB to the BSB Handbook).

Smith v Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund (2016) June, Financial Ombudsman Service 

(successful complaint by a barrister to FOS concerning his right to choose his own solicitors to act for him in the face of insurer insisting on a panel firm)

BSB v Smith (2016) May

(whether and, if so, when negligence is “professional misconduct”)

BSB v J. Dorairaj  (2016) February

(allegation of theft against barrister; disbarment avoided after mitigation)

Regina (M, a barrister) v Legal Ombudsman [2015] December 

(High Court judicial review challenge to LeO findings against a barrister; LeO findings quashed by consent)

BSB v Bethell  BTAS (2015) November

(trial of allegations of forging London University LLB certificates and fabricating degree award)

BSB v S (2015) June

(whether legal professional privilege waived by client; whether regulator has a duty to obtain documents from the complainant)

BSB v L (2015) May

(alleged misbehaviour of off-duty barrister at a social function; whether BSB prosecution violated ECHR Articles 8 (privacy) or 10 (freedom of expression))

Reg (Carron Russell, a barrister) v Bar Standards Board  Court of Appeal, 26.11.14

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

BSB v AXM (2010-2014)

(Advising, acting and reaching settlement in a continuing, high profile series of BSB prosecutions against a leading barrister relating to events over 10 years ago).

BSB v X, a barrister  (2014) 13.11.14  

(application to strike out; whether an allegation of negligence can amount to professional misconduct; application of Calhaem test to barrister disciplinary cases). 

BSB v XY (2014) May

(successful defence of barrister at trial at BTAS Disciplinary Tribunal; allegations against client dismissed).

R (Rosemarine) v Legal Ombudsman [2014] EWHC 601 (Admin; Manchester)

(Judicial Review against the Legal Ombudsman; whether  consideration of a fresh complaint outside of LeO jurisdiction by virtue of s. 126 of the Legal Services Act 2007; bias)

Bar Standards Board v J [2013] Nov; BTAS Disciplinary Tribunal

(Marc Beaumont’s application for further & better particulars of charges; BSB unable to answer; prosecution dropped against very senior member of the Bar).

Bar Standards Board v S [2013] Nov; Spencer J.

(exoneration of barrister by Legal Ombudsman; same charge then made by BSB; whether cause of action estoppel / res judicata / abuse of process).

Bar Standards Board v X  [2013] Nov

(allegations against barrister of sexual harassment and discrimination against pupil;  dropped after plea bargain)

Bar Standards Board v M [2013] October

(Marc Beaumont drafted detailed response to complaints to BSB about barrister; all allegations dismissed)

Reg (Mehey et al) v Bar Standards Board [2013] 16th October, High Court, Lawtel 24.10.13.

(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 Art 47 now has direct effect in UK; 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).

Russell v Bar Standards Board Number 2 [2013] 23rd May, Visitors to the Inns of Court

(correct test for Barrister appeals; whether outside the ex improviso rule, prosecutor may call evidence after prosecution and defence case closed; use of debarring orders against prosecutor; whether tribunal may “enter the arena” and strongly request the attendance of a prosecution witness;  whether BSB has power to summons witnesses;  whether prosecutor may communicate with disciplinary judge behind the back of the defence; whether such communication redolent of actual bias of judge where judge wishes prosecutor good luck on appeal;  whether apparent bias doctrine can be engaged by post-trial conduct of judge; legal effect of serving BSB prosecutions department officer being 1 of 4 appointing members of the COIC “Tribunals Appointments Body” (TAB); whether TAB ultra vires the Bar’s Constitutions;  whether open-ended power of removal of member of COIC pool without cause, unlawful given position of BSB Chair and senior staff on COIC; whether ECHR Article 6 guarantees against pressure on disciplinary judges to conform with a prosecutorial mentality;  whether disciplinary judges Art. 6 “independent” within Findlay v United  Kingdom given key role of BSB prosecutions department in appointing disciplinary judges; serious non-disclosure by BSB of notes of secret meeting between BSB and disciplinary judge until day before appeal and despite requests and application for disclosure by defence)

R v Bar Standards Board [2013] Lawtel, 6th August, Visitors to Inns of Court

(Meaning of “discreditable” conduct where loan not repaid by Barrister)

XH v Bar Standards Board [2013] FebruaryBTAS Review panel,

(Order for disclosure of full sponsor report for use at disciplinary trial)

Q v Bar Standards Board [2013] Lawtel 6th March; Visitors to the Inns of Court (Williams J and 2 others)

(Trial panel convicted Barrister and suspended her, but gave no oral or written reasons for decision; appeal allowed; appeal costs against BSB)

Bar Standards Board v O [2012] November

(Serious allegations against Barrister with Football Association licence; plea bargain; serious allegations dropped; pleas to CPD infringements; advised as to future conduct).

Reg (Conlon) v Bar Standards Board [2012] 11th October 2012, Court of Appeal

(whether the Visitors to the Inns of Court have had the power since 2000 lawfully to sit with non-judge wingmen; whether decision in Russell v BSB on time expiry correct; whether a Barrister can properly sit as a disciplinary tribunal member whilst being remunerated by the BSB in another post);

Bar Standards Board v O’Connor (a Barrister) [2012] 17th August, Visitors to the Inns of Court (Sir Andrew Collins and 2 others);

(A successful appeal by Marc Beaumont for a Barrister against 5 findings of professional misconduct; signing a statement of truth and serving a pleading are not “the conduct of litigation;” meaning of, “discreditable to a Barrister;” trial panel gave no oral or written reasons for decision, nor did it allow any closing speech by the defence; gross breaches of natural justice; Chair of trial panel only honorary QC; not authorised to sit)

Bar Standards Board v H [2012] July 28.

(2 sets of BSB proceedings struck out; application for costs; Baxendale-Walker criteria; Costs awarded against BSB)

Russell v Bar Standards Board [2012] The Visitors to the Inns of Court, 12th July.

(Test case; hundreds of Barrister convictions found to have been made by time-expired disciplinary tribunal members; in this case, disciplinary panel member’s tenure time-expired in breach of clearly laid down COIC requirements for his appointment; held, Singh J – this does not matter and even if it does, he was a de facto judge)

Bar Standards Board v H [2012] 29th February, Kenneth Parker J.

(Charges having been struck out, BSB applied for permission to amend to add 2 new Charges; application successfully opposed by Marc Beaumont; No proper investigation of X’s practising status by BSB before charging him; BSB prosecuted X for not having a practising certificate when he had one and then tried to amend to prosecute him for holding himself out as a self-employed Barrister when he had the BSB’s prior permission to do so; Case dismissed; sponsor reports to be disclosed by BSB without any redactions unless some public interest in non-disclosure)

Bar Standards Board v AXM a barrister [2012] Court of Appeal 9th February.

(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).

H v Bar Standards Board [2012] January

(Charge of “holding out” as a Barrister; application by Marc Beaumont to strike out; Charge struck out).

Leathley v Bar Standards Board [2012] 20th January.

(Appeal to Visitors to the Inns of Court; BSB, the prosecutor, paying fees and expenses of lay panel members and supplying them with secret guidance pack; whether lay panel members should be recused on grounds of apparent bias.)

Bar Standards Board v AXM (a barrister) [2011] July

(Whether internal “sponsor reports” about the decision to prosecute a Barrister are disclosable and the relevant test where the Barrister raises a public law defence).

Bar Standards Board v B (a barrister) [2011] February, Wilkie J.

(A TV personality, F, was terminally ill, had no money and was in the throes of divorce. X, a barrister, provided F with pro bono assistance. F lived in France. Solicitor for Mrs F, reported X to the BSB for acting without an instructing solicitor on a direct access basis. Long investigation. X advised to admit breach of Code of Conduct. Advice wrong. Adviser overlooked the exculpatory effect of the International Practice Rules, as F lived in France. BSB Charge based on the admission of fault. Marc Beaumont instructed in place of first adviser, formally withdrew the admission and made full written submissions to BSB. Result: Charge withdrawn).

Bar Standards Board v O [2010] October

(Guidance from High Court Judge as to BSB providing proper particulars of its Charges).

Bar Standards Board v Russell [2010] June, Bar Disciplinary Tribunal (5 person).

(Allegation of dishonesty, mitigation, successfully urged suspension rather than disbarment).

Bar Standards Board v Russell [2010] March

(Charges of professional misconduct, charges successfully struck out and/or BSB forced to amend to reduce seriousness and breadth).

Bar Standards Board v M [2010] January.

(Barrister immigration specialist charged by BSB with advertising for immigration work on a direct/public access basis; BSB had in the meantime approved Code of Conduct changes allowing immigration work under the Bar Public Access scheme; written submissions drafted by Marc Beaumont as to this and other issues; on receipt of those submissions, BSB offered no evidence).

Bar Standards Board v S  [2008] July

(Defended Barrister accused of dishonesty. Internal Chambers dispute. Acquittal).

P v The General Council of the Bar [2005] Lawtel

(The case that established that it is unlawful for a Bar Disciplinary Tribunal to include serving members of the PCC – acted pro bono as Junior Counsel at trial)

 

Solicitors, Legal Executives, costs draftsmen

CILEX v P [2015] December

(allegations against CILEX member; withdrawal of prosecution secured)

SRA v S (2015) May

(allegation of conflict of interest against solicitor; Marc Beaumont’s representations to SRA; investigation stopped). 

SRA v Charles Henry (a Charity) & Gregory Laing J, 29.1.15

(Application for disclosure against 3rd party under s. 44BB of Solicitors Act 1974).

SRA v S and others [2014] SDT, February.

(represented leading North London firm at SDT; Solicitors Accounts Rules issues).

SRA v K  [2013] SDT, Dec

(Partner liable for breaches of Solicitors Accounts Rules on basis of strict liability; plea bargain; small fine)

Mireskandari v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal & Solicitors Regulation Authority [2012] Administrative Court, 18th May

(SDT has power to grant relief from sanctions)

F-H v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2012] Administrative Court, 16th May.

(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).

Solicitors Regulation Authority v Morgan [2012] April, SDT

(Solicitor’s role in unregulated insurance business).

Solicitors Regulation Authority v S [2012] May, SDT

(Solicitor’s role as conveyancer in land banking transactions)

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).

Association of Law Costs Draftsmen v K [2011] September

(Successful appeal against findings reached in breach of the rules of natural justice; successful challenge to appeal panel constitution, as Chairmen of first instance decision-maker automatically disqualified).

Wilde v Wilsons Solicitors [2011] April, Manchester County Court

(Costs; Solicitors Act 1974, statute bills, enforceability of invoices, solicitor’s lien over client funds);

Kaur v Institute of Legal Executives [2010] LTL 25th November, Administrative Court.

(Judicial Review of ILEX appeal tribunal; Vice President of ILEX sitting on appeal panel before which ILEX resisted the appeal; VP a Director of ILEX, a company limited by guarantee; VP owing fiduciary duties to ILEX; whether judge in her own cause; whether apparent bias; whether ILEX subject to judicial review jurisdiction).

Solicitors Regulation Authority  v E and C [2010] Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

(Managing Clerk raided client account of £ 200,000, partners strictly liable in conduct, breaches of Solicitors Accounts Rules, plea bargain, financial penalty).

Virdi v The Law Society/Solicitors Regulation Authority, The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal intervening [2010] 3 All ER 653, CA

(Appeal by solicitor, Tribunal Clerk retiring with panel members and drafting their detailed findings, whether lawful ? Tribunal Clerk employed and paid by Law Society, the Prosecutor – whether apparent bias ?).

Solicitors Regulation Authority v A solicitor [2009], Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

(Successful vitiation of subjective test of dishonesty in Twinsectra by fear of threat against solicitor).

Virdi v The Law Society, The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal intervening [2009] Lawtel 1st May, Divisional Court.

(Appeal by solicitor from SDT, Tribunal Clerk retiring with panel members and drafting their detailed findings, whether lawful ? Tribunal Clerk employed and paid by Law Society, the Prosecutor – whether apparent bias ? Delay of 12 months in SDT delivering detailed findings, held to be an inordinate and inexcusable violation of Article 6 of the ECHR).

Okoronkwo v The Law Society [2008] EWCA Civ 1572 (Bailii) 9th December, Court of Appeal

(Scope of Section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974; effect of Advocate’s disavowal of dishonesty allegation; standard of proof)

Solicitors Regulation Authority v R [2008] October

(Defended a solicitor accused of dishonesty; negotiated plea bargain whereby dishonesty allegations withdrawn)

Solicitors Regulation Authority v S [2008] June, SDT

(Disciplinary proceedings; solicitor; abuse of process; breach of natural justice; contention that Law Society’s scheme of investigation and adjudication unlawful without a procedural code)

Solicitors Regulation Authority v Okoronkwo [2008] Lawtel, 16th June, Divisional Court

(SDT findings under s. 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 against a Barrister who set up and capitalised a firm of solicitors; whether he was “employed or remunerated” by the firm; SDT purported to convict Barrister; appeal to Divisional Court; SDT Order quashed)

Solicitors Regulation Authority v. Virdi [2007] October

(One of the longest cases in the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, Defence of Senior Partner of firm accused of fraud, dishonesty and money laundering, acquittal on dishonesty charges, striking-off avoided)

 

Doctors, Dentists, Nurses, Paramedics

Winehouse v GMC (2016) Nov

(Colorectal Surgeon acquitted at trial. GMC failed to remove undertakings given by W.  Marc Beaumont’s representations to GMC led to their removal). 

Harrold v Nursing and Midwifery Council  (2016) Nov (Jay J)

(Full appeal. Letter sent by nurse to a patient complaining about staff issues.  Nurse struck off in her absence.  Trial in absence held not to be unfair. Strike off  held not to be plainly wrong.  Sending letter with no effect on anyone held to be, “professional misconduct”.)

Harrold v Nursing and Midwifery Council (2016) Sept (Jay J.)

(NMC application to strike out 2009 appeal as abandoned after 7 years and as an abuse of process; application refused; Marc Beaumont’s amendment allowed).

Jenyo v General Medical Council (2016) July, Administrative Court, Manchester

(appeal; retrospective amendment of patient records by GP; whether the fact that the amendments left an electronic audit trail was evidence of a lack of subjective dishonesty)

East London NHS Foundation Trust v A  (2016) April

(Disciplinary investigation; nurse on unpaid leave worked for another NHS Trust; Marc Beaumont submitted that the Trust’s restraint on such employment was unlawful under ECHR Art 8; investigation terminated).

GMC v W (2015) May

(judicial review of GMC application to Interim Orders Panel; GMC non-disclosure of case notes; whether case examiners referred matter to IOP at all. )

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). 

 Health & Care Professions Council v AG  12.11.14

(secured complete acquittal of paramedic at HCPC; allegation of failing to carry out a proper assessment of a drunk patient with a fractured skull dismissed on submission of no case to answer; allegations about failing to complete ambulance service forms dismissed). 

Nursing and Midwifery Council v Katherine Mullen  25.9.14

(secured acquittal at a Nursing & Midwifery Council re-trial, of a senior nurse accused of neglect of a dying patient, after a 3-year battle to clear her name).

Nursing and Midwifery Council v M [2014] 13th January.

(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).

General Medical Council v V [2010] October, CA.

(Gastroenterologist, erasure from medical register, appeal against sanction, freedom of speech, proportionality, restraint of trade).

General Medical Council v J [2009] September.

(Defended at trial of allegations against GP; witnesses in fear; GMC sought to rely on their written statements as the decisive evidence; application successfully opposed and charge dismissed).

K v General Dental Council [2009] Lawtel, 5th May, Divisional Court.

(Appeal by dentist against suspension by GDC; GDC appoints those who appoint PCC panel members; GDC also prosecutes dentists before PCC; whether system of appointments of PCC panel members by GDC indirectly, engages the doctrine of apparent bias; whether GDC a judge in its own cause; chairman of PCC panel a recent elected member of GDC; whether chairman automatically disqualified; application of Pinochet doctrine).

Other

Immigration regulation

Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner v LL (2015) March

(OISC investigation; written representations by Marc Beaumont. Complaints dismissed)

J v Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner [2012] 30th May, Court of Appeal (Neuberger MR, Toulson LJ)

(News of the World entrapment of immigration adviser; commercial lawlessness; whether prosecuting regulator’s reliance on and adoption of entrapment by a reporter was in law a ratification of anterior criminal activity and so an abuse of process)

Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner v J [2011] Upper Tribunal, Regulatory Chamber.

(Allegation of breach of OISC Code of Standards, “sting” carried out by The News of the World newspaper – the “Fake Sheik” – clandestine filming, entrapment and enticement, whether proceedings an abuse of the process).

Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner v J [2010] First Tier Tribunal, Regulatory Chamber.

(Allegation of breach of OISC Code of Standards, “sting” carried out by The News of the World newspaper (the “Fake Sheik”), clandestine filming, entrapment and enticement, whether proceedings an abuse of the process).

Chartered Surveyors

RICS v W (2017) May

(CPD not completed; senior surveyor expelled; panel not quorate; re-trial secured; one charge dropped at re-trial; plea to the other one and mitigation resulting in a conditional order only)

RICS v R (2017) April (RICS Coventry)

(CPD infringement; internal sanction  imposed of a caution and fine; RICS then charged the same offence at the tribunal; defence of cause of action estoppel and double-jeopardy based on Reg (Mandic-Bozic) v British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy [2016] EWHC (Admin) 3134; defence rejected). 

XYZ Ltd (2017) April 

(Marc Beaumont won XYZ’s 2016 case; months of litigation about defence costs; confidential settlement at Mediation) 

RICS  v Martin Rushton (2017) March High Court, QBD.

(Online protest by surveyor wrongly convicted and struck off; surveyor won his appeal and was reinstated; online postings and correspondence claimed to be actionable harassment of RICS under Protection from Harassment Act 1997; whether ECHR Article 10 right to freedom of expression; whether need to prove “alarm and distress” from alleged harassment; whether RICS seeking an injunction had “clean hands”). 

RICS v B (2017) March

(CPD violation; expulsion set aside; re-trial; client did hundreds of hours of CPD but omitted to register those hours; caution order; other charge sought to prosecute for matters already subject to internal sanction; double jeopardy rule violated; charge withdrawn).

RICS v A (2017) March

(CPD violation; expulsion set aside; re-trial: suspended expulsion on condition of CPD being done for 2017).

RICS v Trainmerit Ltd and Maltby (2016) Dec

(Conviction of property manager under fire safety regulations; heavy fine in Magistrates’ Court; ensuing RICS prosecution; sanction of reprimand rather than fine or worse). 

Z v RICS (2016) Dec

(Surveyor’s successful appeal against striking off for CPD infringements.  RICS 2-person panel was unlawful as the panel has to sit with 3 members.  RICS has disciplined some 317 surveyors using a 2 person panel and struck off c. 200 surveyors in May 2016 in this way.  All cases now have to be re-opened due to  Marc Beaumont’s successful submission)  

 Y v RICS (2016) Dec

(Surveyor’s successful appeal against striking off for CPD infringements.  RICS 2-person panel was unlawful as the panel has to sit with 3 members.  RICS has disciplined some 317 surveyors using a 2 person panel and struck off c. 200 surveyors in May 2016 in this way.  All cases now have to be re-opened due to  Marc Beaumont’s successful submission)

X v RICS (2016) Oct

(Surveyor’s successful appeal against striking off for CPD infringements.  RICS 2-person panel was unlawful as the panel has to sit with 3 members.  RICS has disciplined some 317 surveyors using a 2 person panel and struck off c. 200 surveyors in May 2016 in this way.  All cases now have to be re-opened due to  Marc Beaumont’s successful submission)  

H v RICS (2016) Summer

(Representing the quasi-judicial Chairman of Conduct and Appeals at RICS in a potential judicial review against RICS, who removed him when he refused to sign new terms of appointment providing for his removal on one month’s notice, a clause which would have defeated his ECHR Article 6 security of tenure).

RICS v Maltbys (2016) June

(RICS panel members’ security of tenure within the meaning of ECHR Article 6; whether RICS should make disclosure of panel members’ terms of appointment given attempt by RICS to impose a one month termination clause on the Chair of Complaints and Appeals)

RICS v N  (2016) April

(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 S (2015) December

(successful defence of very senior practitioner; negotiated favourable regulatory settlement)

RICS v Nash (2015) August; RICS appeal panel

(successful RICS appeal against finding of improper entry into referral fee arrangement; strike off set aside).

RICS v Mire (2015) June

(allegations of conflict of interest and improper self-promotion; Charges dismissed on submission by Marc Beaumont of no case to answer)

Mire v RICS [2015] Admin Court, Ouseley J; Feb 2015

(Judicial review; whether a disciplinary or regulatory decision to prosecute engages Article 8(1) of the ECHR where the accused has been prosecuted by a previous regulator).

The Cat Fancy

General Council of the Cat Fancy v XY  September 2014

(successful defence of Cat Fancy member in relation to postings on Facebook).

The Governing Council of the Cat Fancy v H [2010] GCCF, London.

(Cat shows, private club, contractual incorporation of rules of natural justice, altercation at cat show with duty veterinary surgeon who disqualified champion Siamese cat for alleged respiratory illness, prosecution of client before disciplinary committee for alleged discreditable conduct, contested trial, client acquitted of charge).

Pearman v Governing Council of the Cat Fancy (2017) March, Birmingham

(Cat show judge disciplined for 39 late show reports; successfully acted for GCCF in resisting his appeal) 

 

Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners 

PK v Society of Trust and Estates Practitioners (“STEP”) (2017) March

(Successfully overturning all findings on appeal to the STEP appeals committee; disciplinary panel acted ultra vires and misconstrued the facts; no “seriously reprehensible” conduct).  

Judicial Review

H v RICS (2016) Summer

(Representing the quasi-judicial Chairman of Conduct and Appeals at RICS in a potential judicial review against RICS, who removed him when he refused to sign new terms of appointment providing for his removal on one month’s notice, a clause which would have defeated his ECHR Article 6 security of tenure).

Regina (M, a barrister) v Legal Ombudsman [2015] December 

(High Court judicial review challenge to LeO findings against a barrister; LeO findings quashed by consent)

Reg (Strong) v Secretary of State for Education (2015)

(whether land at a school was “playing fields” within the meaning of s. 77 of the School Standards & Framework Act 1998 such that development required the consent of the SSFE).

Reg (W) v GMC (2015) May

(Judicial review of GMC application to Interim Orders Panel; GMC non-disclosure of case notes; whether case examiners referred matter to IOP at all. )

Mire v RICS [2015] Admin Court, Ouseley J; Feb 2015

(Judicial review; whether a disciplinary or regulatory decision to prosecute engages Article 8(1) of the ECHR where the accused has been prosecuted by a previous regulator).

Reg (Russell) v Bar Standards Board  Court of Appeal, 26.11.14

(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 Administrative Court, Nov 2014

(Successful application for relief from sanctions applying Denton v White, arising from non-payment of court fee in JR)

F v United Kingdom (2013) 5th Dec; (2012) No: 5908

(application to European Court of Human Rights; whether violation of presumption of innocence; challenge to  refusal of the Secretary of State to grant F compensation under s. 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 arising from his wrongful conviction in 2004 for various sexual offences).

R (Rosemarine) v Legal Ombudsman [2014] EWHC 601 (Admin; Manchester)

(Judicial Review against the Legal Ombudsman; whether  consideration of a fresh complaint outside of LeO jurisdiction by virtue of s. 126 of the Legal Services Act 2007; bias)

P v United Kingdom  January 2014

(Drafting an application to the European Court of Human Rights  examining the administrative and judicial arrangements in the United Kingdom for dealing with errors in the allocation of judges to the specialist work areas of the High Court of Justice  and the extent to which the UK’s purported solution [the “de facto judge principle”] violates Article 6 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000) ).

Reg (Mehey et al) v Bar Standards Board [2013] 16th October, High Court, Lawtel 24.10.13.

(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).

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).

P v Hertfordshire County Council [2009] Lawtel, 30.1.09

(School closure; judicial review; Closure Notice failed to show how closure would improve SEN provision for SEN children; Closure Notice held to be invalid; closure decision quashed. Defect I identified will affect closures across England & Wales).

For a BBC radio interview with Marc Beaumont about the decision in P v Hertfordshire County Council in December 2008, please click here

SR v Kent County Council [2007] ELR 648, Lawtel, 21st September

(Education, racist bullying, child withdrawn from school, LEA offered same school or school distant from home, whether discharge of LEA duty under s. 19 of the Education Act 1996)

R (Energy Financing Team Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office, GML International Ltd (Interested Party) [2005] All ER 285, Divisional Court

(Foreign proceedings, international fraud, mutual assistance, SFO, search warrants far wider than overseas request, judicial review, specificity of warrant, s.2 Criminal Justice Act 1987, ECHR, formal Guidance from Divisional Court)

J and B v Governors of H School [2005] Lawtel, 2nd September, Court of Appeal.

(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).

BJ and MB v Governors of H School [2005] All ER (D) 274

(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

M v Worcestershire CC [2004] Lawtel 27th April

(SEN, breach of s. 19(1) Education Act 1996, assurances of provision broken)

Louden v Bury School Organisation Committee [2002] Lawtel 19th December

(Constitutionality/illegality; bias of Chairman; evidence ignored; conduct of SOCs)

Boulton & Andrew v Leeds School Organisation Committee [2003] ELR 67

(Final hearing)

Boulton & Andrew v Leeds School Organisation Committee [2002] EWCA 20th June, Lawtel, Court of Appeal

(school closure, right of objectors to appear before SOC, scope of SOC´s duty to hear objections orally, natural justice, locus/whether pupils can be the applicants; abuse of process;)

London Borough of Islington v Michaelides [2001] Crim LR 843, [2001] Divisional Court.

(Planning, breach of Enforcement Notice, autrefois acquit inapplicable where previous acquittal secured by improperly obtained certificate of lawful development).

Thornberry v Coleman [2001] All ER (D) 357, Court of Appeal

(Planning, slander by officer of Local Government, exemplary and aggravated damages, whether slander of Company Director is slander of the Company )

Reg v Kingston Upon Hull MBC ex parte Rhodes [2001] ELR 230

(s.13 Education Act 1996, breach of statutory duty, judicial review)

Reg v Kirklees MBC ex parte Beaumont [2001] ELR 204

(Local Government, bias, non-pecuniary interest, leading case on circumstances in which a Councillor must recuse himself from a Council vote)

Reg v Sheffield CC ex parte McCloskey [2000] ELR 85

(school admissions)

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)

Reg v Sheffield CC ex parte Hague and others [1999] ELR 242 & 511, Court of Appeal

(A leading case on school admissions, Section 411 Education Act 1996, conduct of appeals, whether Appeal Committees can take into account anterior unlawfulness of policy)

Reg v London Borough of Redbridge ex parte Benning & ors [1999] 6 Ed CR 959

(School admissions, s. 411 Education Act 1996, catchment areas and ECHR)

Reg v Rotherham MBC ex parte Clark & others [1998] 2 ELR 152, Court of Appeal

(education; leading modern case on school admissions; judicial review of school admissions policy based on catchment areas rather than parental preference; s. 411 Education Act 1996)

 

Commercial, business & property litigation

V v A (2017) Moscow

(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). 

Smith v Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund (2016) June, Financial Ombudsman Service 

(successful complaint by a barrister to FOS concerning his right to choose his own solicitors to act for him in the face of insurer insisting on a panel firm)

Pratt & Whitney Canada (UK) Ltd v Bushell (2015)

(application for costs in Employment Tribunal; successfully resisted after detailed written submissions)

I v E Aug 2015

(Claim for return of investment funds; Marc Beaumont pleaded a defence of illegality; settled at Mediation) 

Norseman Holdings Ltd v Warwick Court Management Co Ltd,  Coulson J. 5.3.15

(Successful application to recall judgment and remove previous finding of identity fraud) 

G v S (2013/2014)

(successful defence of male Defendant in claim for damages for paternity fraud; claim withdrawn; costs paid to Defendant)

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).

Trade Storage Ltd v Papanicola [2011] EWHC 598

(Security for costs; whether Claimant Company in substance a Defendant and so immune from SFC order).

W v W Solicitors, [2011] April, Manchester County Court

(Costs; Solicitors Act 1974, statute bills, enforceability of invoices, solicitor’s lien over client funds).

DPIL and ISIL v McDonnell & MAL [2011] Technology & Construction Court, (November 2010 to April 2011)

(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).

Re Trumax Ltd  [2011] Lawtel 25th Jan, Companies Court

(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).

Private Car Services v K [2010] Feb, Central London County Court

(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).

GMC Collections v Singh [2009] CLCC, 28th July (HH Judge Collins CBE)

(Re-litigation, consumer credit, improper execution, issue estoppel, abuse of process, Johnson v Gore-Wood, limitation period for allegations of improper execution, successful strike-out application).

G v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2009] Central London County Court, 12th June

(Policeman; disciplinary proceedings which were wrongly brought; Policeman mentally ill; wrong diagnosis by Doctors; MPC’s duty of care to policeman; definition of duty of care; whether non-delegable;  successfully resisted MPC’s strike-out application).

Manning v Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2009] 6th January

(Bankruptcy Petition based on agreement to pay tax; allegation by client debtor that agreement procured by threat by HMRC to extend investigation over another 8 years of trading; need for trial; Petition dismissed with costs against HMRC).

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).

Greenergy SA v Memphis Biofuels LLC [2008] EWHC (Commercial Court) 2nd Sept

(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).

Snopek v Urang Ltd [2008] EWHC 1213 (Ch), Lawtel 23rd May

(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)

Patel v GMS Norwich Ltd [2008] 14th January, Court of Appeal

(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)

Goodchild v Bradbury & Hillier  [2007] WTLR 463, Court of Appeal

(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.

(Consumer Law; Sale of Goods; Hire Purchase Act 1964; title to goods; protection of private purchasers; meaning of “carrying on a business;” single commercial venture; bona fide purchaser without notice)

R (Energy Financing Team Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office, GML International Ltd (Interested Party) [2005] All ER 285, Lawtel 8th August.

(Foreign proceedings, international fraud, mutual assistance, SFO, search warrants far wider than overseas request, judicial review, specificity of warrant, s.2 Criminal Justice Act 1987, ECHR, formal Guidance from Divisional Court)

Shah v Lamberts Solicitors [2004] All ER (D) 66 (Mann J 6.10.04)

(Insolvency, costs, IA 1986, s. 366, lien for unpaid fees)

Di Placito v Slater [2004] 1 WLR 1605 CA

(application of CPR to modification of undertaking; relevant test)

Di Placito v Slater [2003] NLP 20th March, Lawtel 24th March

(Probate action; strike out for breach of undertaking, abuse of process, extension of time)

Hill Samuel Personal Finance v Grundy [2002] CL Aug

(CPR Part 51.19, automatic stay, strike out)

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

(Overreaching, ECHR Article 8, undue influence, subrogation)

Ocwen UK v Travis [2000] Current Law, Aug

(strike out/limitation period for extortionate credit bargain claim)

Leheny v Allied Irish Bank [1999] BPIR

(Appeal against Bankruptcy Order, equitable set-off, sale at undervalue by mortgagee, s. 267 Insolvency Act 1985)

Hurstanger Ltd v Wood & Wood [1999] CL June

(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

(mortgage fraud, LPA Section 199, reasonable inquiries, application of Quennell v Maltby test)

Barclays Bank v Clifton [1998] BPIR 566

(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

(Unless Orders / Hytec Information criteria)

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

(division of post-dissolution partnership profits)

First National Bank v Ann [1998] CCLR 1, [1997] 1 CLY 963, February,

(limitation period for extortionate credit bargain claim)

Re Jayham Ltd [1995] 2 BCLC 455

(Restoration to Companies Register/s.653 Companies Act 1985)

S v W [1995] 1 FLR 862, CA

(a leading case on s. 11 of the Limitation Act 1980; action for damages for childhood sexual abuse/limitation)

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

(writ extension)

 

 

 

© Copyright Marc Beaumont 2011. All rights reserved.