header-logo header-logo

Irreconcilable differences?

19 September 2014 / William McCormick KC , Faisel Sadiq
Issue: 7622 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail
commercial_mccormick

William McCormick QC & Faisel Sadiq report on Patel v Mirza & the dangers of relying on illegal contracts

“As any hapless law student attempting to grapple with the concept of illegality knows, it is almost impossible to ascertain or articulate principled rules from the authorities relating to the recovery of money or other assets paid or transferred under illegal contracts. This court frankly recognised in Tribe v Tribe [1996] Ch 107, [1995] 4 All ER 236. (per Lord Justice Nourse at 121, and per Lord Justice Millett at 135) that the authorities are irreconcilable. The three different judgments in this case reflect some of the complexities of the problems raised by the illegality principle which are apparent from the authorities.” This opening paragraph of the partly dissenting judgment of Lady Justice Gloster in the recent case of Patel v Mirza [2014] EWCA Civ 1047, [2014] All ER (D) 279 (Jul) sets the unhappy scene that has confronted not only the hapless student but the hardened practitioner in this area of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll