header-logo header-logo

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

Irreconcilable differences?

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll