header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 3 April 2020

01 April 2020
Issue: 7881 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Consumer protection

Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter [2020] EWHC 672 (QB), [2020] All ER (D) 158 (Mar)

The proceedings raised a point of some general importance, concerning the interaction of s 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), which deprived a defendant of a limitation defence if he had deliberately concealed a breach of duty, with s 140A-D of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974). The respondent alleged that she had been mis-sold payment protection insurance, in respect of which the appellant company (then trading by a different name), from which she had taken a loan, had received a commission. The respondent brought a claim to recover the balance of the premia she had paid, together with contractual and statutory interest, relying on CCA 1974, s 140A-D. The appellant relied on the defence of limitation, however, the recorder found in the respondent’s favour. The Queen’s Bench Division, in dismissing the appellant’s appeal, construed LA 1980 s 32(2) and held that the appellant’s non-disclosure of the commission had been unfair

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

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
back-to-top-scroll