header-logo header-logo

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

Law digests: 3 April 2020

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll