Law for business students 5th adams

The new edition supports your learning and engagement with this area through a new colour design and a number of learning features that include: ❉ Learning objectives, chapter introducti

Law for Business Students provides an approachable

introduction to the law for those new to the subject or studying

law as part of a non-law degree Alix Adams’ writing style

brings the subject to life and encourages you to apply the law

to your own experiences and the world around you

The new edition supports your learning and engagement

with this area through a new colour design and a number of

learning features that include:

❉ Learning objectives, chapter introductions and

summaries to help structure your reading, aid navigation

and ensure you understand the key points

❉ Real life examples to highlight how the law works in

everyday situations

❉ In the news features that focus on topical and recent cases

or issues and address how the law is relevant today

❉ End of chapter key terms to provide clear defi nitions for

technical or legal terms

❉ Quizzes to allow you to test your knowledge on the key

points in each chapter while web activities encourage

further exploration of relevant law as it relates to you

❉ Assignments, Worth thinking about?, and Take a closer

look features which all encourage you to think in more

detail about the law and discuss some more complex

Cover image © Getty Images

Visit www.mylawchamber.co.uk/adams to access

interactive exercises and fl ashcards designed so that you can test yourself on topics covered in the book There are also legal updates and live weblinks

to help you impress examiners and lecturers with knowledge of the latest developments.

CASE

N

A V I G AT O R

POWERED BY

Worried about getting to grips with cases?

Case Navigator offers unique online support that helps you improve your case reading and analysis skills in Business Law Cases contained within this resource are highlighted throughout this book The LexisNexis element of Case Navigator is only available to those who currently subscribe

to LexisNexis Butterworths online

Do you want to give yourself a head start come exam time?

Lecturers: use the site to access resources to

help you teach the subject, including a testbank

of multiple choice questions which can be used

to assess students’ progress.

ALIX ADAMS has over thirty years’ experience of teaching

law from GCSE to degree and postgraduate level and is a

qualifi ed Barrister

ALIX ADAMS

FIFTH EDITION

Law for Business Students

We work with leading authors to develop the strongest educationalmaterials in business and law, bringing cutting-edge thinking andbest learning practice to a global market.

Under a range of well-known imprints, including

Longman, we craft high quality print and

electronic publications which help readers to understand

and apply their content, whether studying or at work

To find out more about the complete range of our

publishing, please visit us on the World Wide Web at:

www.pearsoned.co.uk

Law for Business Students

Fifth edition

Alix Adams

LLB (Bristol), LLM (Cardiff), Barrister, Cert Ed

For Cherry, who helped to make it happen

Pearson Education Limited

Edinburgh Gate

Harlow

Essex CM20 2JE

England

and Associated Companies throughout the world

Visit us on the World Wide Web at:

www.pearsoned.co.uk

First published under the Pitman Publishing imprint in Great Britain in 1996

Second edition published 2000

Third edition published 2003

Fourth edition published 2006

Fifth edition published 2008

© Pearson Professional Limited 1996

© Pearson Education Limited 2000, 2008

The right of Alix Adams to be identified as author of this work has

been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval

system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,

photocopying, recording or otherwise, without either the prior written permission of the

publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying in the United Kingdom issued by the

Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.

All trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners The use of any trademark in this text does not vest in the author or publisher any trademark ownership rights in such trademarks, nor does the use of such trademarks imply any affiliation with or endorsement of this book by such owners Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland

Law Commission Reports are reproduced under the terms of the Click-Use Licence

ISBN: 978-1-4058-5888-5

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Typeset in 9.5/13 pt Stone Sans by 30

Printed and bound by Rotolito Lombarda, Italy

The publisher’s policy is to use paper manufactured from sustainable forests

Contents vii

1 Getting started: an introduction to studying law 4

5 The law of contract: consideration, intention and privity 82

7 Defects in the contract: misrepresentation, mistake, duress and 126

Brief contents

9 Discharge of the contract and remedies for breach 170

12 Sale of goods: transfer of ownership, performance and remedies for

16 Rights at work: the contract of employment and health and safety at work 342

17 Rights at work: protection against discrimination 360

18 Rights at work: protection against dismissal and redundancy 386

21 Running the company: raising and maintaining capital 444

22 Daily management of the company: functions of directors, secretary

23 Company meetings and shareholder participation 476

24 Statutory intellectual property protection: copyright, designs, patents and

25 Common law protection of intellectual property: passing off, malicious

26 Study skills, and revision and examination hints 532

Guided tour xviii

1 Getting started: an introduction to studying law 4

The differences between criminal and civil law 9

Contents

2 How the law is made 16

Payment into court and offers to settle 48

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) 52

The relative importance of contractual terms 103Limitation and exclusion of liability 106

8 More defects: illegality and incapacity 154

The rights and duties of the principal 212

11 Sale of goods: the contract and its terms 220

The terms implied by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 224

12 Sale of goods: transfer of ownership, performance and remedies

The statutory rules governing transfer of title from seller to buyer 240

Remedies for breach of the sale of goods contract 249

14 Tort liability for defective services 278

16 Rights at work: the contract of employment and health and safety at work 342

The employment contract: a contract of service 344The law of tort: employers’ civil liability for industrial injuries 349Criminal law regulation of safety in the workplace 354

17 Rights at work: protection against discrimination 360

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 375

Legal personality, incorporation and limited liability 410

The impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) on business organisations 423

22 Daily management of the company: functions of directors,

23 Company meetings and shareholder participation 476

24 Statutory intellectual property protection: copyright, designs,

25 Common law protection of intellectual property: passing off, malicious

Part 7: Study skills 531

26 Study skills, and revision and examination hints 532

Visit the Law for Business Students, 5th editionmy lawchambersite at

For students

Companion website support

Do you want to give yourself a head start come exam time?

• Use the multiple choice questions and flashcards to test yourself on each topic out the course

through-• Use the updates to major changes in the law to make sure you are ahead of the game byknowing the latest developments

• Use the live weblinks to help you explore the law as it relates to you

Online Study Guide

Struggling with some of the core concepts in Contract Law?

This study guide includes a series of interactive problem solving exercises to help you revisekey topics in Contract Law

Case Navigator*

Worried about getting to grips with cases?

This unique online support helps you to improve your case reading and analysis skills

• Direct deep links to the core cases in Business Law

• Short introductions provide guidance on what you should look out for while reading the

case

• Questions help you to test your understanding of the case, and provide feedback on

what you should have grasped

• Summaries contextualise the case and point you to further reading so that you are fully

prepared for seminars and discussions

Also: The Companion Website provides the following features:

• Search tool to help locate specific items of content

• E-mail results and profile tools to send results of quizzes to instructors

• Online help and support to assist with website usage and troubleshooting

For more information please contact your local Pearson Education sales representative orvisit www.mylawchamber.co.uk/adams

*Please note that access to Case Navigator is free with the purchase of this book, but you must register with us for access Full registration instructions are available on the website The LexisNexis element of Case Navigator is only available to those who

CASE

N

A V IG ATO R

POWERED BY

Guided tour

When you have studied this chapter you should be able to:

I Distinguish between the different types of share capital

I Define ordinary/preference/redeemable/deferred shares

I Appreciate how shares may be bought and sold

I Understand how a company may obtain loans.

L e a r n i n g O b j e c t i v e s

I n t ro d u c t i o n

In general terms, the company’s capital includes all its business assets, including premises,

equipment, stock in trade and goodwill This chapter is concerned with capital in more

specialised terms: that which can be raised through the issue of shares or through loans made

to the company.

A company may need to borrow money and may do so under the relevant powers in its objects

clause Security to lenders may be obtained from registered charges on the company’s

property which require registration under the Companies Acts.

Capital may be raised in two ways:

1 by selling shares (share capital): the buyers become company members;

2 by obtaining loans (loan capital): the lenders do not become members by virtue of their loan

– they are creditors of the company.

This area of the law is largely unchanged in substance by the Companies Act 2006 and the

existing principles have been restated.

Photo: Getty/Getty Images

The impact of the Consumer Protection Act 1987

As cases emerged some commentators perceived that the way in which the law was negligence This was a concern since the Product Liability Directive had indicated that its overcoming one of the main obstacles to a successful claim The Act (s 1) stated that it was intended to comply with the Directive.

Two subsequent judgments since this case clearly reflect this approach.

272

Horace was injured and suffered damage to his property when an electric blanket, manufactured

a claim in negligence, Horace also has a claim under the CPA 1987, as his losses certainly exceed

the £275 minimum

Cosiwarm the manufacturer is liable as producer under the CPA 1987 if the blanket is proven to

be defective Even if Cosiwarm is not clearly identifiable as producer of the blanket, it may still be

best to claim under the CPA, as this may give Horace more flexibility in his choice of defendant

Flash Electricals, from which Aunt Betty bought the blanket, would be the ‘marker’, if the ket was marketed as Flash’s own brand If there is no label saying who the producer is, Flash may

blan-imported the blanket, it could still be sued as ‘importer’ if it obtained the goods directly from any

country outside the EU.

As long as he can prove that the electric blanket was defective and actually caused the fire, he will be successful and will not have to prove failure to take reasonable care as the CPA 1987

imposes strict liability

Real Life THE LAW OF TORT

European Commission v UK (1997, ECJ)

The Commission claimed that the UK was failing in its obligations to implement the purpose of the

Held: it was essential that the Act be construed in accordance with the purpose of the Directive

and that the Directive must prevail in the event of conflict.

Abouzaid v Mothercare (UK) Ltd (2000, CA)

The claimant, who was 12 years old, was blinded in one eye while attempting to attach the

defen-sprang from his hand and the attached buckle struck his eye.

Chapter introductions

Outline the key concepts that each chapter is going to discuss

in detail so that you are aware of the main issues before youstart your reading

Real life boxes

Give you examples of how the law is applied to everyday situations allowing a deeper understanding of the key legalprinciples

Learning objectives

Highlight the essential points in each chapter so you cancheck your understanding while reading

However, where the buyer is deemed to have delayed rejection unreasonably he or she will lose their right.

The House of Lords recently held (J & H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd (2007): see ‘In the

news’) that when goods are returned to a buyer for inspection with a view to repair this

an implied duty to inform the buyer of the nature of the defect so that the seller can then decide whether or not to repudiate the sale of goods contract

251

12

spin mechanism malfunctioned leaving Horace with a load of very wet washing The engineer was the machine, or that the load had become unbalanced Horace tried again with a small load and again the machine refused to spin.

Horace would be best advised to give up at this point and promptly tell Floggit to take away the machine and give him back his money He would be fully entitled to do this The machine is clearly circumstances amount to acceptance of the goods when rejection is made within a reasonable time.

Jones v Gallagher and Gallagher (2005, CA)

The Joneses sought to reject a fitted kitchen when the work was complete Their initial and then permitted some attempts at rectification by the Gallaghers before eventually seeking to reject period of complaint was ongoing, the right to reject could not be lost.

princi-Held: the right to reject had been lost as several weeks had elapsed before the Joneses had sought

point the kitchen was unpacked and they had delayed raising this and the other issues and then waited even longer before seeking to reject the goods

J & H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd (2007, HL)

The claimant farming contractor bought a seed drill and harrow from the defendant As soon as it before reporting the matter to the defendant The defendant agreed to remove the equipment for

Creation of agency agreement:

deed (power of attorney); or

in writing; or

by word of mouth.

The authority of the agent is usually:

Actual: express/implied and derived from the

By ratification: a party subsequently ratifies a

contract made by another for their benefit.

Duties of the agent

The agency relationship is fiduciary: the agent

or her work for the principal and avoid any conflict of interest

He or she must carry out their work with sonable care and skill.

rea-Duties of principal

To the agent: Perform reciprocal fiduciary duty.

Pay agreed remuneration.

Indemnify expenses.

Principal’s liability to third parties:

Liable to perform authorised contracts.

Vicariously liable for the agent’s torts.

Termination of the agency relationship Operation of law: incapacity/death, bank-

ruptcy, or frustration of the agency agreement.

Act of the parties: performance, agreement or

revocation.

Enduring/irrevocable/lasting power of ney may prevent termination.

attor-Chapter summary

LAW OF CONTRACT, AGENCY AND SALE OF GOODS

steps to preserve the principal’s property.

failure by the principal to give notice that it has ended or to correct the impression that it exists.

affairs to be managed under the supervision of the Court of Protection.

Key terms

(d) The mischief rule This sixteenth-century rule allows the court to adopt a meaning which will enable the statute to fulfil its intended purpose The court examines the law correct; then the statute can be given the meaning which resolves the problem.

This rule largely fell into disfavour with the rise of the literal rule, which inated judicial decision-making in the nineteenth century and for approximately the first 70 years of the twentieth century.

dom-(e) The purposive approach This approach, which is somewhat similar to the mischief approach, but broader in its effect, has come into use since the UK’s entry into the the European Court of Justice It requires the court to interpret the statute by look- court may examine relevant extrinsic documentary evidence such as government reports proposing the reform The next case is a good example of this.

The House of Lords’ decision in Pepper v Hart (see above at page 25) may be seen as

purposive approach is common where this assists a just outcome in the public

them-Held: the purpose of the legislation was to prevent annoyance to people arising from the activities

the street, that conduct clearly fell within the purpose of the Street Offences Act 1959.

HOW THE LAW IS MADE

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS (1981, HL)

Section 1(1) of the Abortion Act 1967 states that an abortion is legal only if carried out by a the procedure was largely carried out by nurses, subject to some supervision by a doctor The courts had to decide whether abortions carried out by this procedure were legal under the Act.

‘reg-The Court of Appeal held (adopting a literal approach) that the practice was unlawful since nurses

do not have the necessary qualifications.

The House of Lords held (by majority) that a purposive approach should be used and that no

ille-are two aspects of it: the first, to broaden the grounds on which an abortion may be obtained; the second is to ensure that the abortion is carried out with proper skill and in hygienic conditions.’

back-street abortionists.)

Key terms

Are highlighted in red and definitions can be

found at the end of each chapter Use them to get

up to speed quickly with legal terminology

Case summaries

Introduce you to legal cases in a straightforward

‘Worth thinking about?’

Encourages you to think in more detail about a

In the news boxes

Provides you with contemporary examples thatstress how the law impacts on 21st century lifeand business!

would reasonably expect successful receipt This principle, generally applied by the determined whether the intention to offer or accept is adequately demonstrated

Electronic communications

As yet there are no reported cases involving communication via fax, or answerphone Using

the reasonable expectations approach, faxes are likely to be treated like telex messages.

It can probably be successfully argued that messages left on answering machines are

not communicated until, like any telephone message, the recipient actually hears them.

be received when the parties to whom they are addressed are able to access them’.

The post rule

nine-teenth and early twentieth centuries the only method of communication for parties

Lindsell (1818) it was held that once a letter of acceptance is posted, a contract comes rules were clarified further by Household Insurance v Grant (1879, CA) which held that

fails to reach the offeror, as long as this is not due to some fault of the offeree’s: for example, an incorrect address.

76

LAW OF CONTRACT, AGENCY AND SALE OF GOODS

Judges always have a reason for changing the law

Why do you think the post rule was developed?

Suggested solutions can be found in Appendix 2.

Worth thinking about?

End of chapter assignments

Test your knowledge in more depth by answeringthe assignments They are great practice for whatyou may be faced with in an exam

Quiz

Test your knowledge on what you have read by

doing the end of chapter quiz Solutions can be

Understand how the law works in the real world

by logging on and trying the web activities

428

Please go to:

www.bytestart.co.uk/index.shtml There is a wealth of information for small businesses Check out their guides to setting up as sole trader, partnership and registered company.

1 Distinguish between wrongful and unfair dismissal.

2 On what grounds may Tiger Enterprises claim that they fairly dismissed the following employees?

(a) Zebra, who was given a job as a trainee lorry driver three years ago and has just failed the HGV test for the sixth time.

(b) Camel, who sexually harassed Ms Wart-Hog at the works’ Christmas party.

(c) Possum, a van driver who has crashed his vehicle three times.

(d) Rhino, who was recently convicted of being drunk and disorderly one Saturday night.

3 Have the following employees been made redundant by Lynx plc?

(a) Aardvark, who heard rumours of redundancy and resigned.

(b) Porcupine, a senior computer programmer, whose current workplace is being closed down He is told that he is being transferred to another branch 80 miles away.

4 What procedures should be observed by an employer before making employees redundant?

Answers to all quizzes can be found in Appendix 2.

Quiz 18

losses arising from the dismissal which are the fault of the employer

qualifies an employee to claim unfair dismissal at the employment tribunal.

maternity leave is deemed to have dismissed her.

ETO:an economic, technical or organisational reason to justify changes to workforce/conditions

of service after the transfer of an undertaking.

business practices/ceases to carry on business/or closes location where employee works.

RIGHTS AT WORK: PROTECTION AGAINST DISMISSAL AND REDUNDANCY

con-tracts (see Chapter 8) It will not generally be granted to force one party to employ or

rectly In Page One Records v Britton (1968) it was held that an injunction would not be would force them to go on employing the claimant But compare Page One Records v Britton with the following case.

Very exceptionally a court may use an injunction actually to compel performance of a

contract where this is in the interests of justice In Gryf Lowczowski v Hinchingbrooke

the claimant to obtain a fair outcome in a situation where his employers had treated him very inappropriately (See ‘In the news’ above, page 179.)

DISCHARGE OF THE CONTRACT AND REMEDIES FOR BREACH

197

9

Warner Bros v Nelson (1936)

The film star, Bette Davis (Nelson), breached her contract, under which she had agreed not to act

UK company.

Held: an injunction would be granted to restrain Bette Davis from making films for the rival

com-her from earning com-her living in otcom-her ways The injunction did not force com-her to perform the contract

if she was prepared to earn her living in a less profitable way.

Discharge of contracts

Performance: must generally be complete

Exceptions: contract divisible, acceptance of

substantial performance.

Agreement: mutuality essential.

Frustration: performance becomes impossible

trol of either of the parties and not due to their fault

The Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act recover any resulting financial losses.

Breach of a condition gives the innocent party

immediately or awaiting performance date.

Take a closer look

Draws your attention to the key legal cases covered in each chapter and invites you to readthe cases yourself in order to gain a deeper under-standing of the law and to better familiariseyourself with legal terminology

383

17

with men doing the same/similar/equivalent work or work of equal value.

gender equality and eradicate racism in all aspects of their work.

may permit employer to discriminate against members of groups who lack it.

offensive environment and is intended/has the effect of violating a person’s dignity.

conditions applicable to the whole workforce but discriminatory to members of a particular group.

1 (a) Ms Antelope, who is employed as a cleaner by Cheetah plc, is paid less than the packers.

(b) Mr Buck was refused a job at the Warren Family Planning Clinic because of his sex.

What legal rights may they have?

2 What is the difference between direct and indirect discrimination?

3 When may it be legal to advertise a job as being open only to members of a particular ethnic group?

4 What aspects of employment discrimination come within the scope of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Race Relations Act 1976?

Answers to all quizzes can be found in Appendix 2.

Quiz 17

The following cases provide important examples of how the law you have studied in this chapter about their facts, as well as helping you to understand the law and to appreciate how the judges reached their decisions

Try looking them up in the law reports or accessing them via a database, e.g Bailli (www.bailii.org/databases.html) LexisNexis or Westlaw may be available in your university or col- lege library, or you may find extracts in a case book (See Appendix 1: Additional resources.)

Take a closer look

• Companion website support: Use the multiple

choice questions and flashcards to test yourself

on each topic throughout the course The siteincludes updates to major changes in the law tomake sure you are ahead of the game, andweblinks to help you read more widely aroundthe subject

• Online Study Guide: Use this resource to revise key topics in Contract Law by working through a

series of interactive problem-solving exercises

• Case Navigator: provides access and guidance to key cases in the subject to improve your case

reading and analysis skills

The publisher would like to thank the following for their kind permission to reproducetheir photographs:

Alamy: Alex Segre p.40; Anthony Dunn p.126; Arcblue p.476; Chuck Pefley p.238;

Enigma p.456; Jeff Morgan retail and commerce p.430; Justin Kase zonez p.2; LourensSmak p.408; Manor Photography p.100; Redsnapper p.82; Robert Harding Picture Libraryp.406; Roy Lawe p.530; Stockfolio p.16; UK Retail Alan King p.62; Vario Images GmbH &

Co.KG p.170; Art Directors and TRIP photo Library: Trip p.278; Corbis: Alan Schein

Photography p.220; Pawel Libera p.60; Richard Klune p.260; William Manning p.386;

Digital Vision: p.258, 312, 490, 514; Getty Images: AFP p.4, 532; Getty p.444; Photographers Choice p.340; Imagestate: Michael Duerinckx p.492; John Binch: John Binch p.342; Photodisc: p.154, p.202; PunchStock: Comstock p.360

Picture Research by: Alison Prior

Every effort has been made to trace the copyright holders and we apologise in advancefor any unintentional omissions We would be pleased to insert the appropriate acknowl-edgement in any subsequent edition of this publication

Acknowledgements

Over thirty years of teaching law on a variety of further and higher education coursesfrom GCSE to post graduate level taught me much about the difficulties experienced bystudents in grasping legal concepts It can be particularly hard for students following anintensive course of which law forms only one part Hopefully this text will meet theirneeds I have tried to make it accessible, without over-simplification of the subjectmatter I have aimed at a light touch, in the hope that it may not only instruct its readersbut also entertain them a little as well.

Many thanks to all at Pearson who have helped me in the creation of this edition, cially my publisher Zoe Botterill, who has helped to inspire many of the changes in theformat of this new edition as well as giving me lots of support, and to Anita Atkinson(Senior Editor) and to Kevin Ancient for his skill in designing it I have enjoyed workingwith them

espe-As ever, my partner Cherry Potts’ emotional and practical port has been crucial to the editing process She hasencouraged me when my enthusiasm flagged and has alsogiven me lots of practical assistance Her eagle eye has beeninvaluable in ensuring removal of typos and her keen criticalmind has greatly assisted me in my endeavour to express thelaw, as far as possible, in accessible terms for the lay person

sup-Alix Adams December 2007

Preface

A v B, sub nom Gary Flitcroft v Mirror Group

Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681, 76

Addie (Robert) & Sons (Collieries) Ltd v Dumbreck [1929] AC 358, 545

Addis v Gramophone Ltd [1909] AC 488, 189 Adler v George [1964] 1 All ER 628, 26, 39 Aerial Advertising v Batchelors Peas [1938] 2 All ER

788, 190 Albert v Motor Insurers Bureau [1971] 2 All ER 1345, 93 Alcock v Wright [1991] 4 All ER 907, 290, 291, 292,

310, 547, 554

Allcard v Skinner [1887] 36 Ch D 145, 148

Visit the Law for Business Students 5th edition my lawchambersite at

improve your case reading and analysis skills

Case Navigator provides:

• Direct deep links to the core cases in Business Law

• Short introductions provide guidance on what you should look out for while reading the

case

• Questions help you to test your understanding of the case, and provide feedback on what

you should have grasped

• Summaries contextualise the case and point you to further reading so that you are fully

prepared for seminars and discussions

Please note that access to Case Navigator is free with the purchase of this book, but you must register with us for access Full registration instructions are available on the website The LexisNexis element of Case Navigator is only available to those who currently subscribe to LexisNexis Butterworths online.

Alliance Bank v Broome (1864) 2 Drew & Sm 289, 86

Allin v City & Hackney Health Authority [1996] 7

Med LR 167, 289

Aluminium Industrie Vaasen v Romalpa Aluminium

Ltd [1976] 1 All ER 552, 243, 255, 256

Amalgamated Investment & Property Co Ltd v John

Walker & Sons [1977] 1 WLR 164, 178

Andreae v Selfridge [1938] Ch 11, 323

Andrews v Singer [1934] All ER 479, 109

Anglia TV v Reed [1971] 3 All ER 690, 189

Anglo Overseas Transport Ltd v Titan Industrial Corpn

Attwood v Small (1838) 6 Cl & F 232, 131

Avery v Bowden (1855) 5 E & B 714, 186

Avon Finance v Bridger [1985] 2 All ER 281, 145

Azmi v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council [2007]

ICR 1154, 379, 384

Badger v Ministry of Defence [2006] 3 All ER 173, 332

Baigent and Leigh v Random House Group Ltd [2007]

EWCA 247, 497

Bairstow Eves London Central Ltd v Smith [2004]

EWHC 263, 117

Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571, 92

Barber v Guardian Royal Insurance (1993), 370

Barber v Somerset County Council [2004] UKHL

13, 352

Barclays Bank v O’Brien [1993] 4 All ER 417, 146, 147

Barker v Corus UK Ltd, Murray v British Docks Ltd

[2006] 3 All ER 785, 303, 304

Barrett v Deere (1828) Moo & M 200, 206 Barrett v Enfield Borough Council [1999] 3 WLR

79, 296 Barton v Armstrong [1975] 2 All ER 465, 144 Batisha v Say (1977) IRLIB 109, 366

Baybut and others v Eccle Riggs Country Park (2006)

The Times, 13 November, 118

Bayley v Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway (1873) LR 8 CP 148, 334

Beale v Taylor [1967] 3 All ER 253, 226, 227 Beard v London Omnibus Co [1900] 2 QB 530, 334 Bell Houses Ltd v City Wall Properties Ltd [1966] 2 WLR 1323, 436

Beneviste v University of Southampton [1989] ICR

617, 365 Berlei (UK) v Bali Brassiere Co [1969] 2 All ER 812,

506, 512

Bernstein v Pamson [1987] 2 All ER 220, 250 Beswick v Beswick [1968] AC 58, 196 Bettini v Gye (1875–76) LR 1 QBD 183, 104 Bigg v Boyd Gibbons [1971] 1 WLR 913, 68 Bissett v Wilkinson [1927] AC 58, 128 Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club v Blackpool Council [1990] 3 All ER 25, 69, 80

Bloom v American Swiss Watch Co [1915] App D

100, 69 Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582, 299, 300

Bolitho v City and Hackney AHA [1997] 4 All ER

771, 300 Bolton v Mahadeva [1972] 2 All ER 1322, 174 Bolton v Stone [1951] AC 850, 297

Borden v Scottish Timber Products Ltd [1981]

Ch 25, 242 Boychuk v Symons Holdings [1977] IRLR 395, 393

BP Exploration Co v Hunt [1982] 1 All ER 925, 182 Bradbury v Morgan [1862] 1 H & C 249, 70 Brace v Calder [1895] 2 QB 253, 194 Bracebridge Engineering v Darby [1990] IRLR 3, 349 Branco v Cobarro [1947] 2 All ER 101, 74

BRC Engineering Ltd v Schelff [1921] 2 Ch 563, 161 Brinkibon Ltd v Stahag Stahl und Stahlwarenhandels GmbH [1983] 1 All ER 293, 75, 536

Bristol Conservatories Ltd v Conservatories Custom Built Ltd [1989] RPC 455, 516

British Celanese v Hunt [1969] 1 WLR 959, 322 British Railways Board v Herrington [1972] 2 WLR

537, 545 Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co [1877] 2 App Cas 666, 74, 537

Bunker v Charles Brand [1969] 2 QB 480, 315 Bushell v Faith [1970] 2 WLR 272, 467

C (a debtor), Re (1994) 11 May, unreported, 91

Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] 2

Capper Pass v Lawton (1977) IRLR 366, 362

Car & Universal Finance Co Ltd v Caldwell [1964] 1

Chadwick v British Rail [1967] 1 WLR 912, 288

Chapelton v Barry UDC [1940] 1 All ER 456, 107

Chappell v Nestlé & Co Ltd [1960] 3 WLR 701, 86

Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police v Liversidge

Lawtel [2002] EWCA Civ 894, 374

Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police v Stubbs

Clark v Novacold [1998] IRLR 420, 375

Clea Shipping Corpn v Bulk Oil International [1984]

Collins v Godefroy (1831) B & Ad 950, 87

Commission for Racial Equality v Dutton [1989]

IRLR 8, 371

Condor v The Barron Knights [1966] WLR 87, 176

Confetti Records v Warner Music UK [2003] EWHC

1274, 74

Conlon and Harris v Simms [2007] 3 All ER 802, 132

Co-operative Insurance Society v Argyll Stores

(Holdings) Ltd [1998] AC 1, 196

Couturier v Hastie [1856] 5 HL Cases 673, 137

Cox v Post Office (1997) (unreported) Daily Telegraph,

5 November, 375 Craig, Re [1971] Ch 95, 146 Credit Lyonnais v Burch [1997] IRLR 167, 147, 151

Crown Suppliers (PSA) v Dawkins [1991] 1 All ER

306, 371 Cundy v Lindsay [1878] 3 App Cas 459, 139, 142 Cunningham v Reading Football Club [1991] The Independent, 20 March, 315

Currie v Misa (1875) LR 10 Ex 153, 84 Cutter v Powell (1795) 6 Term Rep 320, 172, 174, 183

D & C Builders v Rees [1965] 3 All ER 837, 92 Dalkia Utilities Services plc v Caltech International ltd [2006] EWHC 63 (Comm), 184

Dalton v Burtons Gold Medal Biscuit Co Ltd (1974) IRLR 45, 347

Davey v Harrow Corpn [1957] 1 QB 60, 321 Davis Contractors v Fareham UDC [1956] 2 All ER

145, 177, 178, 200 Davison v Kent Meters [1975] IRLR 145, 392

De Beers Products Ltd v International General Electrics [1975] 1 WLR 972, 520

De Francesco v Barnum [1890] 45 Ch D 430, 164 Dennis v Ministry of Defence [2003] EWHC 793,

324, 329

Dickinson v Dodds [1876] 2 Ch D 463, 71, 537 Dimmock v Hallett (1866) LR 2 Ch App, 130 Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank [2001] 1 All ER 97, 117, 118

Dollman v Hillman [1941] 1 All ER 355, 328 Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, 262, 265,

274, 275, 279

Dooley v Cammell Laird & Co [1951] 2 Lloyd’s Rep

271, 287 Douglas and another v Hello! Ltd [2001] 2 All ER

289, 523, 526 Douglas and another v Hello! Ltd [2005] 4 All ER

128, 523 Douglas and another v Hello! Ltd (No 3) [2007] 4 All

ER 545, 524, 525, 528 Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) [1969] 2 QB 158, 133 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage & Motor

Co Ltd [1915] AC 79, 193 Dunlop Rubber Co Ltd v Selfridge [1915] AC 847,

Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 All

ER 493, 57, 80, 536

Errington v Errington & Woods [1952] 1 All ER 149, 72

Erven Warnink BV v Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd

[1979] AC 731, 516

Esso Petroleum v Mardon [1976] 2 All ER 5, 129,

151, 161

Etam plc v Rowan [1996] IRLR 75, 368

European Commission v UK (C-300/95) [1997] ECR

I–2649, 272

Everet v Williams (1725) cited in [1899] 1 QB 826, 156

Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1986] 1 All ER 617,

159, 524

Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services [2002] 3 All

ER 305, 303, 304

Farley v Skinner (No 2) [2001] 4 All ER 801, 191, 192

Farr v Hoveringham Gravels Ltd [1972] IRLR 104,

394, 404

Fawcett v Smethurst (1914) 84 LJKB 473, 164

Federspiel v Twigg [1957] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 240, 241

Feldaroll Foundry Plc v Hermes Leasing London Ltd

Foley v Classique Coaches [1934] All ER 88, 65

Ford Motor Co Ltd and Iveco Fiat SpA’s Design

Application [1993] RPC 167, 500

Forster & Sons Ltd v Suggett (1918) 35 TLR 87, 158

Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461, 482, 483, 486, 549

Freeman & Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties Mangal

Ltd [1964] 2 QB 480, 460

Fuller v Stephanie Bowman Ltd [1977] IRLR 87, 399

Gallie v Lee (Saunders v Anglia Building Society) [1970]

132, 207 Great Peace Shipping v Tsavliris (International) Ltd [2002] 4 All ER 689, 136, 137

Green v Cade Bros [1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 602, 114 Griffiths v Peter Conway [1939] 1 All ER 685, 231 Gry-Lowczowski v Hinchinbrooke Healthcare NHS Trus [2006] ICR 425, 177, 179, 197

Guinness plc v Saunders [1990] 2 AC 663, 464, 474 Guthing v Lynn (1831) 2 B&AD 231, 65

Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341, 187, 198, 199 Halsey v Esso Petroleum [1961] 1 WLR 683, 322 Hambrook v Stokes [1925] 1 KB 141, 289, 547 Harlingdon & Leinster Enterprises v Christopher Hill Fine Art [1990] QB 564, 227, 236

Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) 7 EL BL 872, 87 Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566, 142 Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552, 67

Hatton v Sutherland [2002] 2 All ER 1, 352 Hayes v James & Charles Dodd [1990] 2 All ER

815, 192 Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 147, 330 Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders [1988] 1 All

ER 503, 364 Hedley Byrne v Heller [1963] AC 465, 133, 281–4,

286, 289, 310, 418, 554

Heil v Hedges (1951) 1 TLR 512, 230 Hendy Lennox v Graham Puttick [1984] 2 All ER

152, 241 Herne Bay Steam Boat Co v Hutton [1903] 2 KB

683, 177 Heywood v Wellers [1976] QB 446, 191 Hickman v Romney Marsh Sheep Breeders Association [1915] 1 Ch 881, 437

Hilder v Associated Portland Cement [1961] 1 WLR

1434, 297 Hillas v Arcos [1932] 147 LT 503, 65 Hochster v De la Tour (1853) 2 E & B 678, 184 Hodges (G.T.) & Sons v Hackbridge Residential Hotel [1939] 4 All ER 307, 209

Hoenig v Isaacs [1952] 2 All ER 176, 174 Hogg v Cramphorn [1967] Ch 254, 462 Holwell Securities v Hughes [1974] 1 All ER 161, 77, 80 Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett [1936] 2 KB

468, 323 Home Counties Dairies v Skilton [1970] 1 All ER 1227,

160, 168

Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004,

Hood v West End Motor Car Packing [1917] 2 KB 38,

130

Household Insurance v Grant [1879] 4 Ex D 216, 76

Howard Marine & Dredging Co Ltd v Ogden & Sons

Hunter v Canary Wharf [1997] 2 All ER 426, 326, 338

Hussain & Livingstone v Lancaster City Council [1999]

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Fry (2001), 75

Interfoto Picture Library v Stiletto Productions [1988]

Jarvis v Swan Tours [1973] 3 WLR 954, 186, 191, 200

Jeancharm v Barnet Football Club [2003] EWCA Civ

58, 193

Johnson v Unisys [2001] UKHL 13, 190

Jolley v London Borough of Sutton [2000] 1 WLR

Jones v Tower Boot Co Ltd [1997] IRLR 168, 368, 374

Jones v Vernons Pools [1938] 2 All ER 626, 94

Junior Books v Veitchi [1982] 1 AC 520, 266, 275

Kearney v Eric Waller [1966] 1 QB 29, 315

350, 188, 200 Krell v Henry [1903] 2 KB 740, 177 Lacis v Cashmarts [1969] 2 QB 400, 240 Latimer v A.E.C [1953] AC 643, 298 Lawrence v Lexcourt Holdings Ltd [1978] 2 All ER

810, 129 Leakey v National Trust [1980] QB 485, 325 Lee v York Coach & Marine [1977] RTR 35, 253 Leeman v Montague [1936] 2 All ER 1677, 323 Leslie v Sheill [1914] 3 KB 607, 165

L’Estrange v Graucob [1934] 2 KB 394, 109 Lewis v Averay [1971] 3 WLR 603, 140 Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 769, 335, 338 Litster v Thom & Sons Ltd [1975] IRLR 47, 391 Littlewoods Organisation Ltd v Harris [1978] 1 All ER

1026, 160, 168 Lombard North Central plc v Butterworth [1987] QB

527, 105, 123 Luxmoore May v Messenger May Bakers [1990] 1 WLR 1009, 300

Lyons & Co v Gulliver [1914] 1 Ch 631, 328 McArdle, Re [1951] Ch 669, 85, 99

McCarthys v Smith [1981] QB 180, 364 McCutcheon v David McBrayne [1964] 1 All ER

430, 108 McGhee v National Coal Board [1973] 1 WLR 1,

McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commissions [1951] 84 CLR 377, 137

McWilliams v Arrol [1962] 1 WLR 295, 302 Malik v Bank of Credit & Commerce International [1998] AC 20, 189, 200

Malone v Laskey [1907] 2 KB 141, 326 Malonely v Lambeth Council [1966] 198 EG 895,

317, 319

Maloney v Torfaen CBC [2005] EWCA Civ 1762, 314

Managers (Holborn) Ltd v Hohne (1977) IRLR 230, 399

Mandla v Dowell Lee [1983] IRLR 209, 371

Marc Rich & Co v Bishop Rock Marine [1995] The

Martin v Parkham Foods (2006) unreported, 378, 390

Mathieson v Noble [1972] IRLR 76, 394

Mattocks v Mann [1993] RTR 13, 307

Merrit v Merrit [1970] 2 All ER 760, 92

Metropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr & Co Ltd

[1918] AC 119, 177, 179

Mihalis Angelos, The [1970] 3 WLR 601, 105, 106

Mint v Good [1950] 2 All ER 1159, 327

Minter v Wellingborough Foundries [1981] The Times

202, 393

Mondial Shipping & Chartering BV v Astarte Shipping

[1995] CLC 1011, 75

Moorcock, The (1889) 14 PD 64, 102

Moore v C & A Modes [1981] IRLR 71, 392

Morgan Crucible Co plc v Hill Samuel Bank [1991]

Murphy v Bord Telecom Eireann [1988] IRLR 267, 364

Murphy v Bradford Metropolitan Council [1991] The

Nettleship v Weston [1971] 3 All ER 581, 299

Newman v Alarm Co Ltd [1976] IRLR 45, 393

Newtons of Wembley Ltd v Williams [1964] 3 All ER

532, 245, 257

Noble v David Gold & Sons (Holdings) Ltd [1980]

IRLR 252, 362

Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns & Ammunition

North Yorkshire County Council v Ratcliffe [1995] ICR 833, 365

Nottingham Patent Brick & Tile Co Ltd v Butler (1886) 16 QBD 788, 130

O’Brien v Associated Fire Alarms [1969] 1 All ER 93,

398

Ogwo v Taylor [1987] AC 431, 314, 338 Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel [1949] 1 All ER

127, 107 O’Neill v Symm & Co 1998] ICR 481, 375, 384 Osman v Ferguson [1993] 4 All ER 344, 295 Osman v UK [1999] 1 FLR 193, 296 Ottoman Bank v Chakarian [1930] AC 277, 346 Overseas Medical Suppliers v Orient [1999] 1 All ER (Comm) 981, 115

Overseas Tankships & Engineering v Morts Dock &

Engineering Ltd See Wagon Mound, The

Owen v Professional Golf Association (2000) ported, 375

unre-P v S & Cornwall County Council [1986] IRLR 347, 370 PSM International v Whitehouse & Willenhall Ltd [1992] FSR 489, 521

Page v Smith [1995] 2 All ER 736, 286, 307 Page One Records v Britton [1968] 1 WLR 157, 197 Pagano v HGS [1976] IRLR 9, 350

Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] Lloyd’s Rep Med 351, 291

Panesaar v Nestlé [1980] IRLR 64, 373 Panorama Developments v Fidelis Furnishing Fabrics Ltd [1971] 3 WLR 440, 470, 474

Paris v Stepney Council [1951] AC 367, 297 Parks-Cramer Co v Thornton Ltd [1966] RPC 407,

502, 512

Parsons v McLoughlin [1981] IRLR 65, 393 Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 2 All ER 421, 66 Patel v Ali [1984] Ch 283, 196

Payne v Cave [1789] 3 Term Rep 148, 537 Peachdart, Re [1983] 3 All ER 204, 244, 257 Pearce v Brooks (1866) LR 1 Exch 213, 157, 547 Pennington v Surrey County Council and Surrey Fire

& Rescue Services [2006] EWCA Civ 1493, 351 Pepper v Hart [1993] 1 All ER 42, 25

Pereira Fernandes (J) SA v Mehta [2006] 2 All ER 891,

Phipps v Rochester Corpn [1955] 1 QB 450, 316

Phones 4U Ltd v Phone4U.co.uk Internet Ltd [2006]

EWCA Civ 244, 507, 517

Phonogram v Lane [1982] QB 939, 432, 442

Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd

[1980] 2 WLR 283, 110

Pickard v Sears (1837) 6 Ad&E 469, 244

Pickstone v Freemans plc [1988] 2 All ER 803, 364

Pilkington v Wood [1953] 2 All ER 810, 194

Pinnel’s Case (1602) 5 Co Rep 117, 89, 91, 551

Piper v JRI (Manufacturing) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ

R v Secretary of State for Employment, ex parte

Seymour-Smith and Perez [1995] IRLR 889, 389

R v Shivpuri [1986] 2 All ER 334, 545

R (on the application of Begum) v Headteacher and

Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] 2 All

ER 487, 35, 39

R (on the application of Khatun) v Newham London

Borough Council [2004] 3 WLR 417, 117, 118

R (on the application of Laporte) v Chief Constable

of Gloucestershire Constabulary [2007] 2 All ER

529, 34

R (on the application of Pearson) v Secretary of State

for the Home Department; Hirst v

Attorney-General [2001] EWHC Admin 239, 33

R (on the application of Save Britain’s Heritage) v

Westminster Council [2007] EWHC 807 (Admin), 46

R & B Customs Brokers Co Ltd v United Dominions

Trust [1988] 1 WLR 321, 112

Racing UK Ltd v Doncaster Racecourse Ltd and

Doncaster Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ

999, 206

Raffles v Wichelhaus (1864) 2 H&C 906, 138 Rainbow Estates Ltd v Tokenhold [1998] 3 WLR

980, 195 Rainey v Greater Glasgow Health Board [1987] AC

224, 365, 384 Ramsgate Hotel Co v Montefiore (1866) LR 1 Exch

109, 71 Ratcliff v Harpur Adams Agricultural College (1998)

The Times, 30 November, 320, 332

Ratcliffe v Evans [1892] 2 QB 524, 338, 519 Rayfield v Hands [1960] Ch 1, 437, 442 Ready Mixed Concrete v Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 WLR 627, 333 Real and Personal Advance v Palemphin (1893) 9 TLR

569, 206 Reardon Smith Line v Hansen-Tangen [1976] 1 WLR

989, 106 Redfearn v Serco ltd [2006] ICR 1367, 372, 384 Redgrave v Hurd [1881] 20 Ch D 1, 131 Reeves v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [1999] 3 WLR 363, 307

Regazzoni v Sethia [1957] 3 All ER 286, 156, 168 Reid v PRP Architects [2007] ICR 1119, 354, 358 Ritchie v Atkinson (1808) 10 East 95, 172 Ritchie (J & H) Ltd v Lloyd Ltd [2007] 2 All ER 353,

251, 252, 257

Rogers v Parish [1987] QB 933, 250, 257, 324 Roles v Nathan [1963] 1 WLR 1117, 299, 317 Rose & Frank Co v J R Crompton & Bros [1925] AC

845, 93 Routledge v Grant (1828) 4 Bing 653, 72, 536 Rowland v Divall [1923] 2 KB 500, 225 Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [2001] 4 All

ER 449, 147, 148 Royal College of Nursing v DHSS [1981] AC 800, 27,

28, 39

Royscot Trust Ltd v Rogerson [1991] 2 QB 297, 133 Ruxley Electronics & Construction Ltd v Forsyth [1995] 3 All ER 268, 189

Ryan v Mutual Tontine Association [1893] 1 Ch 116,

Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales [1974] AC

Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2002] 4 All ER 572,

CA; affirmed [2004] 1 All ER 215, HL, 141, 142,

Smith v Leech Brain & Co Ltd [1962] 2 WLR 148, 307

Smith v Littlewoods Organisation [1987] 1 All ER

710, 293, 554

Smith and others v Secretary of State for Trade and

industry and the London Development Agency

Stansbie v Troman [1948] 1 All ER 599, 294

Stennett v Hancock [1939] 2 All ER 578, 263

Stephens v Avery [1988] 2 All ER 477, 521

Stevenson v McLean [1880] 5 KBD 346, 70

Stewart v Casey (Casey’s Patents) [1892] 1 Ch 104, 85

Stilk v Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317, 87, 88, 546

Taylor v Alidair [1978] IRLR 82, 391 Taylor v Caldwell (1863) 3 B&S 826, 175 Taylorson v Shieldness Produce [1994] PIQR P329, 291 Tetley v Chitty [1986] 1 All ER 663, 326

Thomas v Thomas [1842] 2 QB 85, 86 Thompson v Smiths Ship Repairers Ltd [1984] 2 WLR

522, 299 Thomson v Alloa Motor Co [1983] IRLR 403, 392 Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] 2 WLR 585,

2 All ER 657, 91 Trac Time Control Ltd v Moss Plastic Parts ltd [2005] All ER (D) 06 (Jan), 228

Tsakiroglou & Co v Noblee Thorl GmbH [1961] 2 WLR 633, 177

UK Atomic Energy Authority v Claydon [1974] IRLR

6, 346 Underwood v Burgh Castle Brick and Cement Syndicate [1922] 1 KB 343, 240

Venables v Newsgroup Newspapers [2001] 1 All ER

908, 424 Victoria Laundry v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 1 All ER 997, 188

Vitol SA v Norelf [1996] 3 All ER 193, 185

W v Edgell [1990] Ch 359, 525 Wagon Mound (No 1), The [1961] 1 All ER 404, 31,

Warner Bros v Nelson [1936] 3 All ER 160, 197 Warren v Henlys Garage [1948] 2 All ER 935, 334 Watford Electronics v Sanderson [2001] 1 All ER (Comm) 696, 115, 123

West Bromwich Albion Football Club Ltd v El-Safty

White v Jones [1995] 1 All ER 691, 281

White v London Transport Executive [1982] QB 489,

Williams and Another v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd

and Mistlin [1998] 2 All ER 577 313, 419, 427

Williams v Roffey Bros [1990] 1 All ER 512, 88, 89,

91, 99

Williams v Settle [1960] 1 WLR 1072, 496, 512 Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1986] 2 WLR

557, 299, 302, 303 Wilson v Rickett Cockerell [1954] 1 QB 598, 229,

X v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] 3 WLR 152,

295, 296

Young v Bristol Aeroplane Company [1944] 2 All ER

293, 30

Z and A v UK (2002) 34 EHRR3, 296

Companies (Audit, Investigations

and Community Enterprise)

Part II, 495, 497, 510 Part III , 498, 510

Employment Relations Act 1999,

Enduring Powers of Attorney Act

1985, 214

European Communities Act 1972,

Limited Liability Partnerships Act

2000, 413 Limited Partnerships Act 1907, 413 Marine Insurance Act 1906, 130

Mental Capacity Act 2005

s 2, 214

s 9, 214

s 11, 214 Minimum Wage Act 1999, 348,

358

Minors’ Contracts Act 1987, 165

s 1–3, 165 Misrepresentation Act 1967, 135

s 2(1), 132–6, 149

s 2(2), 133–5, 149

s 2(3), 134 Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, 25,

Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949,

Representation of the People Act

1983, 33 Resale Prices Act 1976, 156

Restriction of Offensive WeaponsAct 1959

Sale of Goods Act 1979, 102, 105,

Street Offences Act 1959, 27

Supply of Goods (Implied Terms)

Trades Union and Labour Relations(Consolidation) Act 1992

Civil Procedure Rules, 47 Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, 212 Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 1996, 497

Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003, 498 Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997, 509 Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (Amendment) Regulations 2003, 375, 376 Employment Act (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004, 390, 395

Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006, 379, 380, 384, 394 Employment Equality (Religion of Belief) Regulations 2003, 371, 399 Employment Equality (Sexual Discrimination) Regulations 2005, 366, 370 Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003, 378, 382 Equal Pay (Amendment) Regulations 1983, 362

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992, 353, 355, 356 Partnership (Unrestricted Size) No 17 Regulations, 412

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998

reg 3(2), 354 retg 3(2), 354 Race Relations Act (Amendment) Regulations 2003, 373 Registered Designs Regulations 2001, 499

Registered Designs (Amendment) Rules 2001, 499 Registered Designs (Fees) Amendment Rules 2001, 499 Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002, 233 reg 2, 228

reg 4(2), 246

Table of Statutory Instruments

Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999, 370 Single Member Private Limited Companies Regulations 1992, 416 Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981, 400 Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations 2006, 400–2 Unfair Dismissal and Statement of Reasons for Dismissal (Qualifying Period) Order 1999, 389 Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994, 115, 119

Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, 23, 101, 115–123, 234

European Community legislation

Treaties

Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty) 1992, 18, 20 Article 4, 19

Treaty of Nice 2003, 20 Article 203, 18 Single European Act 1987, 19, 20 Treaty of Rome 1957, 20, 508 Article 119, 20

Article 141, 362, 364, 370, 389 Treaty of Amsterdam 1997, 20, 21

Directives

Directive 75/117/EC (Equal Pay Directive), 362, 363 Directive 76/207/EEC (Equal Treatment Directive), 369, 370, 389 Directive 85/374/EC (Product Liability Directive), 267, 272, 273 Directive 89/92/EC (Insider Dealing Directive), 471

Directive 89/104/EC (Trademarks Directive), 505 Directive 91/13/EC (Consumer Credit Directive), 115 Directive 92/85/EC (Pregnant Workers Directive), 369 Directive 93/104/EC (Working Time Directive), 346 Directive 97/75/EC (Parental Leave Directive), 369 Directive 98/71/EC (Designs Directive), 499, 500

Directive 2000/31/EC (E-Commerce Directive)

Article 11, 76 Directive 2000/43/EC (Race Equality Directive), 373 Directive 2000/78/EC (Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation Directive), 366, 379, 380

Table of European and International Legislation