Shipowners chartered a vessel stating she was 'expected ready to load about 1st July 1965' without reasonable grounds for that expectation. Charterers purported to cancel for force majeure when cargo was unavailable. The Court held the 'expected ready to load' clause was a condition, breach of which entitled charterers to cancel, and that only nominal damages were recoverable where the charterers would inevitably have cancelled anyway.
Martin Groom, a volunteer Coastguard Rescue Officer, was denied trade union accompaniment at a disciplinary appeal. The Court of Appeal held that CROs are 'workers' under s 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 when attending remunerated activities, dismissing the MCA's appeal.
Charterers hired a trawler requiring a licence to operate. When only three licences were granted for their five trawlers, they chose not to license this vessel. The Privy Council held the contract was not frustrated as the appellants' own election caused the inability to perform.
Marks and Spencer paid a full quarter's rent in advance before exercising a break clause mid-quarter. It sought repayment of the apportioned rent for the post-termination period. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, refusing to imply such a term, and restated the principles for implying terms into contracts.
Marleasing sought nullity of La Comercial's incorporation, claiming it was a sham to defraud creditors. The ECJ ruled national courts must interpret domestic law consistently with EU directives, even unimplemented ones, to achieve directive purposes. This established the principle of indirect effect of directives.
A husband and wife executed each other's wills by mistake due to their solicitor's oversight. After both died, the Supreme Court held the husband's will could be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 as a clerical error, validating the intended bequest.
Following the Supreme Court's earlier decision validating a will mistakenly signed by the wrong spouse, this costs judgment determined that the negligent solicitor's insurers should bear the costs of both parties throughout, subject to counsel disclaiming CFA success fees.
An HGV driver resigned claiming constructive unfair dismissal after workplace pressures and a perceived 'checking up' incident, citing earlier 2017 safety incidents. The EAT held the Tribunal misdirected itself on the 'last straw' test and remitted the case to a freshly constituted Tribunal.
Miss Marshall was dismissed at age 62 solely because she had reached the state pension age for women, which differed from that for men. The ECJ held this constituted sex discrimination under Directive 76/207, and that directives could be directly invoked against state authorities acting as employers.
Walter Merricks sought to bring collective proceedings against Mastercard on behalf of 46.2 million UK consumers, alleging unlawful interchange fees were passed on through higher retail prices. The Supreme Court dismissed Mastercard's appeal, holding the Competition Appeal Tribunal had applied too strict a certification test.
Julie Mate spent years working with a planning consultant to remove her family's farmland from the Green Belt, securing housing allocation that led to a £9 million sale to Persimmon. Her proprietary estoppel claim failed due to insufficiently clear promises, but she succeeded in unjust enrichment, recovering £652,500.
Cameron Mathieson, a severely disabled child, had his Disability Living Allowance suspended after 84 days as an NHS in-patient. The Supreme Court held this violated his rights under Article 14 ECHR taken with A1P1, as the Secretary of State failed to justify the discriminatory treatment.
Trustees failed to submit a claim in a financial scheme by the midnight deadline of 2 June 2011. Beneficiaries sued on 5 June 2017. The Supreme Court held that in midnight deadline cases, the day following midnight counts as a complete day for limitation purposes, meaning the claim was statute-barred.
May & Butcher Ltd agreed to purchase surplus government tentage with the price to be agreed later between the parties. When price negotiations failed, the Crown refused to deliver further goods. The House of Lords held there was no binding contract as the price, an essential term, remained undetermined.
MB, a transsexual woman who remained married to her wife, was refused a state pension at age 60 because UK law required her marriage to be annulled before her acquired female gender could be legally recognised. The Supreme Court, being divided, referred the compatibility question to the CJEU.
Ms McAleenon sought judicial review against regulators for failing to take action regarding harmful emissions from a landfill site affecting her home. The Supreme Court held that private prosecution or nuisance claims against the site operator were not suitable alternative remedies to judicial review of the regulators' public law duties.
Ms McBride, a fingerprint officer dismissed following the controversial McKie identification dispute, was found to have been unfairly dismissed. The Supreme Court held the Employment Tribunal had not erred in ordering her reinstatement, recognising practical rather than contractual limitations on her duties.
Mr McCann, a long-term detained patient at the State Hospital Carstairs, challenged a comprehensive smoking ban including its grounds. The Supreme Court held the prohibition on possession, search and confiscation of tobacco was unlawful for non-compliance with the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, but the smoking ban itself was justified.
Mrs McCue, guardian for her disabled son Andrew, challenged Glasgow City Council's charges for community care services, arguing insufficient deductions for disability-related expenditure. The Supreme Court held the Council's charging policy did not constitute unlawful discrimination under sections 15 or 20 of the Equality Act 2010.
The widow and family of Mr McCulloch sued for negligence after his death from cardiac tamponade, claiming his doctor should have advised him about NSAID treatment for pericarditis. The Supreme Court held that the professional practice test (Bolam/Hunter v Hanley) applies when determining what constitutes a reasonable alternative treatment requiring discussion with patients.
Mr McCutcheon's car was lost when the respondent's ship sank due to negligent navigation. The carrier sought to rely on exclusion clauses from previous dealings, but no risk note was signed on this occasion. The House of Lords held that previous course of dealing cannot incorporate terms into a contract where no contractual document was used on the relevant occasion.
Fiona McDonald, a vulnerable tenant with mental health issues, faced eviction from a property bought by her parents through a buy-to-let mortgage after receivers were appointed. The Supreme Court held article 8 proportionality cannot be invoked against private sector landlords seeking possession.
Percy McDonald was exposed to asbestos dust while visiting Battersea Power Station between 1954 and 1959 to collect pulverised fuel ash, later developing mesothelioma. The Supreme Court held, by majority, that the occupiers breached the Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931, but dismissed the section 47 Factories Act 1937 cross-appeal.
Mr McDonald, a former miner, retired early on ill-health grounds shortly after marrying. On divorce, the question arose whether his pension's matrimonial property value should be apportioned by reference to his active contributing period or his total scheme membership. The Supreme Court held membership included non-contributing periods.
The plaintiff, on board the support vessel Tharos during the Piper Alpha oil rig disaster, claimed psychiatric injury from witnessing the catastrophe. The Court of Appeal held he was not owed a duty of care as he was neither in actual danger, a rescuer, nor had sufficient proximity as a bystander.
