• CRIMINAL

England and Wales Court of Appeal 

R v Johnson & Ors

In this case, accused were convicted by the Trial court for committing serial burglary and sentenced to substantial terms of imprisonment. Appeal filed. Court held that The Trial judge in his sentencing remarks set out very clearly the reasons why this conspiracy to commit burglary was a very serious offence: it involved the burgling not only of commercial premises but also the burgling at night of isolated country homes which were targeted because the Applicants knew they contained antiques, silver and other items of considerable value. There was, plainly, careful planning and advance reconnaissance; balaclavas or other headgear were worn to prevent identification; suitably high-powered, 4-wheel drive cars were used which had been stolen shortly before the burglaries and were burnt out or abandoned soon afterwards. Most of the articles stolen not recovered. By considering the amount involved , court was not inclined to give leave to appeal.

• ARBITRATION

England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

 Temple Legal Protection Limited v QBE Insurance (Europe) Limited

In this case there was underwriting agreement called "Binder between the Petitioner and respondent. It was held that the binder holds matters fairly in balance. The consequences of a repudiation, save as they might come within the wording of sections 9 and 10, are left to the common law. The right under the common law of QBE as principal, whatever its agreement, to terminate its agent's authority is not affected. However, by agreeing, where section 10 applies, that Temple /petitioner shall continue to conduct the run-off, implicit in Temple's/petitioner continuing obligation to do so (unless that is the parties agree otherwise, QBE may thereby have to respect and compensate any losses caused to Temple/petitioner by the withdrawal of its authority in the absence of Temple's agreement. If, however, there has been a repudiation at common law, accepted outside the provisions of section 9, then section 10 does not seem to apply at all.