0370 270 6000

Medicaments and related classes of Goods No.4, Court of Appeal

13 August 2001
The issues

Wasted costs – Lord Chancellor’s liability

The facts

This concerned an application by the Director General of Trading in the Restrictive Practises at Court. The hearing had to be abandoned because it appeared to the parties that a member of the Court was biased. The costs concerned were estimated as being in something of the region of a million pounds!

The applicants for the wasted costs submitted that their right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights had been infringed and that they were entitled to compensation by the Lord Chancellor who was an emanation of the State responsible for providing impartial tribunals to conduct trials.

The decision

The Lord Chancellor had argued that an impartial tribunal had been made available, subsequently, so that Article 6 had not been infringed. The Court had itself remedied the situation and the application had proceeded afresh in a reconstituted Court. It was trite convention law that an Appeal Court could remedy the defects of first instant decisions so that no violation could be said to have occurred. There was no authority for holding under convention law that in these circumstances applicants were entitled to recover wasted legal costs.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up