Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 24.7 MB]
Categories:
Remedies & Enforcement
Property Litigation
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
  • FREE
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

In this podcast property law specialist Tom Weekes from Landmark Chambers discusses the reasons why he believes the Courts are now more likely than they once were to grant an injunction in response to an actual, or threatened, right of lights infringement rather than to make an award of damages in lieu of an injunction.

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Be aware of developments in the approach the Courts will take when deciding whether to grant an injunction;
  • Appreciate the impact of recent authorities on the suggestion that a more lenient approach should be adopted in rights of light cases;
  • Be aware of the change in the Courts’ approach to applications for mandatory injunctions;
  • Appreciate the approach the Courts are now likely to adopt to the exercise of their discretion over whether or not to grant an injunction;
  • Understand the impact that cases such as Regan v Paul and Heaney have had on the approach the Courts will take to the question of whether to award damages in lieu of an injunction.
Level:
Specialist Difficulty: 5 of 5
Classification:
Legal Principles
Sources and References:
  • Colls v Home and Colonial Stores Ltd [1904] AC 179;
  • Gafford v Graham (1999) 77 P&CR 73;
  • HKRUK II (CHC) Ltd v Heaney [2010] EWHC 2245;
  • Isenberg v East India House Estate Co Ltd (1863) 3 De GJ & S 637;
  • Jackson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2007] EWCA Civ 181;
  • Jaggard v Sawyer [1995] 1 WLR 269;
  • Morris v Redland Bricks Ltd [1970] AC 652;
  • Regan v Paul Properties Ltd [2007] Ch 135;
  • Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Company [1895] 1 Ch 287;
  • Slack v Leeds Industrial Cooperative Society Ltd [1924] 2 Ch 475;
  • Snell & Prideaux Ltd v Dutton Mirrors Ltd [1995] 1 EGLR 259;
  • Tamares Ltd v Fairpoint Properties Ltd [2007] 1 WLR 21 48.

In this podcast Tom Weekes from Landmark Chambers discusses recent developments in the approach taken by the Courts when deciding whether to grant an injunction in response to right of light infringements.

Date recorded: 8th May 2012

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com