JOURNALS HOUSE OF LORDS - United Kingdom Parliament

404 18th-20th April
2005
9. R v. Z (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal Northern Ireland) (Northern Ireland)—
The cause was in part heard.
Their Lordships adjourned at four o’clock
till tomorrow, half past ten o’clock.
Bingham of Cornhill, L.
Brown of Eaton-under-
Heywood, L.
Tuesday 19th April 2005
Their Lordships met at half-past ten o’clock in Committee Room No. 1
The following Lords of Appeal were present:
Carswell, L.
Rodger of Earlsferry, L.
Woolf, L.
1. R (on the application of Gillan (FC) and another (FC)) (Appellants) v. Commissioner of Police for
the Metropolis and another (Respondents)—The appeal was set down for hearing and
referred to an Appellate Committee.
2. Powerhouse Retail Limited and others (Respondents) v. Burroughs and others (Appellants)—The
appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.
3. R v. Z (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal Northern Ireland) (Northern Ireland)—
The cause was further and fully heard and consideration was adjourned sine die.
Their Lordships adjourned at twenty minutes past noon
till tomorrow, half-past ten o’clock.
Wednesday 20th April 2005
Their Lordships met at half-past ten o’clock in Committee Room No. 1
Bingham of Cornhill, L.
Brown of Eaton-under-
Heywood, L.
Carswell, L.
The following Lords of Appeal were present:
Hale of Richmond, L.
Hope of Craighead, L.
Nicholls of Birkenhead, L.
Rodger of Earlsferry, L.
Steyn, L.
Walker of Gestingthorpe, L.
Woolf, L.
1. Sherrington and others (Petitioners) v. Sherrington (Respondent)—The petition of Daliah Dorit
Sherrington, Donna Karina Sherrington and Ramon Gerrard David Sherrington praying for
leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.
2. London Borough of Tower Hamlets (Petitioners) v. Begum (Respondent)—The petition of the
Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets praying for leave to appeal
was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.
3. Appeal Committee—The 8th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following
Orders were made—
Bultitude (Petitioner) v. Law Society (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the
respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d); and, if
the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments
if not agreed between the parties.
Gravgaard (Petitioner) v. Aldridge & Brownlee (a firm) (Respondents)—That leave to appeal
be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with
direction 5.1(d); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the
Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
Lincoln National Life Insurance Company (Petitioners) v. Sun Life Assurance Company of
Canada and others (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be
at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d); and, if the application is
granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed
between the parties.
Scribes West Limited (Petitioners) v. Anstalt and others (Respondents)—That leave to appeal
be refused; that the first and third respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in
accordance with direction 5.1(d); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be
certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.