- Explained — Patricia Kihembo v Disclosure and Barring Service 2023-12-21
“… by words like ‘plainly’. Nowadays, that has to be understood in the way explained by the Supreme Court in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600:…”
- Cited — Vale SA v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor 2023-11-24
“…[2014] 1 WLR 2600…”
- Cited — CDE v Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 2023-11-14
“…As to the meaning of “plainly wrong” in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600:…”
- Cited — Decision Inc Holdings Proprietary Limited & Anor v Stephen Garbett & Anor 2023-11-03
“…Appellate Courts are, of course, slow to interfere with such findings. In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, Lord Reed said at paragraph 67:…”
- Applied — Darty Holdings SAS v Geoffrey Carton-Kelly 2023-10-09
“…372D in which he said that appellate caution applied equally to the evaluation of facts. More recently, in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 Lord Reed said at [67]:…”
- Considered — MXX v A Secondary School 2023-08-25
“…In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 2600 Lord Reed considered the authorities and the principles governing the review of findings of fact by the appellate courts and stated at [67] that:…”
- Cited — Disclosure and Barring Service v JHB 2023-08-17
“…alify the word ‘mistake’. The UT referred to the relevant test, which is whether a decision is ‘wrong’, and to Henderson v Foxworth Investments [2014] UKSC 41; [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at paragraph 62. It was not enough that the UT would, itself, have made different findings (paragraph 38). The UT gave examples of mistakes of fact in paragrap…”
- Cited — Floreat Investment Management Limited v Benjamin Churchill & Ors 2023-04-25
“…, therefore, one of those rare cases where this court can and should reverse a finding by the trial judge (Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67]).…”
- Cited — Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc & Anor 2023-02-24
“…For example, in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 Lord Reed said that:…”
- Cited — Quantum Care Limited & Anor. v Lalit Modi 2023-02-21
“…Ms Jessie Ingle, appellate Courts do not lightly interfere with findings of fact made by a trial judge. In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, Lord Reed (with whom Lords Kerr, Sumption, Carnwath and Toulson agreed) said at paragraph 67:…”
- Cited — Gary James Keane v David Sargen & Ors 2023-02-15
“…stances in which an appellate Court should interfere with a finding of fact made by a trial judge. Thus in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, Lord Reed (with whom Lords Kerr, Sumption, Carnwath and Toulson agreed) said at paragraph 67:…”
- Cited — RACHEL RILEY v MICHAEL SIVIER 2023-02-01
“…I draw these points from the Supreme Court’s decision in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41 [2014] 1 WLR 2600 and three decisions of this court: Fage UK Ltd v Chobani UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 5 [2014] FSR 29 [114]-[115], Haringey LBC v Ahmed[2017] EWCA Civ 1861 [30]-[31]…”
- Cited — Gabriele Volpi & Anor. v Matteo Volpi 2022-04-05
“…cGraddie [2013] UKSC 58, [2013] 1 WLR 2477; Fage UK Ltd v Chobani UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 5, [2014] FSR 29; Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600; Elliston v Glencore Services (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 407; JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2018] EWCA Civ 1176, [2019] BCC 96; Staechelin v ACLBDD Holdings Ltd [2019…”
- Cited — Mark Byers v The Saudi National Bank 2022-01-27
“…In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd[2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, Lord Reed said at paragraph 67:…”
- Cited — Natwest Markets Plc & Anor v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors 2021-05-10
“…e adopted by the appellate court when the appeal is against findings of fact was succinctly summarised by Lord Reed JSC in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67]:…”
- Cited — Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v Azima 2021-03-12
“…ion is whether we are satisfied that the judge was wrong in the findings that he made. As Lord Reed said in Hendersonv Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [62]:…”
- Cited — H, Re (Children: Findings of Fact) 2021-03-05
“…UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67] in this way:-…”
- Cited — Revenue And Customs v Development Securities Plc & Ors 2020-12-15
“…As regards that reluctance, Lord Reed noted in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at paragraph 67:…”
- Cited — Gray v Global Energy Horizons Corporation 2020-12-09
“… [114] – [116] per Lewison LJ. For present purposes, it is sufficient to cite from Lord Reed’s judgment in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67]:…”
- Cited — Assetco Plc v Grant Thornton UK LLP 2020-08-28
“…t in McGraddie v McGraddie [2013]UKSC 58, [2013] 1 WLR 1911 and other cases. As Lord Hodge expressed it in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67]:…”
- Explained — Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Achilles Information Ltd 2020-03-05
“…in the sense that it is one that no reasonable judge or tribunal could have reached: see, for example, Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, at [61] and [67] per Lord Reed JSC. As we shall explain, we do not consider that Network Rail comes near to satisfying this exacting standard.…”
- Cited — British Telecommunications PLC, R (On the Application Of) v Treasury 2020-01-21
“…In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, the test was said (at [62]) to be whether the decision under appeal was one that no reasonable judge could have reached, and (at [66]) whether the decision of…”
- Cited — Kahrmann v Harrison-Morgan 2019-11-27
“…orted by a great deal of authority at the highest level: see, for example, the judgment of Lord Reed JSC in Henderson vFoxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, at [62] and [67].…”
- Cited — A (No. 2) (Children: Findings of Fact) 2019-11-14
“…[2014] 1 WLR 2600,…”
- Followed — Britned Development Ltd v ABB AB And ABB Ltd 2019-10-31
“…Equally familiar are the observations of Lord Reed JSC in Henderson v FoxworthInvestments Limited [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, at [58] to [69], which include the following:…”
- Cited — Watson v KEA Investments Ltd 2019-10-23
“…the point. It is one of those findings which an appellate court can only reject if satisfied that it is plainly wrong: see in this context Henderson v Foxworth [2014] 1 WLR 2600. It is impossible to say that the judge was “plainly wrong” about this issue.…”
- Considered — Simetra Global Assets Ltd & Anor v Ikon Finance Ltd & Ors 2019-08-09
“…Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67] to “a demonstrable failure to consider relevant evidence”.…”
- Cited — Z & Aanor, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Hackney & Anor 2019-06-27
“…o the contrary, to assume that the lower court has taken the whole of the evidence into its consideration: Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [48]; ACLBDD Holdings Ltd v Staechelin [2019] EWCA Civ 817 at [31]. Second, an appeal court should be reluctant to interfere with a lower court’s findings o…”
- Cited — Prescott v Potamianos & Anor 2019-06-06
“…[2014] 1 WLR 2600 in which it was held that, in the absence of some identifiable error, such as a material error of law or the making of a critical factual finding which had no …”
- Explained — Staechelin & Ors v ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors 2019-05-14
“…cGraddie [2013] UKSC 58, [2013] 1 WLR 2477. What does “plainly wrong” mean? The Supreme Court explained in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [62]:…”
- Explained — Lachaux v Lachaux 2019-05-01
“…son rightly acknowledged. They have been explained in a number of cases including McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] 1 WLR 2477, Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 2600 and Fage UK Ltd v Chobani UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 5. There is no basis on which this court would be entitled to conclude that the judge had made, what Lord Reed…”
- Cited — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…[2014] 1 WLR 2600.…”
- Cited — Diamond v Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust 2019-04-08
“…es, including McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] UKSC 58; 2014 SC (UKSC) 12; [2013] 1 WLR 2477 and Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41; 2014 SLT 775; [2014] 1 WLR 2600, that appellate courts should exercise restraint in reversing findings of fact made at first instance. As was said in Henderson's case at para 67,…”
- Cited — McDonald v Rose & Ors 2019-01-15
“…layed a material role. For the general approach, it is sufficient to refer to the judgment of Lord Reed in Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, at [67]:…”
- Cited — W Nagel (A Firm) v Pluczenik Diamond Company NV 2018-11-28
“… reasonable judge could have reached: see e.g. McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] 1 WLR 2477 and Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41; [2014] 1 WLR 2600.…”
- Cited — Moore v Moore & Anor 2018-11-27
“…reme Court and this court, beginning with McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] UKSC 58, [2013] 1 WLR 2477, and Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600. The general rule is that an appellate court can interfere only where it is satisfied that the trial judge has gone “plainly wrong”: see the judgment of Lord R…”
- Cited — Winter v Hockley Mint Ltd 2018-11-15
“…ent conclusion. What matters is whether the decision under appeal is one that no reasonable judge would have reached – see Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [62] (Lord Reed).…”
- Cited — Wheeldon Brothers Waste Ltd v Millennium Insurance Company Ltd 2018-10-18
“…he parties were broadly agreed upon the relevant law in the light of the recent Supreme Court decisions of Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41; [2014] 1 WLR 2600 and McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] 1 WLR 2477 the latter of which cited with approval Hamilton v Allied Domecq Plc [2006] SC 221, para 85. In the…”
- Explained — Euro-Asian Oil SA v Credit Suisse AG & Ors 2018-07-25
“…th findings of fact unless it is satisfied that the finding cannot reasonably be explained or justified, see for example, Henderson v. Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [67], cited with approval in Montgomery v. Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] AC 1430 at [97]. This approach extends to a judge’s evaluation of those facts and…”
- Followed — C & Anor. v A Local Authority & Ors. 2018-06-07
“…g which had no basis in the evidence), such findings could only be disturbed if the decision were plainly wrong: see e.g. Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd. [2014] 1 WLR 2600 at [58] and following, per Lord Reed.…”
- Explained — JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Anor 2018-05-22
“…that the conclusion is “plainly wrong”: see e.g. McGraddie v McGraddie, [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] 1 WLR 2477; Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41; [2014] 1 WLR 2600. As Lord Reed explained in the latter case, what this amounts to is that it must either be possible to identify a material error in the judge’s process of reas…”
- Cited — JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Anor 2018-05-22
“…ce with the principles set out by Lord Reed in McGraddie v McGraddie [2013] UKSC 58; [2013] 1 WLR 2477 and Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41; [2014] 1 WLR 2600, it cannot be said that the judge’s conclusions on the facts were plainly wrong, and they are therefore not susceptible of interference by this court.…”
- Cited — Gresport Finance Ltd v Battaglia 2018-03-23
“…e that the decision under appeal is one that no reasonable judge could have reached: see, for example, Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, at [58] – [69] per Lord Reed JSC. That case was not cited to us, but Mr Macpherson referred us to similar observations made by Sir Colin Rimer (with whom Patt…”
- Cited — Surrey v Barnet And Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 2018-03-16
“…fact the burden of persuading an appeal court to reverse a finding of fact is even higher: see for example Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600. However, I am content to proceed on the basis that the test is as stated in Solutia.…”
- Cited — Generator Developments Ltd v LIDL UK GmbH 2018-03-08
“…eluctant to interfere with trial judges’ findings of fact. The recent cases on that subject are legion. In Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 41, [2014] 1 WLR 2600, Lord Reed said [62] that “[w]hat matters is whether the decision under appeal is one that no reasonable judge could have reached”. At [67] Lord Reed said:…”