- Considered — Syed Tahseen Ahmed v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2023-09-28
“…ent of a material fact without considering whether it was dishonest. The judge should have adopted the approach to dishonesty set out in Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67; [2018] AC 391 (Ivey v Genting). The judge did not, and did not scrutinise his findings carefully which he was required to do, because of their far-reaching co…”
- Cited — The General Dental Council v Lucy Jane Williams 2023-05-05
“…In my judgment, the applicable principle was set out by Lord Hughes in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Limited [2017] UKSC 67; [2018] AC 391 at [74]. He said:…”
- Cited — Floreat Investment Management Limited v Benjamin Churchill & Ors 2023-04-25
“… is not surprising as there was no dispute about it. The authorities, from Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan [1995] AC 378 to Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391, were reviewed by this court in Group Seven Ltd v Nasir [2019] EWCA Civ 614, [2020] Ch 129, and there is no need to repeat that exercise. As Lor…”
- Cited — Kenneth Davies v Stephen Ford & Ors. 2023-02-17
“…y and, by reference to the standards of ordinary decent people, objectively: see [349], referring to the test for dishonesty in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391.…”
- Applied — Ceredigion Recycling & Furniture Team v Pope 2022-01-14
“…The judge went on to consider, applying the test for dishonesty set out by the Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos Limited[2017] UKSC 67, whether the first and second defendants had acted dishonestly in setting up the SIPPs. The judge held that the factors relied upon by Ms Seymour were a strong…”
- Cited — Stanford International Bank Ltd v HSBC Bank Plc 2021-04-15
“…[2017] UKSC 67…”
- Cited — Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v Tradition Financial Services Ltd 2021-02-22
“…ctual subjective state of mind of a defendant and then to test that against an objective test of whether that is honest or not: Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67 at [74] per Lord Hughes JSC. TFS is of course a corporate body that can only act through individuals, and so it will be necessary for the Claimants to establis…”
- Considered — The Racing Partnership Ltd & Ors v Sports Information Services Ltd 2020-10-09
“…taken view of one’s own legal rights. I do not consider that this is affected by the reformulation of the test of dishonesty in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391. The example given by Lord Hughes at [60] is of the man who gets off the bus without paying, because he does not realise that public transport i…”
- Cited — Simetra Global Assets Ltd & Anor v Ikon Finance Ltd & Ors 2019-08-09
“…The judge referred to Ivey v Genting Casinos UK Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391 (and now see also Group Seven at [57]) as showing that dishonesty is to be judged according to the standards of ordinary reasonable people, but …”
- Cited — The Secretary of State for the Home Department v BK (Afghanistan) 2019-07-30
“…ision findings, the only possible truthful answer these questions was yes. Mr Malik referred us to Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (trading as Crockfords Club) [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391, the well-known authority on the test for dishonesty in civil proceedings: see paragraph 74. Mr Malik accepted that the Tribunal’s decision on B…”
- Cited — Balajigari v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2019-04-16
“…eld above would be required in any event as a matter of domestic law. And, unlike in Ahsan (or Kiarie and Byndloss v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391), there is no issue as to the fairness of the available procedures for a legal challenge.…”
- Cited — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…(UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391 (“Ivey”), judgment in which was delivered on 25 October 2017 less than three weeks after Morgan J had handed down his judgment in the present ca…”
- Applied — Friends Life Ltd v Miley 2019-02-28
“…She argued that the judge did not and could not apply the statement of the test for “dishonesty” given by the Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. [2017] UKSC 67. The decision in that case was delivered on 25 October 2017, some three weeks after the judge delivered his judgment in this case.…”
- Disapproved — Raychaudhuri v General Medical Council 2018-09-14
“…ver, following the hearing before Sweeney J this approach to dishonesty was disapproved by the Supreme Court by its judgment in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67; [2018] AC 391 and replaced with a different approach. Before Sweeney J and before us it was common ground that the approach to dishonesty in relation to findi…”
- Considered — Gempride Ltd v Bamrah & Anor 2018-06-21
“… judgment did not expressly consider the concept of dishonesty in any detail; but it predated the Supreme Court judgment in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Limited [2017] UKSC 67; [2017] 3 ELR 1212, and therefore perhaps understandably focused on the subjective element, i.e. whether Ms Bamrah had a subjective intention to deceive. He fo…”
- Cited — Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc 2018-03-02
“…ons about dishonesty, such as Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Eurotrust International Ltd [2005] UKPC 37, [2006] 1 WLR 1476 and Ivey v Genting Casinos UK Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2017] 3 WLR 1212, may be relevant. It is unnecessary for us to resolve that question in this case.…”