Latest Cases

Capital gains tax – Disposal of assets. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant taxpayer's appeal, held that enterprise investment scheme relief applied in priority to taper relief, when calculating capital gains tax, in a case in which the asset disposed of had been used for both business and non-business purposes.

Medical practitioner – Appeal against determination of disciplinary committee. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant nurse's appeal against the decision of the respondent Nursing and Midwifery Council's Conduct and Competence Committee, declining to extend a previously imposed period of suspension and making an order striking the appellant off the register. 

Libel and slander – Damages. The Queen's Bench Division awarded the claimant £30,000 damages in his libel proceedings against the defendant. It also made an order, providing that the defendant might be committed to prison if in future he repeated the conduct towards the claimant or his family which was of the same sort. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division held the claimant in a personal injury action was entitled to summary judgment against the second defendant in that she had had a contract with the second defendant which had been breached and that breach had caused her injuries. 

Landlord and tenant – Repair. The Chancery Division allowed the claim of the tenant art gallery concerning works carried out by the defendant landlord on the building where the gallery was situated. The court held that, among other things, the landlord had not acted reasonably in exercising its right to build combined with its scaffolding rights under the terms of the lease and had thereby been in breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment. In the circumstances, the tenant was entitled to damages. 

Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against the dismissal of a claim for judicial review of the respondent local planning authority's decision to use its powers, under s 178 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to clear agricultural land located in the Green Belt of caravans occupied by the appellant and family members, which had been stationed there in breach of planning controls since 2009. Among other things, the appellant had failed to show that it had been irrational for the authority to have decided that enough was enough and that the time had arrived at which it would be reasonable and proportionate, in light of all relevant interests, to proceed to implement the enforcement notice, the validity of which had been upheld on appeal to the Secretary of State.

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant local planning authority's application for an order quashing the decision of an inspector appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State to permit development of a synagogue. The inspector had not given the required considerable importance and weight to the finding of harm to the synagogue, and its features of special architectural and historic interest or great weight to the conservation of the synagogue. 

Limitation of action – Foreign limitation periods. The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Iraqi claimants, who alleged that they had suffered unlawful detention and/or physical maltreatment at the hands of British armed forces in Iraq, against a decision by the Court of Appeal in which it had found in favour of the Ministry of Justice that an English court was bound to disregard any impediment arising from Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) Order 17 because that order was not a law with respect to limitation which the English courts were bound to apply. The court ruled that the Court of Appeal had been right to say that CPA Order 17 had no legal effect in an English court. It ruled that, in the English proceedings, the relevant law was the Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984. The CPA Order 17 had no relevance to English proceedings because it had no application outside Iraq and had never impeded resort to the English court. 

Employment – Contract of employment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the Secretary of State's appeal, held that, in considering a claimant's employment status, the ultimate question had to be the nature of the relationship during the period that the work was being done. However, it did not follow that the absence of mutuality of obligation outside that period might not influence, or shed light on, the character of the relationship within it. Its relevance would depend on the particular facts of the case, but to exclude consideration of it in limine ran counter to the repeated message of the authorities that it was necessary to consider all the circumstances. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appellant Pakistani national's appeal concerning the respondent Secretary of State's refusal of his application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) migrant, as she was not satisfied that the English language proficiency requirement in the Immigration Rules had been met. Whatever might have been the subjective intention of the Secretary of State in drafting the relevant 'evidential flexibility policy', it was not accepted that it could be read as if circumscribed by para 245AA of the Immigration Rules.