Latest Cases

Limitation of actions – Prescription – Triennium. Court of Session: In an action, raised in July 2015, in which the pursuer sought reparation for sexual and physical abuse allegedly suffered in the early 1960s whilst at a boarding school run by the defenders, the court did not accept that it had been established on a balance of probabilities that the pursuer attended the school on or after 26 September 1964, which meant that the whole of his claim had been extinguished by the long negative prescription; even if that was wrong his action was now time-barred because the triennium was long expired; and even if some or all of his claim had not been extinguished by the long negative prescription the court would have refused to exercise its discretionary power in favour of allowing the action to proceed. 

Local authority – Statutory powers. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision, refusing to provide accommodation and support to the claimant and her mother, a Nigerian overstayer, under the provisions of s 17 of the Children Act 1989. The authority's assessing social worker had been entitled not to be satisfied that the family had been destitute and that they could be accommodated by others. 

Medical practitioner – Disciplinary proceedings. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the claimant British Medical Association's application for judicial review, held that para 6(b) of the Schedule to the General Medical Council (Legal Assessor and Legally Qualified Persons) Rules Order of Council 2015, SI 2015/1958, which provided that a legally qualified tribunal chair did not need to advise other panel members on any question of law in the presence of the parties after deliberations had begun, was neither contrary to the requirements of art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights or common law fairness, nor otherwise unlawful. 

Negligence – Causation. The Queen's Bench Division held, in dismissing the claimant's case in negligence against the Secretary of State for Health, that there had been no breach of duty in respect of the delivery of a twin in circumstances where she was deprived of oxygen and suffered serious brain injury. 

Negligence – Duty to take care. The county court dismissed the claimant's claim for damages for physical and emotional abuse caused by a licensee on parole after a murder conviction. The Secretary of State had not owed the claimant a duty of care to investigate the initial allegations that she had been in a relationship with the licensee in a different, more thorough, manner, nor had he owed a duty to warn the claimant of the licensee's background. 

European Union – Residence. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that art 7(1)(c) of Council Directive (EC) 2003/86 should be interpreted as allowing the competent authorities of a member state to refuse an application for family reunification on the basis of a prospective assessment of the likelihood of the sponsor retaining, or failing to retain, the necessary stable and regular resources which were sufficient to maintain himself and the members of his family, without recourse to the social assistance system of that member state, in the year following the date of submission of that application, that assessment being based on the pattern of the sponsor's income in the six months preceding that date. 

Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellants' appeal by way of case stated against the Crown Court's decision, dismissing their appeal against conviction for using their land as a builder's merchants with ancillary sales, in contravention of the terms of an enforcement notice. There had been sufficient evidence on which the Crown Court could reasonably conclude to the required standard that the land had been used as a builder's merchants with ancillary sales throughout the period alleged in the information. 

Sentence – Extended term of imprisonment. On a reference by the Attorney General, the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that an extended sentence of 140 months, comprising a custodial element of 92 months and an extended licence period of 48 months, for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, had been unduly lenient. In all the circumstances, the custodial element of that sentence would be quashed and in its place, a term of 11 years' imprisonment would be imposed. The extended licence period of 48 months would remain the same. 

Contract – Construction. The Technology and Construction Court determined two preliminary issues in the course of proceedings concerning a claim for damages for delay in sub-contract works on the Rolls Building. It ruled that: (i) on the assumption that EMCOR was entitled to an extension of time, pursuant to the sub-contract, as amended, the sub-contract required that such revised or further revised period or periods were added contiguously to the end of the current period within which the sub-contract works should be completed; and (ii) the claimant's liability to the Rolls for liquidated and ascertained damages for the relevant period had not been not extinguished by a further supplemental agreement. 

Costs – Order for costs. The Chancery Division, on the claimant's application for an order, under s 51(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, that RG, who had been joined as a party to the present proceedings for the purposes of costs only, pay the costs of its claim against the first defendant, held that the present was an exceptional case and it was just to make an order for costs against RG. RG was ordered to pay the claimant's costs incurred from the date on which the first defendant had filed its acknowledgement of service.