Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Laboratorios Ern, SA against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office, relating to opposition proceedings concerning the application by the intervener, Matthias Werner, for registration of a figurative sign 'Dynamic Life' as a European Union trade mark. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that art 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1186/2009 was to be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of the application of that provision, a natural person could not have at the same time a normal place of residence in both a member state and in a third country. 

Value added tax – Appeal. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) dismissed the appellants' appeal against a finding of the First Tier Tribunal that the sale of the freehold interest in the property to them by the trustee had been chargeable to VAT at the standard rate. The interpretation of para 30 of Sch 10 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 that the appellants put forward was a strained construction, and the issue would be decided in favour of the defendant Revenue and Customs Commissioners. 

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. 

Animal – Protection. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the RSPCA's appeal, held that, in order for an offence of animal fighting to be committed, contrary to s 8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006, as defined by s 8(7) of that Act, the other animal, with which a protected animal was placed, had to be the subject of some control or restraint by some person or persons connected with that activity or some other artificial constraint so that its ability to escape was prevented. 

Immigration – Leave to enter. The Administrative Court allowed the application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision denying the claimant refugees resident in a sovereign base area in the Republic of Cyprus entry to the United Kingdom. The Secretary of State had failed to consider the view of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees that relocation to the Republic of Cyprus was no longer a desirable or practical option. In a supplemental ruling, the court declined the Secretary of State's application to re-open the issue. 

Employment – Contract of service. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claimant was constructively dismissed, by reason of a repudiatory breach of contract by his employer Leeds United Football Club and therefore was entitled to damages for that breach less the amount of any bonuses to be received in respect of his current job. 

Charity – Registration. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) dismissed the appellant's appeal against the finding of a judge that the appellant lacked standing to appeal against a decision by the respondent Charity Commission not to remove certain charities from the Register of Charities. The court held that, among other things, the appellant could not be considered to be a person affected by the decision for the purposes of the Charities Act 2011.