Latest Cases

Landlord and Tenant – Business premises. The Chancery Division ruled that notices served by a tenant of leasehold office premises, notifying the claimants (together the landlord) of its intention to exercise a contractual break clause in the leases, had been valid. The notices had been validly served at the landlord's stated address in accordance with the leases. That address was an 'abode or place of business' because the landlord had, on the true construction of the leases, nominated it as such, and not because the landlord actually abided there or carried on any business there. The court rejected the tenant's contention that s 23(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 was of general application to any sort of notice to be served by a tenant and applied to any claim that a tenant might serve. Section 23 was not intended to relate to matters outside that Act. 

Immigration – Detention. In dismissing the appeal of the claimant Nigerian national against the refusal of her application for permission for her claim for judicial review to proceed in circumstances where she had been detained pending deportation, the Supreme Court considered issues arising from the appeal relating, among other things, to the lawfulness of her detention and the policy of the Secretary of State for the Home Department in respect of the detention of the mentally ill pending deportation. 

Income tax – Tax advantage. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the Revenue and Customs Commissioners' appeal against a finding that it had issued a valid Closure Notice in respect of an enquiry into the taxpayer's corporation tax self-assessment return. The court dismissed the taxpayer's cross-appeal against a finding that the disregard provisions in para 28 of Sch 26 to the Finance Act 2002 had not applied in the circumstances its case. 

Personal Injury: Quantum Case. Asbestos related disease. PSLA of £80,000 with total damages of £642,972.51. The claimant contracted mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos during her course of employment and subsequently died following surgery. 

Human rights – Freedom of expression. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant professors' application for judicial review of the defendant university's decision to withdraw permission to hold a conference entitled 'International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism' on its campus on proposed dates. Given the risks of holding the conference, the decision had been a proportionate interference with the claimants' rights. 

Contract – Construction. The Court of Appeal, Civil, Division, allowed the first defendant's appeal against the judge's finding that it had been in breach of an exclusive supply agreement, under which it agreed to purchase from the first claimant all its requirements of certain electric motors and leadframe assemblies identified or covered by it, by purchasing 'Gen 2' motors from another firm. On the principal issue, it held that it had not been open to the judge to have interpreted the terms of the agreement in the way he had. 

European Union – Common foreign and security policy. The Court of Justice of the European Union, Fifth Chamber, dismissed the Council of the European Union's appeal against the annulment of Council Decisions to include the applicant Iranian bank on a list of persons or entities regarded as being involved in nuclear proliferation in Annex II to Council Decision 2010/413 and repealing and Implementing Regulation No 668/2010, and other Decisions, in so far as those acts concerned the applicant. 

Criminal law – Costs. The Queen's Bench Division in an application under s 19 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and reg 3 of the Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 SI 1335/86 held that the decision to prosecute an NHS Trust and a doctor or the continuation of the prosecution was not improper. It was based on expert evidence which was put forward with some force and clarity. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Franmax UAB (Franmax) against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office concerning opposition proceedings between Ehrmann AG Oberschönegg im Allgäu and Franmax, regarding the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'Dino', depicting a dinosaur, as a European Union trade mark. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant local authority's appeal against an order designating it as the authority responsible for an eight-month-old baby, held that, given that the test for ordinary residence was one of fact and should not be made into an overly complicated exercise, there was no basis for concluding that the judge's decision was perverse. It had been reasoned and clear and, in all the circumstances, unassailable.