Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

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. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellants' appeals against the judge's decision, sending their cases to the Secretary of State, who ordered the appellants' extradition to Peru to face trial for drug trafficking. The assurances provided by Peru applied to the second appellant Italian national as to the first appellant British national, and the appellants' rights under arts 3 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights would not be breached. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Niagara Bottling LLC (Niagara) against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office, concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the word mark 'NIAGARA', which Niagara sought to register as a European Union trade mark. The General Court upheld the Board's decision that the sign at issue was descriptive of the characteristics of the goods and services in respect of which registration was sought, within the meaning of art 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against a finding that the appellant had been in breach of a freezing order and, therefore, in contempt of court. The judge had been entitled to reach the conclusion that he had on the evidence that had been before him and it was impossible to say that the penalty imposed (a suspended sentence of imprisonment) had been excessive. 

Companies – Shareholders – Unfair prejudice. Sheriff Court: In an unfair prejudice petition under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006, in which the petitioner moved the court to allow the petition to be amended and thereafter to grant warrant for diligence by arrestment on the dependence of the action under s 15A of the Debtors (Scotland) Act 1987, the court was satisfied that the petitioner's minute of amendment should be allowed and the petition amended in terms thereof, and that it was competent in principle to grant arrestment on the dependence in the action; however the petitioner's motion for warrant to arrest on the dependence was refused as she had failed to satisfy the court that the statutory grounds for granting the order sought had been made out. 

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. 

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. 

Practice – Striking out. The Chancery Division dismissed the defendant banks' application to strike out parts of a claim arising from the extension of a loan facility to a company that managed business parks, which had entered administration. The court allowed in part an application by the claimants to amend the claim, in that it was necessary to refine the proposed amended pleading in order to refer solely to the named individuals who had been employed by the banks at the time of the alleged conspiracy, for whom it was vicariously liable.