Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

Contract – Sale of Goods – Relevancy and specification of averments. Sheriff Court: In an action in which the pursuers, who purchased 5000 roofing tiles from the defenders in 2003 and 2004, sought damages for breach of contract, averring that the tiles had suffered severe discolouration, and contending that the defenders were in breach of implied terms as to the satisfactory quality of the goods supplied, the court concluded that the pursuers' averments anent pecuniary loss should be allowed to go to proof, however those regarding a manufacturers' guarantee in relation to the tiles were irrelevant, those relating to the tiles' conformity or otherwise with British Standards were lacking in specification, and those anent rejection of the tiles did not disclose a tenable claim for rejection and accordingly should be deleted. 

Civil procedure – Assignation – Purported assignation of damages claim. Sheriff Court: In an action in which the pursuer claimed to be the assignee of a company's claim for damages against the defender, who was the arbiter in arbitration proceedings involving the company and another company, the party minuter, the court held that the pursuer had no title to pursue the company's rights and, accordingly, he had no title to sue in the proceedings, the action was incompetent, any right of action which the pursuer might have had to claim damages had now been extinguished by prescription, and the action as a whole was irrelevant. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant's application for interim relief, namely, for an order that the defendant Secretary of State should grant or reinstate his indefinite leave to remain (ILR) in the United Kingdom pending the resolution of his claim for judicial review and anticipated appeal. The removal of the claimant's ILR had been an automatic consequence of the Secretary of State's erroneous decision to deport him. 

Elections – Local government. The Queen's Bench Division allowed the claimant's application for urgent interim relief to lift his suspension from holding office in, or representing the Labour Party. The suspension had gone on too long and there was a good arguable case that it had reached the point that the delay had amounted to unfairness, such that the balance of convenience and justice came down firmly in favour of the grant of relief. 

Negligence – Personal injury. The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) dismissed the claimant's appeal in a personal injury action against the judge's finding that the claimant had not been found by him to be a credible witness and that on the balance of probabilities the claimant had not satisfied him of the account as he had changed significant details. The court held that the judge had been entitled to so find.