Latest Cases

European Union – Public procurement. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2, 44 and 48(3) of Directive (EC) 2004/18. The request had been made in proceedings between Partner Apelski Dariusz (Partner) and the Warsaw municipal cleansing authority concerning Partner's exclusion from the procedure for the award of a public contract for the comprehensive mechanical cleansing of roadways of the city of Warsaw (Poland) in the years from 2014 to 2017. 

Criminal law – Robbery. On a reference by the Attorney General, the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that a sentence of four years' imprisonment for the robbery of a man in his home, had been unduly lenient. In the circumstances, the offender's sentence would be quashed and, in its place, a term of nine years' imprisonment would be imposed. 

Family proceedings – Jurisdiction. The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by the Children's Guardian and the local authority against an order stating that the Hungarian court was better placed to hear a case regarding two children and that transferring the case to Hungary would be in the children's best interests. The children were Hungarian nationals born in the United Kingdom to Hungarian parents. The transfer request would be set aside and the case would be returned to the Family Division. 

Counsel – Duty. The Administrative Court upheld the defendant Legal Ombudsman's determination, criticising the claimant barrister's handling of the interested party's formal complaint letter in his own letter. However, it quashed the remainder of the determination, including the decision to award the interested party the equivalent of her costs in the claimant's county court action against her for unpaid fees. 

Contract – Damages for breach. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal against the judge's decision that the defendant was entitled to recover spread costs for a period of delay caused by the claimant's breach of contract. The language of the exclusion clause in the contract in LOGIC form was clear and was apt to exclude liability for wasted costs in the form of the spread costs which the defendant sought to recover. 

Land registration – Title. The Chancery Division held that the claimant and the first defendant, who was his wife, were entitled to an order setting aside a transfer and a settlement and transfer of property on the grounds of mistake, where they had believed that the steps they had taken would not result in an immediate charge to tax nor a ten-year anniversary charge. The equitable rules applied to the situation. In the circumstances, it was appropriate to set aside all of the relevant transactions. 

European Union – Immigration. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council on the development of the Association set up by the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey. The request had been made in proceedings between Mr Genc and the Danish Ministry of Integration concerning the rejection by the latter of his application for a residence permit in Denmark for the purposes of family reunification. 

Arbitration – Award. The Commercial Court ruled on preliminary issues concerning the claimant's applications under ss 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to appeal/set aside an award. It held that: (i) English law governed the question of separability, such that the arbitrators had had jurisdiction to decide the issue of validity; (ii) the arbitrators had been right to have dismissed the claimant's challenge to their jurisdiction with regard to their conclusion that the assignment of the relevant contract from the first defendant to the second defendant had been valid, and that the second defendant had been a party to the arbitration; and (iii) there was no prospect of success for the claimant's application under s 68 of the Act by reference to s 68(2)(g), and it would be struck out as unarguable. 

Rates – Valuation list. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant listing officer's appeal against the decision of the Valuation Tribunal for England (the VTE), ordering her to alter the valuation list for the entry in respect of a property to show one entry for the property instead of two. The VTE had not misdirected itself in law and, on the evidence, its conclusion had been a reasonable one. 

Profit à prendre – Prescription. The Supreme Court allowed in part an appeal regarding the geographical extent of a prescriptive right of a several fishery. If a right over land, the identity of which shifted, could be the subject of an express grant, then it followed that there was no reason why that should not apply equally to a right over land obtained by prescription. The seaward boundary of the area subject to the right was the lowest astronomical tide mark from time to time. The area did not include sandbanks that had become attached to the foreshore within living memory either because the right applied to the foreshore as constituted from time to time or through the doctrine of accretion.