Latest Cases

Damages – Personal injury. The Queens' Bench Division, in a case where liability was admitted in respect of historic sexual abuse by a scout camp leader, heard evidence in respect of the amount of an award of damages for the claimant who had been one of the victims. The court allowed an award for pain, suffering and loss of amenity but rejected any award for past or future loss of earnings, for handicap on the open labour market or for therapy and no separate award by way of aggravated damages. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that arts 23(5) and 24 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 should be interpreted as meaning that, in a dispute concerning the non-performance of a contractual obligation, in which the applicant had brought proceedings before the courts of the member state in which the respondent had its seat, the jurisdiction of those courts could stem from art 24 of that regulation where the respondent did not dispute their jurisdiction, even though the contract between the two parties contained a clause conferring jurisdiction on the courts of a third country. 

Company – Administration order. The Companies Court held that Council Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 applied to the administration of a company which was authorised to undertake both insurance and reinsurance business but which, in practice, only undertook the latter type of business. 

Capital gains tax – Assessment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a taxpayer's appeal against a finding that there was no right to a separate preliminary hearing to determine whether, under s 29 of the Taxes Management Act 1970, the Revenue and Customs Commissioners had validly made a discovery assessment. 

Partnership – Existence of partnership disputed. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant's appeal against a chief master's decision granting summary judgment to the defendants on the claimant's claim that a partnership had been created between the parties. The chief master had been entirely right to conclude that, on the evidence, no partnership had been created within the meaning of s 1(1) of the Partnership Act 1890. There was no evidence that the defendants had carried on business themselves and there was no realistic prospect of establishing that they had agreed to become partners for the purposes of the Act. 

Shipping – Charterparty. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant owner's appeal against a finding of the tribunal that the defendant charterers had been entitled to order a vessel hired from the owner to load further cargo. The court held that, on the true construction of the charter between the parties, the charterers had been entitled to order the vessel to load further cargo at a port in Oman. 

European Union – Customs duties. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that the Combined Nomenclature listed in Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 had to be interpreted as meaning that a stand-alone device designed to retrieve, receive and stream digital audio files in the form of amplified sound, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, should, subject to the referring court's assessment of all of the facts which it had available to it, be classified under tariff heading 8519 of that nomenclature. 

Town and country planning – Development. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on two conjoined appeals concerning the meaning and effect of para 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the NPPF). Among other things, it held that, '[relevant] policies for the supply of housing', meant 'relevant policies affecting the supply of housing'. A 'relevant' policy was simply a policy relevant to the application for planning permission before the decision-maker, relevant either because it was a policy relating specifically to the provision of new housing in the local planning authority's area or because it bore upon the principle of the site in question being developed for housing. 

Company – Administration order. The Chancery Division made a ruling with regard to the solvency of he defendant company, Lehman Brothers UK Holdings Ltd, which was in administration. The court held that the solvency condition in the standard terms of three loan agreements would be satisfied in the case of the defendant. As a result, the claimant company was entitled to the relief that it claimed as a creditor of the defendant. 

Education – Discrimination – Age and/or disability. Court of Session: In an appeal by a local education authority, which had refused a request to continue funding the school fees of the pursuer, who suffered from a disability (autism), for further year after he attained the age of 18, and also refused to grant him funding by way of a bursary, the court allowed the appeal in part, holding that while the sheriff was entitled to find that the local authority did discriminate against the pursuer and an award in respect of anxiety and upset should be affirmed, it was not open to the sheriff to make an award based on a finding of liability to pay the school fees for a further year.