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. 

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. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that art 13(1) of Directive (EC) 2004/48 should be interpreted as permitting a party injured by an intellectual property infringement, who claimed compensation for his material damage as calculated, in accordance with heading (b) of the second sub-paragraph of art 13(1) of that directive, on the basis of the amount of hypothetical royalties, also to claim compensation for the moral prejudice that he had suffered, as provided for under heading (a) of the second sub-paragraph of art 13(1) of that directive. 

Banking and finance – Lending and security – Performance bond – Notice calling up bond – Validity. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in an action seeking payment of a sum said to be due by the defender under a performance guarantee bond it had granted in favour of the pursuer in security of the obligations of the operator of an opencast mine to restore the land following the cessation of mining operations, in which the defender asserted that the notice the pursuer served to call up its liability under the bond was invalid, the court held that the Lord Ordinary was correct to conclude that the notice sent by the pursuer was an effective notice in the light of the terms of the bond. 

Prison – Prison conditions. The Administrative Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision by a prison to move the claimant's civil partner to a separate cell in circumstances where the claimant was disabled and contended that she had required her partner's assistance. The prison's 'intimate relationship restriction' had not been applied inflexibly and had been required to maintain order and discipline. Her rights under arts 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had not been engaged. Further, there had been no breach by the prison of ss 20 and 149 of the Equality Act 2010. 

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. 

Income tax – Charge to tax. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the Revenue and Customs Commissioners' appeal concerning whether an employee was liable to income tax in respect of a car leased to him by his employer on arm's length commercial terms, including lease charges at full market value. The tribunals had been right to have decided that a charge to income tax arose under Ch 6 of Pt 3 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 only if the terms on which a car was leased to an employee conferred a benefit on the employee in the ordinary sense of that word, and the employees in the present case had received no such benefit. 

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. 

Limitation of actions – Prescription. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in an action in which the pursuers, who had instructed the defenders, a firm of solicitors, to serve notices to quit on a tenant to terminate agricultural tenancies over three fields, sought damages on account of the defenders' alleged breach of contract in drafting ineffective notices to quit, the court agreed with the approach of the Lord Ordinary, who upheld the defenders' plea of prescription and absolved them, concluding that an application of the interpretation of s 11(3) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 adopted by the majority of the Supreme Court in David T Morrison & Co Ltd v ICL Plastics Ltd required that the reclaiming motion be refused, but also that the pursuers were put on notice as to loss, injury or damage more than five years before the action was raised. 

Parent and child – Specific issue order – Relocation. Sheriff Court: In a case in which the mother of two young boys, aged 10 and 4, sought a specific issue order permitting her to relocate with them to Exeter, the court refused to make the order sought as it was not satisfied that the proposed relocation was in the children's best interests or that it was better that such an order be made than no order be made at all.