Latest Cases

Solicitor – Negligence. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimants' appeal in respect of the applicable measure of damages, which arose out of the admitted negligence on the part of the defendant solicitors' firm in respect of a property transaction. In upholding the judge's award of £250, representing the cost of an application to the local authority to remove a planning restriction on the property, it held that, by reason of the subsequent removal of the restriction, the claimants had suffered no loss and there was nothing in respect of which they required to be compensated. 

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. 

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. 

Damages and compensation – Crime – Ex gratia compensation scheme. Court of Session: Dismissing a judicial review petition in which the petitioner, who had spent seven years in prison before his murder conviction was quashed on appeal, sought reduction of the Scottish Ministers' decision to refuse his application for compensation under the ex gratia scheme compensating persons for periods spent in custody following wrongful conviction or charge resulting from serious default on the part of the police force or other public authority, the court held that the ministers' decision was one they were entitled to make and was not irrational. 

Negligence – Clinical negligence. The Queen's Bench Division found that the claimant's case on clinical negligence had been made out and that notwithstanding the pressures of a busy labour ward, the system of communication and the response to messages sent between the teams had been inadequate and failed to ensure that a reasonable standard of care had been provided to the claimant and his mother in the period before his birth which had resulted in a period of acute hypoxic-ischemic insult at the end of labour which had led to neurological damage. 

Minor – Custody. The Family Division, on the father's application for the return to Ireland of his 13-year-old son, A, concluded that A's return to Ireland would be ordered, despite his objections. Among other things, it held that, against the expressed strength of A's objections, the countervailing considerations were compelling and the clear influence of the mother and of A's older half-brother upon the development of his objections could not be ignored. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign government. The Commercial Court adjourned a case concerning a dispute over which of two regimes was recognised as the government of Libya following the fall of Colonel Gaddafi in 2011. The dispute arose in respect of Libya's Sovereign Wealth Fund (LIA), which had assets of approximately US$67bn and in circumstances where, shortly before the trial was due to start, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had written to the court and the parties stating Her Majesty's Government's (HMG) position on the question of recognition. The court held, on a point of principle, that where the court had received a formal communication from the British government, it was that communication which was the voice of HMG for legal purposes and it was not open to the court to set aside the letter and look at other material in an attempt to identify what the position of HMG actually was. In the circumstances, it would be both contrary to principle and premature at the present time to rule on the issue as to the chairmanship of the LIA. 

Criminal law – Bill of indictment. The Queen's Bench Division allowed the applicant Environment Agency's application for the granting of a voluntary bill of indictment in the context of proceedings concerning alleged offences in relation to the storage and processing of waste wood, contrary to the provisions of the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010, SI 2010/675. The court held that the judge, in dismissing the claim, had made a fundamental error of law that had been clear or obvious, and that it was in the interests of justice for the application to be allowed. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the General Medical Council's appeal in two conjoined cases and remitted both matters to the High Court. In doing so, the court gave guidance on the approach to be taken by the Fitness to Practise Panel in proceeding without the individual present or represented at the hearing and the question of the admissibility of fresh evidence both as to the reason for non-appearance and the general merits. 

Employment – Disability discrimination. The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the employer's appeal against a finding by the employment tribunal (ET) that an employee's claim for disability discrimination began to run by a specified date. It held that the tribunal's decisions to extend time under s 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of that claim and a separate claim of harassment had been wrong in law.