Latest Cases

Landlord and tenant – Repair. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, upheld the dismissal of a claim under s 4 of the Defective Premises Act 1972, which the appellant had brought, following her having slipped and fallen as she had walked up the stairs of a property. Among other things, it held that there was little doubt that, without a handrail, the staircase was a hazard. However, as unsafe as it might have been, there was nothing about it that could possibly justify the description of being in disrepair. 

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. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) allowed the employee's appeal against a decision of the employment tribunal striking out his claims of alleged detriments after being reinstated. The EAT held that the tribunal had erred or had reached a perverse conclusion in striking out the alleged unfair dismissal claim. The EAT concluded that the claims should go forward and that the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the claims. 

Air traffic – Noise nuisance. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant's appeal against the judge's grant of an injunction, restraining certain manoeuvres by helicopters on or above part of its land lying near the claimant's property and rejecting its defence based on s 76(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. The judge had been wrong in confining 'flight' in s 76(1) of the Act to lateral travel from one fixed point to another and holding that the precondition of immunity was that flight or ordinary incidents of flight had to be reasonable.

Contract – Contract for service. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant's claim regarding an alleged agreement between the parties by which the claimant was to provide services to the defendant. On the evidence, no legally binding contract had been made between the parties, either orally or in writing. 

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. 

Children and young persons – Protection. The Administrative Court held that the defendant local authority had made an irrational decision in not finding that C was a child in need under the Children Act 1989 on the basis of the risk of radicalisation. 

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. 

Building contract – Contractor. The Technology and Construction Court allowed the claimant company's application for declaratory relief in a dispute concerning the payment obligations under a contract and an escrow agreement. The court held that the first defendant had not made a valid interim application within the meaning of the contract, and thus no default event had occurred within the meaning of the escrow agreement. 

Contract – Construction. The Technology and Construction Court construed a settlement agreement made between the claimant mobile network operator EE Ltd, formerly known as T-Mobile (UK) Ltd and the defendant mobile virtual network operator, Mundio Mobile Ltd (MML). Among other things, it held that a new marketing support fund only became available to MML once it had complied with its 'Minimum Year to Date Bundle Commitment' up to the end of the previous calendar month.