Latest Cases

Insolvency – Liquidator. The Chancery Division held, among other things, that the defendant liquidator was not liable to the claimant firm of solicitors (the firm) for its charges, basic costs and uplift or for interest on unpaid or late payment of disbursements in respect of work done, pursuant to a conditional fee agreement (CFA), in respect of the liquidation of a company. A letter sent to the Firm by the liquidator and its acceptance by the Firm's principal, had had the effect of importing into the conditional fee agreement that recovery of assets into the estate was a precondition to the firm rendering an invoice to the liquidator for work done by the Firm. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against orders for his extradition to Romania to serve a sentence of five years and ten months' imprisonment for aggravated burglary. After giving guidance on s 20 of the Extradition Act 2003, it held that, if the judge had wrongly found the appellant had deliberately absented himself from trial, he would have been obligated to have concluded that the appellant would be entitled to a retrial. 

Value added tax – Penalty. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) dismissed the appeal by Marsdens Caterers of Sheffield (Marsdens) against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (the FTT) by which the FTT had dismissed Marsdens challenge to a default surcharge imposed on it by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners in respect of late payment of VAT for the relevant period. 

Housing – Local authority. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant severely autistic children's application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's failure to afford them a transfer to other accommodation was unlawful, alleging that their present accommodation was unsafe for them. There was no doubt that the system in operation to deal with accommodation to meet needs complied with the indirect application of s 27 of the Children Act 1989 and its application to each claimant was lawful. 

Patent – Infringement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal against the quantification of an account of profits following an earlier finding that the defendant had infringed the claimants' patent for a snap-in insert that attached to shop display panels. The judge had erred in his approach to apportionment of the overall profit made by the defendant and had further erred in his assessment of the deduction of general overheads. 

Criminal evidence – Hearsay. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the judge had not erred in having exercised her discretion, pursuant to s 126 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, to exclude the hearsay confession of a deceased man. In the circumstances, the case for exclusion had been overwhelming. The defendant's convictions for two counts of rape, two counts of robbery and one count of indecent assault, were, accordingly, safe. 

Immigration – Judicial review – Application for permission. Court of Session: In one of the first applications for permission to proceed with a petition for judicial review under the new Rules in Chapter 58 of the Rules of the Court of Session, in which a Nigerian citizen challenged the Home Secretary's decision to curtail his leave to remain for breach of one of its conditions, the court made observations on the test for permission and held that the petitioner had demonstrated a case with a real prospect of success and granted permission. 

Professional misconduct – Disciplinary proceedings. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against the decisions of the Conduct and Competence Committee Panel (the panel) of the respondent Health and Care Professions Council, that her fitness to practise as a social worker was impaired by reason of her misconduct, and making a striking off order, removing her name from the register. The panel's factual findings with respect to two allegations had been supported by evidence and its decision on sanction had been lawful. 

Creditor – Partnership. The Chancery Division dismissed appeals made by Z against orders made by a district judge in the course of his attempts to challenge an individual voluntary agreement made in relation to K, against whom he had commenced proceedings. The district judge had not erred in her findings or proceeded on an incorrect basis. 

Value added tax – Supply of goods and services. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) allowed the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to the effect that Vodafone Group Services Ltd could amend a previous claim for repayment of overpaid output tax, in respect of which an appeal was pending, so that it encompassed subsequent claims on different grounds, limited to the same amount as the previous claim. The tribunal held that, in the present case, the later claims had not been subsumed within the previous claim, as claimed by Vodafone.