Latest Cases

Company – Liquidation. The Chancery Division considered an application by the joint liquidators of Longmeade Ltd for directions, pursuant to s 168(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986 in relation to a potential claim in negligence, which they had identified could be made by the company against the Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills. Consideration was given to the principles to be applied to the modified regime concerning the commencement of proceedings by a company in compulsory liquidation post-26 May 2015. 

Arbitration – Award. The Family Division following an application by the husband, held that an arbitration award be made an order of the court following the parties' family financial dispute resolution under the family law arbitration scheme. 

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. 

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. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that the Combined Nomenclature (CN) set out in Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) no 1214/2007 had to be interpreted as meaning that a product such as the 'video multiplexer' at issue in the main proceedings should, subject to the referring court's assessment of all the facts before it, be classified in CN heading 8521 of that nomenclature. 

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. 

Legal aid – Legal fees. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claimant was entitled to recover payment on account made to the defendant solicitors firm in accordance with Legal Services Commission v Loomba and s 3(1) of the Access to Justice Act 1999. 

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. 

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. 

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.