Latest Cases

Damages – Personal injury. In an appeal against the method of calculation of damages made to the appellant following the death of his wife from mesothelioma, the Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal against the decision of the trial judge to assess the multiplier from the date of death, as previously decided by the House of Lords, rather than from the date of trial. The Supreme Court decided not to follow those earlier cases on the basis that the correct date as at which to assess the multiplier when fixing damages for future loss in claims under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 should be the date of trial and not the date of death. 

Sentence – Release on licence. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the conditions imposed upon his licence on release from prison. The conditions had not been a breach of the defendant Secretary of State's policy. Further, neither the imposition of the conditions in the claimant's case nor the provision within them for prior approval to their relaxation were disproportionate. 

Local government – Valuation for rating. Court of Session: Allowing appeals by an assessor against a Valuation Appeal Committee's decision concerning the valuation of six 'Run-of-the-River' hydroelectric schemes, the court held that the committee, in rejecting the assessor's argument that a sequential approach should be taken, erred in law in its interpretation of the Valuation for Rating (Plant and Machinery) (Scotland) Regulations 2000, and it quashed the valuations and remitted to the committee for reconsideration. 

Negligence – Defective premises. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claimant's appeal from a decision of a master granting the defendants summary judgment on the claimant's claim under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 and s 4 Defective Premises Act 1972 in respect of the death of her husband. There had been no real prospect of success on any part of the claim and summary judgment had been properly granted. 

Trust and trustee – Shares in company. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant's claim that an establishment created by his grandmother, O, to hold assets of hers had been part of her estate, or that she had retained the right to control the founder's rights in the establishment. Further, the court held that the establishment, and the foundation that replaced it, had not held its entire interest in certain shares on trust absolutely under Liechtenstein law for the trustees of O's trust. 

Arbitration – Award. The Commercial Court allowed the claimant's appeal concerning an arbitration which arose out of a contract of affreightment (COA) made between the claimant, as owners and the defendant, as charterers of bulk carriers. The tribunal had erred in law by failing to hold that by being deprived, by the defendant's breach, of its right to receive freight, the claimant had suffered a loss, notwithstanding that the claimant had used two other companies to receive all inward freight earned under the COA and to pay all outgoing freight. The tribunal had not taken into account that, whilst one limb of the right to receive freight had been the right to receive it into one's bank account, another limb of that right had been the right to give it away. 

Costs – Order for costs. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal by insurers against an order that they pay the claimants' costs of the proceedings, which had been made on the basis of, among other things, the exercise of the court's discretion to order costs to be paid by a non-party, pursuant to s 51(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981. The insurers were unable to demonstrate that the judge's exercise of his discretion had been flawed in any way. On the contrary, there had been ample material to have justified the order which he had made. 

Criminal evidence – Sufficiency of evidence – Unreasonable verdict – Misdirection. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who was convicted art and part of culpable homicide, along with a co-accused who was convicted of murder, the court rejected grounds of appeal contending (i) that the trial judge had erred in holding that the evidence was sufficient, alleged admissions by the appellant in text messages having been demonstrably wrong and there being no evidence which could corroborate them, (ii) that even if there had been a sufficiency of evidence the verdict was one which no reasonable jury could have reached, and (iii) that the judge erred in his directions to the jury about what was capable of amounting to corroboration of the texts. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the appellant's appeal against the dismissal of his application for judicial review of a decision that he was not entitled to asylum and that the discretion under r 353B of the Immigration Rules would not be exercised in his favour. An error in the decision letter had neither amounted to maladministration nor been a material error. It was inconceivable that, if the error had not been made, a different conclusion would have been reached on the facts of the case. 

Town and country planning – District plan. The Administrative Court allowed the claimants' application, under s 133(3) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, for an order that a policy of the local plan adopted by the first defendant local planning authority be treated as not adopted and remitted to the second defendant Secretary of State. The Secretary of State's inspector had failed to give reasons for acting as he had or had been irrational in making a recommendation without reasons.