Latest Cases

Prison – Prisoner. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal concerning the lawfulness of the guidance given by the defendant Parole Board to its panels in December 2013 as to the test to be applied by panels of the Board when considering whether to direct the release after recall to custody of a prisoner serving a determinate sentence of imprisonment. Among other things, it held that the guidance correctly stated that ss 255B(3) and 255C(3) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, as amended, did not require or permit the risk of offending to be balanced against the benefits of release to the prisoner and the community. 

Building contract – Breach of contract. The Technology and Construction Court made rulings regarding liability in a dispute concerning the construction and sale of a residential property owned by the defendant. It held that, among other things, the first claimant owner of the second claimant building company was entitled to recover damages for breach of contract and to reflect his entitlement to share in the benefit obtained by the defendant in occupying and renting out the property. The defendant was entitled to recover damages to reflect his loss over the period of culpable delay by F in completing the property. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court allowed the mother's application to relocate with her child back to Poland to live with the family on the basis that the state of the mother's mental health meant that it was in the child's best interest for the mother to have the support of her family in Poland. 

Health and safety at work – Duty to employees. The Supreme Court, in allowing an appeal on a claim regarding an accident while at work, gave guidance on the proper approach to the admission and use of expert evidence in proceedings in Scotland and updated the position regarding an employer's liability at common law and the inferences that could be drawn where there had been a failure to provide personal protective equipment which would have been used had it been provided. 

Judicial Review – Leave to apply for judicial review. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, on two appeals where the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) had certified applications for permission to seek judicial review as being 'totally without merit', issued guidance on the proper approach to be taken in considering whether to certify an application for permission to apply for judicial review as totally without merit. 

Company – Member. The Companies Court ruled that the trustees in the bankruptcy of the first respondent's husband were entitled to present a petition to wind up a company in which he had shares because they were to be regarded as 'a member' of the company, for the purposes of s 74 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and, therefore, as registered within the company's register of members for the relevant period. On the balance of probability, the trustees had established unfair prejudice and grounds for winding up the company, subject to financial issues yet to be determined. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The Queen's Bench Division held that the defendants would be sentenced for contempt of court for 28 days for breach of an injunction that prohibited anyone from participating in car cruising in a defined area, such sentence to be suspended. 

Criminal law – Trial. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division held that an order which imposed reporting restrictions in a trial for terrorism offences would not be lifted after the conclusion of the trial. The nature of the evidence, heard in private, continued to necessitate a departure from the principle of open justice. 

Criminal law – Trial. The Divisional Court allowed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant Crown Court's ruling that no member of the public could make notes of the proceedings without permission. The default position was that those who attended public court hearings should be free to make notes of what occurred and the paramount question for a judge, if considering withdrawing that liberty, was whether the note-taking in question would be likely to interfere with the proper administration of justice. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Administrative Court allowed the appellant's appeal against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve a sentence of approximately nine months for offences of robbery, criminal damage and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. As the appellant had served the remainder of his sentence on remand, it would be disproportionate to his rights under art 8 of the Convention to order his extradition.