Latest Cases

European Union – Public procurement. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 49 and 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The request had been made in proceedings between Consorzio Artigiano Servizio Taxi e Autonoleggio and two transport operators and Local Health Authority of Ciriè, Chivasso et Ivrea and the Region of Piedmont concerning, first, the award, with no competitive tendering, of the service of transporting dialysis patients to various health care establishments, to Associazione Croce Bianca del Canavese and to several other voluntary associations and, secondly, the authorisation of the related expenditure. 

Terrorism – Prevention of. The Administrative Court determined that the claimant's appeal against the defendant Secretary of State's refusal to vary measures set out in his Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measures notice should be held at the same time as the statutory review of that notice. It further set out the procedure to be followed, given the Secretary of State's refusal to disclose in open proceedings all the material sought by the claimant. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The request had been made in proceedings between several travel agencies and the Competition Council of Lithuania concerning a decision by which the latter had ordered those travel agencies to pay fines for having entered into and participated in anti-competitive practices. 

Sentence – Life imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the Secretary of State's appeal, held that the evidence had not established that the claimant prisoner had been denied a real opportunity to demonstrate a sufficient reduction of risk by the end of the tariff period. It dismissed the claimant's cross-appeal, by which he sought to advance a claim under art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Immigration – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the Secretary of State's appeal against the respondent foreign criminal's successful appeal against deportation. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) had erred in its approach and its failure properly to have applied the Immigration Rules had led to it taking an insufficiently vigorous approach to the issues raised under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. That had been a material error of law. 

Heritable property – Dispute as to ownership – Prescriptive possession. Court of Session: In a dispute about the ownership of residential property in which the pursuer, the executor nominate on his father's estate, sought reduction of a 2006 disposition of the disputed property in favour of the defenders, who had moved into the property in 1992 and paid the pursuer's parents £15 per week in connection with their occupation of it, the court granted decree of declarator in favour of the pursuer, holding that he had established that his father possessed an interest in the land which included the property for a continuous period of 10 years from 1 December 1992, openly, peaceably and without any judicial interruption. 

Human rights – Right to respect for private and family life. The Administrative Court held that the claimant heterosexual couple's ineligibility to register as civil partners, under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, was not incompatible with their rights under arts 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The state had fulfilled its obligations under the Convention by having made a means of formal recognition of their relationship available and the denial of a further means of formal recognition which was open to same-sex couples did not amount to unlawful state interference with the claimants' rights to family life or private life. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding, among other things, that art 20(2) of Directive (EC) 2008/118 had to be interpreted as meaning that the movement of excise goods under a duty suspension arrangement ended, for the purpose of that provision, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, when the consignee of those goods had found, on unloading in full from the means of transport carrying the goods in question, that there had been shortages of the goods in comparison with the amount which should have been delivered to him. 

Divorce – Jurisdiction. The Family Division, applying art 19 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003, dismissed the wife's divorce petition where the jurisdiction of the French court had been established. The husband had previously filed a divorce petition in the French court and, accordingly, that court was first seised. The court should actively discourage the tactical filing of a second set of proceedings in England when the jurisdiction of the court of another member state had been established. 

Heritable property – Title to share of house – Purported revocation of survivorship destination. Court of Session: In a dispute about the ownership of a house which was disponed to the pursuer and his late wife 'equally between them and to the survivor of them', the wife having then executed a codicil purporting to revoke the survivorship destination in favour of the pursuer and her executors having sought confirmation on an estate which included her one‑half joint pro indiviso share of the house and granted title to that share to first defender, the court held that the first defender had stated no relevant defence to the proposition that the terms of the codicil did not operate to revoke the special destination, his case under s 1 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 was bound to fail, and he had failed to plead a relevant case of acquiescence.