Latest Cases

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court gave guidance on the correct approach to European arrest warrants containing particulars of offences for which return was sought which stated that the sentences for other offences had been 'merged' in a variety of ways into the offences for which return was sought. In particular, it considered the warrants' validity with respect to the sufficiency of the particulars and specialty. 

Legal aid – Entitlement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant Director of Legal Aid Casework's appeal in respect of the interpretation of para 21(4) of Sch 1 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and ruled on the proper interpretation of that provision. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant, Sports Direct's application to commit the defendants, Rangers International Football Club and its chairman, to prison for breach of an order restricting the disclosure of certain confidential information, following the chairman's interview on Sky Sports, reported in an article. There was no evidence to that Rangers had held the chairman out as having authority to make the statements on its behalf, and an unverified hearsay statement of one or more unidentified reporter(s) was not a sufficient basis for persuading the court to the criminal standard that the chairman had uttered the words said. Further, it was fatal to Sports Direct's application that no order had been served personally on the defendants and the court declined to exercise the discretion, under CPR 81.8, to dispense with service. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division in a mesothelioma case brought on the deceased's behalf by his wife held that the deceased had not been contributory negligent and made an award of £85,000 in respect of an asbestos related disease in the upper half of the most severe category. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH (LR) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Robert McBride Ltd and LR concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative mark 'LR nova pure' as a Community trade mark. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the condition imposed by the defendant local planning authority on granting planning permission to the interested party for a new retail-led development. The condition required a legally binding commitment, it was enforceable and not too vague, it would achieve its purpose and material considerations had not been ignored. 

Solicitor – Advice. The Chancery Division held that the defendant firm of solicitors, which had acted on behalf of the claimant in respect of the purchase of land, and for another individual in respect of the sub-sale of part of that land, was liable to the claimant in negligence concerning the sub-sale. The defendant's principal, by attaching the wrong plan to the TP1 form and filing of it, had diminished the value of the retained land. The defendant was also liable for negligent advice concerning the amount of stamp duty land tax (SDLT) to be paid, with the result that the claimant had overpaid the SDLT. The concession to SDLT in respect of transfers of land, under s 45 of the Finance Act 2003, had been available because there had been substantial performance of the contract to purchase the whole site and the sale of part of it at the same time. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign judgment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a father's appeal against the mother's successful appeal against recognition and enforcement of an order obtained in Romania regarding their child, who was habitually resident in England. It was both a welfare and fundamental principle whether a child was to be heard and the question to be determined by the court, by reference to the child's age and understanding, was 'whether and if so how was the child to be heard'. As the child in the present case had not been given an opportunity to be heard in the Romanian proceedings, the judge had been correct to refuse recognition and enforcement of its order pursuant to art 23(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003. 

Negligence – Causation. The Queen's Bench Division held that in a claim for medical negligence in respect of the death of a prisoner by his former foster parent and their son, the claimants, that although the foster parent did have victim status under art 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the claimants had failed to establish violations of arts 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and accordingly their claims were dismissed. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division held in answering preliminary issues in a libel action, that the publication of the part of the article on the open website in the United Kingdom had not caused serious harm to the claimant's reputation, and the pursuit of proceedings in respect of that publication would be an abuse of process.