Latest Cases

Privilege – Legal professional privilege. The Divisional Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the legality of the procedure set out in the Operational Handbook of the Serious Fraud Office for dealing with material potentially subject to legal professional privilege embedded in electronic devices. The procedure was lawful and, in particular, the preliminary sift of paper or electronic material did not have to, as a matter of law, be conducted by third parties. 

European Union – Treaty provisions. The Court of Justice of the European Union granted the application by the European Commission for a declaration that by failing to repeal, with retroactive effect from 1 May 2004, the age-related criterion in art 27 of the Law 97 (Ι)/1997 on Pensions, Cyprus, which deterred workers from leaving their member state of origin in order to work in another member state, or in an EU institution, or in another international organisation and which had the effect of creating unequal treatment between migrant workers including those who worked in the EU institutions or in another international organisation, on the one hand, and civil servants who had worked in Cyprus, on the other, Cyprus had failed to fulfil its obligations under arts 45 and 48 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and under art 4(3) TEU. 

Building contract – Adjudication. The Technology and Construction Court ruled that the claimant company was entitled to summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator's award of in excess of £10m in respect of work at a power plant, which the claimant had been engaged by the defendant company to carry out. The defendant's challenge to the adjudicator's decision on the grounds that there had been breaches of natural justice and/or a wrongful delegation of the adjudicator's decision-making function, failed in every ground. 

Court of Appeal – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the third defendant company's application to vary an order requiring it to pay a judgment debt into court as a condition of the continuation of its appeal against a judgment awarding the claimant company (in liquidation) equitable compensation for dishonest assistance of breaches of fiduciary duty against the company by its sole director. The court took account of the position of third defendant's controlling shareholder and chairman, who was wealthy and able to provide it with financial assistance, and held that the third defendant had not established that it could not have satisfied the condition. In those circumstances, the court had no proper alternative but to dismiss the appeal. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division allowed an appeal from the defendant employer, following the entering of judgment by consent, seeking to rely on fresh medical evidence in relation to the claimant's claim that he had suffered diffuse pleural thickening and asbestosis caused by his exposure to asbestos dust during the course of his employment. The order would be varied to read that there be judgment for the claimant on breach of duty, with the issues of causation and quantum to be assessed. 

Terrorism – Sanctions. The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal in respect of a decision made by the respondent Secretary of State in September 2005, in his capacity as a member of the United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committee, which removed the hold the United Kingdom had previously placed on the appellant's designation by the Sanctions Committee. The court ruled on, among other things, issues concerning the tests to be applied in judging the legality of the decision and their consequences under domestic law. 

Medical practitioner – Negligence. The Queen's Bench Division ruled on a list of six disputed facts in connection with a clinical negligence claim arising out of the allegedly negligent manner in which the defendant had obtained the claimant's consent to surgery. 

Prison – Life sentence. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant serving prisoner's application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decisions, refusing to re-categorise him from category A to category B and refusing him an oral hearing. His denial of the offence had not been treated as a bar to re-categorisation and an oral hearing would not have affected the decisions. Further, the claimant had been given an opportunity, reasonable in all the circumstances, to rehabilitate himself. 

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. 

Mental health – Patient. In allowing the appellant patient's appeal, the Supreme Court held that it would be wrong to have a presumption that an anonymity order should be made in every case in civil proceedings in the High Court relating to a patient detained in a psychiatric hospital or otherwise subject to compulsory powers under the Mental Health Act 1983. However, in the present case, the anonymity order in place would be maintained on the basis that without it there was a very real risk that the progress the appellant had made during his long years of treatment in hospital would be put in jeopardy and his re-integration in the community, which had been an important purpose of his transfer to hospital, would not succeed.