Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Nigerian national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision refusing him temporary leave to remain in the United Kingdom. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that there was no evidence to support the bare assertion that the claimant had lost all ties to Nigeria and that a decision which resulted in the return of the claimant and his family to Nigeria would not amount to a disproportionate interference with their rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Patent – Petition for revocation. The claimant issued proceedings, seeking a declaration that a European patent for a dosage regimen for use of levonorgestrel as a method of emergency contraception was invalid and should be revoked on grounds including obviousness. The Patents Court, having considered relevant person skilled in the art, held that it had been obvious from a report, discussing interim results of research regarding the effectiveness of a regimen involving a single dose as compared a two-dose regimen, that such a regimen could be pursued and investigated with a reasonable or fair expectation of success. Accordingly, the challenge to the validity of the patent on the ground of obviousness succeeded. 

Personal Injury: Quantum Case. Road traffic accident. The claimant was awarded £6,500 in general damages. She suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder which resolved 11 months post-accident and a phobia of driving which resolved one year post-accident. The claimant also suffered an injury to her hip which resolved four months post-accident, and a small scar on her eyebrow which was permanent but which was not particularly noticeable. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant was convicted of assault in Poland, for which he received a suspended sentence, and he committed a further offence during his probationary period. He then came to the UK, where he worked to financially support his fiancée's family in Poland. A European arrest warrant was issued and the district judge made an order for his extradition to Poland. The appellant appealed. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that extradition would not be a disproportionate interference with his rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Housing – Homeless person. The appellant had been assessed by the local authority as not being in priority need of housing. The reviewing officer found that he was no more at risk than the ordinary street homeless person and dismissed the appeal. The appellant's application to the county court was rejected. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the appellant's appeal and found that the reviewing officer's mistakes regarding the statistics that demonstrated suicide risk among the street homeless had not infected the whole of his decision, which had not been perverse or irrational. Further, the reviewing officer had been entitled to conclude that the appellant's risk of relapse into drug taking did not make him especially vulnerable when compared with other street homeless people. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimant brought proceedings against various defendants, including Siemens Public Ltd Company, alleging infringement a patent concerning a method of operating a pitch-controlled wind turbine. The claimant applied for an order that Siemens provide it with, among other things, information as to its customers within the jurisdiction of the court. The Patents Court held that the balance of justice was in favour of making a Norwich Pharmacal order for disclosure. 

Medical practitioner – Professional misconduct. The appellant registered nurse appealed against the decision of a panel of the Conduct and Competence Committee of the respondent Nursing and Midwifery Council (the panel), finding that his fitness to practice was impaired by reason of misconduct and suspending his registration for 12 months. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that the panel had failed to conduct a careful balancing exercise in admitting the witness statements of absent witnesses and had failed to consider their credibility or reliability. Further, the findings in respect of a third witness could not stand and the decision would be quashed with no direction for a rehearing. 

Human rights – Property. The European Court of Human Rights found that the government of the United Kingdom had wrongly confiscated the wages of an Ivorian worker who had used a false passport to gain employment and should have balanced individual property rights against the interests of the general public. Consequently, the applicant's right to peaceful enjoyment of his property pursuant to art 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated. 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. The claimant had invested in a fund operated by the defendant, a Gibraltar company, which had lost all its capital. The claimant brought a claim in negligence and breach of contract against the defendant and served the claim form, without permission, outside the jurisdiction under CPR 6.33(2)(b)(iii) and art 23 of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001. The Commercial Court dismissed the defendant's application to set aside the service of the claim where the claimant had a good arguable case that there had been a concluded agreement, within art 23 of the Regulation. 

European Union – Action for annulment. The General Court of the European Union granted: (i) the application by Spraylat GmbH (Spraylat) for annulment of an invoice issued by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) setting the amount of the administrative charge imposed on Spraylat; and (ii) a precautionary application by Spraylat to annul Decision SME (2012) 1445 of the ECHA which stated that Spraylat did not fulfil the conditions to receive a reduction of the fee for small enterprises and had imposed an administrative charge on it.