Latest Cases

Trade union – Recognition. The claimant (Boots) sought judicial review of the decision of the defendant Central Arbitration Committee (the CAC) that the application of the Pharmacists' Defence Association Union (the PDAU) to be recognised by the Boots for the purposes of collective bargaining on behalf of the pharmacists employed by Boots was admissible. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that, on the proper interpretation of 'collective bargaining' in para 134(1) of Sch A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, the PDAU's application to the CAC had been rendered inadmissible by para 35 of Sch A1 to the Act. 

Criminal evidence – Admissibility/sufficiency of evidence. High Court of Justiciary: In appeals against conviction by three bus drivers who were found guilty of forming a fraudulent scheme to defraud Transport Scotland by scanning lost or stolen concessionary travel cards into electronic ticket machines, the court held that the sheriff was entitled to admit evidence of the appellants' interviews with employees of Transport Scotland, was correct in repelling their submissions of no case to answer and was entitled to convict them, but that the findings-in-fact were not sufficient to support convictions for the period 5 February 2010 to 23 November 2010, so the convictions should be restricted to the date '23 November 2010'. 

Criminal law – Costs. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, considered an application for costs following a private prosecution by Virgin Media Limited in which the defendant had been alleged to have provided set-top boxes where the encryption firmware had been compromised, allowing the user to view television channels free of charge. In making its award, the court considered the reasonableness of instructing the solicitor and counsel retained by the company. 

Criminal law – Cost. The judge refused the claimant costs of an abortive hearing, under s 19 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, as he could not identify 'the party whose fault it was'. The claimant sought judicial review, but the parties invited the court to treat the matter as an appeal by way of case stated. The Divisional Court held that the judge had erred in law. Proceedings as on an appeal by way of case stated, it held that there had been a clear mistake without satisfactory explanation, which had caused the hearing to be abortive and ordered the prosecution to pay the claimant's costs. 

Company – Director. The defendants committed a number of offences, including fraud, connected to the retention of deposit money by a letting company. They were found criminally responsible, but the court declined to make an order for disqualification. The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills applied for an order disqualifying the defendants, but the Chancery Division held that it was not appropriate to make such an order and was unfair that the defendants should be exposed to the same claim on two occasions. 

Value added tax – Supply of goods and services. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the appeal brought by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (the FTT) in which the FTT had decided that certain dog foods sold by Roger Skinner Ltd were zero-rated as 'animal feeding stuffs' within Sch 8 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994. The tribunal decided that on the evidence, the FTT had been entitled to take the view that none of the products in dispute had been 'meal for ... dogs' and consequently did not fall within the excepted items in Group 1 of Sch 8 to the Act which were standard-rated. 

Criminal evidence – Appeal – Fresh evidence. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal against conviction by an appellant who pled guilty to the murder of his two young sons and whose case the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred to the High Court on the ground that there was 'fresh evidence' relating to his mental health at time of killings, the court held that the appeal was bound to fail since the court could not find that the plea was tendered under some real error or misconception or in circumstances which were clearly prejudicial to the appellant. 

European Union – Transport. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that arts 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation (EC) 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) 295/91) had to be interpreted as meaning that the concept of 'arrival time', which was used to determine the length of the delay to which passengers on a flight had been subject, referred to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft was opened, the assumption being that, at that moment, the passengers were permitted to leave the aircraft. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the FTT) assessed the claimant asylum seeker as a minor, but the High Court in distinct judicial review proceedings found that he was not a minor. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the UT) found error in the FTT's decisions and placed considerable weight on the High Court's decision in finding the claimant an adult. The claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the UT had not been bound by the High Court's decision, but had been entitled to attach considerable weight to it. However, the UT had not regarded itself as bound by the High Court's decision and had not fundamentally erred. 

Sentence – Hospital order. The claimant, who had a long history of mental health problems, had received an indeterminate sentence for arson with intent to endanger property. Having served the minimum term, she sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's and Parole Board's decisions in reviewing her detention over 22 months. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that, although it had taken a considerable time to be resolved, there had been no breach of the obligation on the part of the state to provide a 'speedy' resolution.