Latest Cases

Landlord and tenant – Assignment of lease. The Chancery Division considered the construction of assignment provisions in leases entered into by companies in the Hilton Group of companies and the effect of the Landlord and Tenants (Covenants) Act 1995. The court held that the claimants were entitled to the declaratory relief sought. 

Police – Discipline. The claimant police officers issued judicial review proceedings, challenging the refusal of their appeals against the continued imposition of the service confidence procedure (SCP) against them. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the decisions had sufficient public law element. However, the circumstances which led to a decision to invoke the SCP required that the court not intervene in the absence of very exceptional circumstances and that threshold had not been met. There was no patent and unanswerable illogicality/irrationality/unfairness in the defendant's decisions. 

Value added tax – Exemptions. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) ruled on an appeal by Bookit Ltd against a decision of the Revenue and Customs Commissioners which had decided that the taxpayer's services consisting of credit and debit card handling fees charged by the taxpayer to customers making advance bookings for cinema tickets at Odeon cinemas, were not exempt within 

Solicitor – Negligence. The appellant solicitors appealed against the judge's finding of negligence and award of damages to the respondent client on the basis of the loss of a chance of further recovery in his claim for services required as a consequence of his disability. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge's findings on causation were unassailable. If properly advised, there would have been no sensible reason for the respondent not to pursue the services claim. Further, it was inherently implausible that the respondent had given up the services claim because he had realised that it had been based on exaggeration at least verging on dishonesty. 

Practice – Civil litigation. In the course of private law family proceedings, the local authority intervened and issued care proceedings in relation to the two children. A case management hearing was held, at which the judge made critical comments of the mother and maternal grandmother and expressed doubt as to the veracity of their evidence. Following the fact finding hearing, the judge held that the mother's allegations were untrue and determined that the threshold criteria had been met. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, commenting on the role of the judge in such proceedings, allowed the mother's appeal on the ground that the judge had displayed apparent judicial bias. 

Landlord and tenant – Service charge. The Chancery Division held that a landlord was not entitled to charge the claimant tenant service charges which represented costs for refurbishment works, which it had incurred after the claimant had terminated the lease by operating a break clause. That was so, notwithstanding that the relevant works had been carried out within the original contractual period of the lease. 

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. 

Patent – Infringement. The defendant company, LEO, owned two pharmaceutical patents. The claimant company, TEVA, opposed both of the patents on the grounds that they were, among other things, obvious. The Chancery Division, Patents Court, held that, given a prior United States patent, the two patents were obvious. 

Professional misconduct – Disciplinary proceedings. The appellant pharmacist appealed against the decision of the respondent General Pharmaceutical Council's Fitness to Practise Committee (the FPC) to remove him from the Register of Pharmacists, as his fitness to practise was impaired. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the FPC's decision had not been wrong in its determination of the facts and there had been no procedural irregularity or unfairness in its proceedings. Further, the decision to remove the appellant from the Register of Pharmacists had been open to it and had not breached art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Employment – Continuity. A local authority changed to a new contractor, the appellant, for gas servicing work. The appellant accepted that some, but not all, staff transferred from the old contractor, the second respondent. The remaining employees brought unfair dismissal claims. The employment tribunal found that those employees had been transferred and, accordingly, had been unfairly dismissed. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the appeal, held, inter alia, that the tribunal had failed to give adequate reasons as to why it had considered that the relevant employees had been assigned to an organised grouping in relation to the transferred work.