Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

Practice – Service out of the jurisdiction. The claimant was granted permission to serve its contractual claim against the defendant out of the jurisdiction. The defendant sought to set aside the order on the ground that it had never entered into any contracts with the claimant. The Commercial Court, in allowing the application, held that the claimant had failed to show the better argument that it had been a contracting party. Accordingly, the order for service out of the jurisdiction had to be set aside. 

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. 

Gaming – Lawful and unlawful gaming. The claimant casino issued proceedings to recover £1m on unpaid cheques provided by the defendant in exchange for chips, which she had lost. The Queen's Bench Division, in allowing the claim, held that there had been no unlawful giving of credit to the defendant. Further, the defendant had not established any claim in negligence, as it was not fair, just and reasonable that the law should impose a duty of care on the claimant to prevent her from using her cheque cashing facility. 

Unfair Dismissal – Constructive Dismissal. The employment tribunal had rejected the employee's claim for unfair constructive dismissal in circumstances where he had given seven months' notice of termination following the alleged breach of contract. The employee's appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal raised a short question of law in relation to s 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act of 1996 as to whether the common law concept of affirmation applied in circumstances where an employee resigned giving notice exceeding the contractual minimum period of notice. 

Child – Welfare. Following the removal of his brain tumour, the parents of A, a boy aged five, disputed the hospital's proposed further treatment. They, before removing him to Spain, proposed therapy generally unavailable in the United Kingdom and A's referral to a facility in Prague. On the local authority's application, the judge made A a ward of the court and ordered a further hearing. Following receipt of further information, the Family Division held that there was no reason to stand in the way of the parents' proposal. Both proposed courses were reasonable and it was the parents who bore the heavy responsibility of making a decision. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The defendant in a personal injury claim was refused permission by the district judge to amend his defence late in the proceedings in order to plead formally a case in contributory negligence. The defendant sought permission to appeal and an appeal if granted. The Queen's Bench Division in granting permission and allowing the appeal held that Justice and fairness required that the amendment should have been allowed so that 'the real dispute' between the parties could be adjudicated upon. 

Damages – Inquiry as to damages. The claimant, Jodie Henderson, was a singer, songwriter and musician. In earlier proceedings, the court had held that she was entitled to damages from the defendant for the infringement of her performer's rights in respect of a track called 'Heartbroken'. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court conducted an inquiry as to damages and held that the claimant was entitled to total damages of £35,000. 

Insolvency – Bankruptcy. The first defendant appealed against the entry of judgment against him on the basis that the claimant had failed to disclose his bankruptcy, which had occurred after the start of proceedings, but before judgment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the first defendant's appeal had been founded on the false premises that the bankruptcy order had immediately deprived the claimant of his cause of action. The first defendant had failed to show that the claimant's property had passed to a trustee in bankruptcy before judgment, and that the claimant had known that the official receiver had become trustee, that his estate had become vested in the official receiver and that that had been so before judgment had been entered.