Latest Cases

Contract – Memorandum or note. The parties contracted under a memorandum of understanding to work together in oil production in Iraq. A dispute arose and the claimant commenced proceedings. The Commercial Court held that, among other things, the claimant was entitled to recover debts accrued in a debt claim, but that sums stated to be recoverable in the event of breach in a memorandum of understanding were a penalty and unenforceable. 

European Union – Reference to European Court. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) 562/2006, as amended, (establishing a community code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders) and European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) 810/2009 (establishing a community code on visas). The request had been made in the course of a dispute between Air Baltic and Valsts robežsardze concerning the imposition of a fine on Air Baltic for the administrative offence of transporting a person to Latvia without necessary travel documents. 

Immigration – Asylum. Court of Session: Refusing a judicial review petition in which the petitioner, who accepted that he had not stated additional grounds until served with a refusal of his wife's claim, sought reduction of a decision to certify his asylum claim so as to deny a right of appeal, the court held that at the earliest possible stage the petitioner knew he had to disclose the whole truth and plainly did not do so; the respondent had correctly exercised her discretion and had given reasons for her decision, having fully explored all the proper issues; she was not bound to take account of Country of Origin information and did not err in the way the wife's case was considered. 

European Union – Data protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2(a), 12(a) and 13(1)(d), (f) and (g) of Directive (EC) 95/46 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data), and of arts 8(2) and 41(2)(b) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The requests had been made in two sets of proceedings between third country nationals who had applied for a residence permit for a fixed period in the Netherlands, and the Netherlands Minister for Immigration, Integration and Asylum, concerning the Minister's refusal to communicate to those nationals a copy of an administrative document drafted before the adoption of the decisions on their applications for residence permits. 

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. 

Land – Sale of land. The claimant brought proceedings, seeking an order for the sale of two properties, which were assets of an informal partnership with his brother, the defendant. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant's application for a pre-emptive sale order. The court was not prepared to make the draconian pre-emptive sale order sought unless and until independent solicitors and estate agents had been appointed and some attempt had been made to assess the present market. 

Personal Injury: Quantum Case. Road traffic accident. The claimant was awarded £6,600 in general damages. She suffered fractures to her mid right ribs, soft tissue injuries to her neck, shoulders and jaw. Rib fractures resolved after four months, neck injury resolved after five months, shoulder injury resolved after three months. The swelling to the claimant's jaw resolved after two weeks and the associated pain and tenderness resolved after four months. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employment tribunal had dismissed the employee's claim for disability discrimination, but had awarded the employee arrears of pay which he had not claimed for. The Employment Appeal Tribunal in dismissing the employee's appeal against the tribunal's rejection of his claim, ruled that there had been no discrimination or breach of duty to make reasonable adjustments as the employer trust's act of refusing to allow the employer to return to work as a consultant was not a disability discrimination under s 15 Equality Act 2010 and was justified as a proportionate means of protecting patients. The EAT however remitted the arrears of pay award to the same tribunal having found substantive and procedural irregularities and errors of law in the making of that award. 

Court of Appeal – Leave to appeal. Following the claimant's success at first instance, the defendant sought permission to appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, imposed conditions on the defendant's application and ordered it to pay security for costs. 

Court of Appeal – Leave to appeal. The Revenue and Customs Commissioners had issued proceedings regarding a missing trader intra-community fraud. Following a trial of sample claims, some of the allegations were found to be proved and the defendants were ordered to pay the sums lost in revenue. The defendants sought permission to appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ordered that conditions regarding payment into court of the judgment sum be attached to the application for permission to appeal and ordered a stay of the execution of the judgment between the payment into court of the judgment sum and determination of the appeal.