Latest Cases

Human rights – Right to life. The claimant issued judicial review proceedings, contending that the United Kingdom had an obligation, under art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to investigate the death of her son, a British soldier murdered by an armed mob when visiting a police station in Iraq in June 2003. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the application held that art 2 of the Convention did not give a member of the armed forces a civil right to be protected by the state against errors, including negligent errors, in the military chain of command in carrying out an order relating to the conduct of operations in theatre where such an error created or increased the risk of loss of life. Accordingly, there was no duty under art 2 of the Convention to hold an investigation. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimants in a human rights claim regarding prison conditions in the United Kingdom had their cases struck out. They applied to have them reinstated. The Queen's Bench Division having regard to CPR 3.9 held that on the facts no relief from sanction would be granted in each of the five actions and they would consequently remain struck out. 

Criminal Law – Importation of prohibited goods. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that a sentence of six years' imprisonment for conspiracy to evade a prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug of Class A, contrary to s 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, had been unduly lenient. Despite the offender's limited involvement in the conspiracy, the judge ought to have scaled up the sentence to reflect the massive quantities involved within the operation. The offender's sentence would be quashed and substituted for a sentence of eleven years' imprisonment. 

Value added tax – Input tax. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the taxpayer company's appeal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (the FTT) to uphold the Revenue and Customs Commissioners' refusal of the taxpayer's claim for input tax on the basis that the transactions which had given rise to the input tax at issue had been connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT. The tribunal decided that in arriving at its decision, the FTT had considered the relevant evidence and had applied the correct test. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant Guinean national sought damages, declarations and an order for an inquiry for her unlawful immigration detention. The Administrative Court granted her claim. Accordingly, the claimant was entitled to damages, but an investigation into the circumstances of the claimant's detention would not be ordered, as they were well documented. 

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. 

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. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant issued proceedings, seeking the quashing of the defendant local authority's grant of planning permission for the installation of two wind turbines. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that it would have been driven to conclude that the reasons given in the planning officer's screening opinion had been inadequately expressed, but for the contents of the witness statement. Further, the decision had not been irrational and the planning officer had not misdirected herself as to the expression 'likely to have significant effects'. 

European Union – Reference to European Court. The Court of Justice of the European Union considered a request for a preliminary ruling made in the course of proceedings between Mr U and the Stadt Karlsruhe concerning the latter's refusal to alter the form in which Mr U's birth name appeared in his German passport. The Court answered a number of questions relating to the interpretation of Council Regulation (EC) 2252/2004 (on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents). 

Negligence – Information or advice. The claim concerned allegedly negligent advice given by the defendant company to the claimants in relation to a loan. In the course of proceedings, HMT admitted liability. Following the admissions, the Chancery Division made findings as to the various remaining aspects of the case.