Latest Cases

Marriage – Foreign marriage. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed a wife's appeal against a declaration that her marriage by way of Nikah in Pakistan had been valid. On the new evidence presented, the decree absolute that had purported to end her previous marriage had been void as issued less than six weeks after the decree nisi. In any event, the amended date of decree absolute meant that the marriage had not been dissolved for the three month period required by Sharia law before a woman could re-marry. The matter would be remitted to consider whether the fact that her previous marriage had been a nullity due to the husband's bigamy had any impact upon the validity of the parties' marriage. 

Time – Extension of time. Having failed in their claim for defamation, the claimants were granted an extension of time for filing their points of dispute in respect of the defendant's bill of costs. The defendant appealed that order, but it was dismissed. Subsequently, the defendant did successfully appeal the extension on the ground that the claimants had issued their application out of time and so had been seeking relief from sanctions, which the judge had been wrong to grant. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appeal as the application for an extension had been made in time and so there had been no relief from sanctions. The court gave guidance on changes to the CPR in respect of applications to extend time. 

Guarantee – Misrepresentation. A bank sought to enforce two limited guarantees signed by the defendant, as security for facilities provided by the bank to a property development company owned by the defendant and his son. The defendant contended that he was entitled to rescind the guarantees on the grounds of misrepresentation and economic duress. The Chancery Division, in granting the bank's claim, and in dismissing the counterclaim, held that, whilst, in principle, a statement by a bank or other financial institution that it wanted to increase its exposure in a particular business sector might, if untrue, be capable of providing the basis for a claim in misrepresentation, the defendant had, on the facts, failed to establish that defence or economic duress. 

Warrant – Search warrant. Search warrants made and executed, and restraint orders made, concerning the claimants were subsequently quashed. The defendant court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the Revenue and Customs Commissioners' application, under s 59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, for the retention of the seized material and the claimants sought judicial review. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the application, held that the meaning and intent of s 59 of the Act was plain. The Crown Court had jurisdiction to entertain an application by the Revenue under s 59 of the Act. 

Damages – Entitlement to damages. The claimants were the tenants of a restaurant. A fire occurred at the restaurant, which was caused by contractors working for the landlord, P. The claimants commenced proceedings against P, seeking a range of remedies including the award of exemplary damages. The Chancery Division held that the claimants were entitled to be placed in the position that they would have been in had the fire not occurred, namely in occupation of restaurant premises with a working kitchen. Exemplary damages were not awarded. 

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. 

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. 

European Union – Community aid. The Court of Justice of the European Union held that the first paragraph of art 33 of Regulation 2419/2001 had to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of intentional irregularity found in an area aid application, the farmer was to be refused all of the aid to which that farmer would have been entitled under the aid scheme concerned by the application and for which the crop group concerned by that irregularity had been eligible. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action brought by Lidl Siftung & Co. KG (Lidl) for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market concerning opposition proceedings between A Colmeia do Minho Ldª and Lidl regarding the application by Lidl for registration of a figurative sign depicting the word 'FAIRGLOBE' as a Community trade mark. 

Mental health – Patient. The applicant NHS Foundation Trust sought declarations, including that it was not in the respondent's best interests to be subjected to further compulsory detention and treatment of her anorexia nervosa, and that it was in her best interests and would be lawful for her treating clinicians not to provide her with nutrition and hydration with which she did not comply. Having fully reviewed the circumstances of the case, including the unanimous medical evidence that the declarations were in the respondent's best interests, the Court of Protection held that treatment of the respondent's anorexia should not be compelled.