Latest Cases

Shipping – Cargo. The Commercial Court determined preliminary issues concerning a claim by the claimant owner of a vessel to enforce the terms of a letter of undertaking, which had been provided by defendant time charterer of the vessel to the owners by way of security for the potential liability of cargo interests in general average. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The child S, died in hospital. Post mortem investigations found that she was suffering from a number of injuries usually associated with non-accidental trauma, such as bone fractures, a scalp injury and intra-cranial bleeding. In addition, S, suffered from a number of conditions, all linked to a unique combination of genetic abnormalities. Following a fact finding hearing, the Family Division held that the local authority had not proven on a balance of probabilities that S's injuries had been inflicted non-accidentally. 

Family proceedings – Costs. Following a decision of the Family Division to make an order in its' inherent jurisdiction that the local authority were permitted not to disclose the care plan for the unborn child to the mother, namely removal into care at birth and three hearings regarding the capacity of the mother in the Court of Protection, the issue of costs arose. The Court of Protection made an appropriate order on the basis of the evidence before it. 

Riot – Damage. In the course of the 2011 London Riots, a gang of youths broke into a warehouse, looted it and burned it down with petrol bombs. The judge held that the gang were 'persons riotously and tumultuously assembled' so that the defendant Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime was liable to compensate anyone who had sustained losses, but that the defendant's liability did not extend to consequential loss. The parties appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division held that the judge had been correct in his findings on liability. However, s 2(1) of the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 included a right to compensation for consequential loss. 

Company – Winding up. The trial of a preliminary issue was ordered, concerning the priority to be given to the payment of certain charges owed to the respondent company for gas and electricity supplied to retail premises after companies in liquidation had entered into administration and after they had been vacated by the companies. The Companies Court held that liability under the deemed contracts was provable, pursuant to r 13.12(1)(b) of the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925, as a liability to which the companies had become subject after the date of administration by reason of an obligation incurred before that date. 

Particulars of claim – Amendment. The claimants brought proceedings against the defendant chartered accountants and licensed insolvency practitioners alleging that they had negligently caused the claimants' financial loss as their trustees in bankruptcy. The Chancery Division ruled on the defendants' appeal and the claimants' cross-appeal following orders made by the deputy master in relation to the claimants' particulars of claim. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. Pursuant to s 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1969, a judge of the High Court could grant a 'leapfrog' certificate to enable the case to proceed directly to the Supreme Court. In the instant case of several hundred claims by Iraqi civilians seeking damages from the defendant Ministry of Defence for their allegedly unlawful detention and/or unlawful treatment by British armed, the Queen's Bench Division granted the application. 

Medicine – Product licence. The claimant issued judicial review proceedings on the basis that, when conducting a re-inspection, the Medicines and Health Care Products Regulatory Agency (the MHRA) was knowingly gathering evidence in the context and for the purpose of infringement proceedings which had been brought against it under Commission Regulation (EC) 658/2007. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that it could not declare that the MHRA's response to the European Medicines Agency's requests under art 8(3) of the Regulation had been unlawful or rule substantially rule on the contention that the material provided contained errors. Further, the MHRA's conduct had not been procedurally improper and unlawful in failing to advise the claimant of the potential use of the information. 

Freedom of information – Information. The claimant complained to the first defendant Information Commissioner in respect of the second defendant local authority's failure to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in the requested Excel format and to help him to formulate an appropriate request. The complaints and appeals were dismissed and the claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the authority had been required to provide the information in the requested format. Further, the authority had complied with its duty to help him to formulate an appropriate request. 

Administration of estates – Payment. Following the death of W, a locum doctor, the appellant NHS authority submitted that money had been overpaid to W's executors and needed to be returned. The deputy pensions ombudsman held that repayment was not necessary. The authority appealed. The Chancery Division held that, while the ombudsman had acted within her powers, there were no grounds for limiting the authority's entitlement to repayment to the net assets of the estate, and her decision to that effect would be set aside.