Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in judicial review proceedings in which the petitioner, who was granted discretionary leave to remain in the UK for three years only challenged that decision and sought declarator that he was entitled to indefinite leave to remain, the court rejected the petitioner's central claim that he had a legitimate expectation, based on Parliamentary and other statements, that his application to remain in the UK would be decided by July 2011 as part of the 'legacy' programme and would be dealt with in accordance with the law and practice then in force. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant challenged the defendant local authority's grant of outline planning permission to the interested party for two sites. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority could rationally conclude that the requirements of reg 61(5) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, SI 2010/490 had been met. Further, the authority had been entitled to rely on Natural England's withdrawal of its objections, as it had correctly done so and, in any event, the authority had been entitled to presume it had been correct. 

Income tax – Additional assessment. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the taxpayer director's appeal against six assessments issued against him pursuant to s 29 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 for the years 2003/04 to 2008/09. The tribunal decided that, contrary to the argument put forward by the taxpayer, there had been a discovery by the relevant officer for the purposes of s 29 of the Act. Accordingly, the appeal in regard to all six years was allowed to proceed to a substantive hearing. 

Costs – Order for costs. Following the claimant's success in obtaining an injunction against the defendant, the claimant applied, pursuant to CPR 36.14(3)(d) in the prescribed percentages, calculated by reference to the sum awarded in respect of costs. The Queen's Bench Division held that the imposition of an additional liability would involve an element of penalty which the court did not consider just to impose on the defendant. The court would therefore decline to impose on the defendant an order for an additional amount. 

Costs – Employment tribunal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the employee's appeal against an award of costs made against him by the employment tribunal. The EAT found that the tribunal had erred in law as it was not possible to tell from the tribunal's reasons whether it had taken into account a potentially relevant matter, namely the employee's means. The matter was remitted to the tribunal. 

Arbitration – Arbitrator. The Privy Council dismissed the appellant housing trust's appeal against the findings of an arbitrator in a dispute concerning land development in Jamaica. The Privy Council decided that there was no sufficient basis for the Board to disturb the arbitrator's award. 

Solicitor – Negligence. The claimant company retained the defendant solicitors' firm to act in the sale of commercial premises to another company. The sale was completed at a lower price than originally agreed and the claimant issued proceedings against the defendant for negligence. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that the relevant clauses of the sale agreement had not exposed the claimant to the risks which it asserted as the foundation of its claim against the defendant. Further, the claimant's representative had had a proper understanding of the risks inherent in the transaction, and the detail and effect of the terms of the contract. 

Pleading – Amendment. The defendant company sought to amend its CPR Pt 20 breach of contract claim against the third party company to include a negligence claim. The Queen's Bench Division, in allowing the application, held that, although the claim was statute-barred, the new claim framed in negligence arose out of the substantially the same facts. The factors against the exercise of discretion to amend were outweighed and the defendant would be permitted to amend, pursuant to CPR 17.4(2). 

Solemn procedure – Time bar – Twelve-month rule. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant whose trial in July 2013 on a charge of assault was adjourned to the October 2013 sitting because of the complainer's absence from the country, and who appealed against a sheriff's decision on the last day of that sitting to grant the Crown's motion to adjourn the trial again 'due to pressure of business', the court held that that sheriff had correctly exercised his judgment that sufficient reason had been shown for an extension of the time bar, as there was no contention that when the case was allocated in July for trial at the October sitting it was anticipated that it would not take place, and it did not take place because of a combination of factors, including the unexpected overrunning of another trial. 

Landlord and tenant – Assignment of lease. The Chancery Division considered the construction of assignment provisions in leases entered into by companies in the Hilton Group of companies and the effect of the Landlord and Tenants (Covenants) Act 1995. The court held that the claimants were entitled to the declaratory relief sought.