Latest Cases

Employment – Equality of treatment of men and women. The employment tribunal, in considering the employee's claim for equal pay, found that the employee's work had been of equal value to that done by a male comparator and that the employer had failed to make out the genuine material factor (GMF) defence. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employer's appeal, held, inter alia, that the tribunal's findings had not been shown to be unsupported by evidence nor contrary to the agreed evidence. It had been entitled to conclude that the GMF defence had not been made out. 

Local authority – Residential care home. A dispute arose as to which of three brothers should be appointed as the deputies for their elderly father, DG, who suffered from Alzheimer's disease and lived in a care home. It was held that the application of two brothers who lived near their father would be preferred over that of the third brother, who lived further away and had not had as productive a relationship with those caring for DG. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The claimant finance company had purchased the debts of a company, which went into administration and subsequently into liquidation. The claimant brought proceedings, seeking to recover a sum from the defendant directors of the company, under deeds of indemnity. The Commercial Court, in granting the application, held that, on the true construction of the deeds of indemnity, the defendants' liability in each case was primary, not secondary and they had no real prospect of success in any of their defences. 

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. 

European Union – Action for annulment. The General Court of the European Union granted: (i) the application by Spraylat GmbH (Spraylat) for annulment of an invoice issued by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) setting the amount of the administrative charge imposed on Spraylat; and (ii) a precautionary application by Spraylat to annul Decision SME (2012) 1445 of the ECHA which stated that Spraylat did not fulfil the conditions to receive a reduction of the fee for small enterprises and had imposed an administrative charge on it. 

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. 

Criminal law – Appeal. The first and second defendants were convicted of conspiracy to supply amphetamine, and the third defendant was convicted of doing an act tending and intended to pervert the course of justice. The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the case on the basis of fresh evidence as to the principal witness for the prosecution. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the addition to the opprobrium of the witness of one post-trial allegation would not have been of the significance necessary to cast doubt upon the safety of the defendants' convictions. 

Patent – Infringement. The second claimant (Rovi) issued proceedings for infringement of its patent against the first two defendants (Virgin) in respect of one of Virgin's set-top boxes. Virgin conceded infringement, but counterclaimed for revocation on grounds of anticipation and obviousness over three forms of prior art. The Patents Court held that the relevant patent claims were obvious over one form of prior art and fell to be revoked. Since no claim survived, there could be no question of infringement and Rovi's action was dismissed. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The patient executed a lasting power of attorney in favour of her son. The local authority sought to revoke the LPA. The son objected. The Court of Protection allowed the authority's application and also gave permission to appoint a panel under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. 

Sentence – Imprisonment. The defendants were sentenced for offences which included threatening and injuring numerous people for the purpose of enforcing debts of a known drug-dealer. The first defendant was sentenced to a total sentence of 17 years' imprisonment for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and for firearm offences. The second defendant was sentenced to a total of three years and eight months' imprisonment for two counts of affray. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowing the appeal of the first defendant, held that the total sentence was manifestly excessive and that a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment overall was appropriate. On the facts, there was nothing excessive or wrong in principle in the sentence imposed on the second defendant and his appeal was dismissed.