Latest Cases

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2(1) and 10(2) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388, as amended by Council Directive (EC) 1999/59, then by Council Directive (EC) 2001/115. The requests had been made in proceedings between Air France-KLM, formerly Air France, and Hop!-Brit Air SAS, formerly Brit Air, on the one hand, and the Ministère des Finances et des Comptes publics, on the other hand, concerning the liability to VAT of an unused transport ticket and of sums paid by an airline company to an undertaking carrying on the same type of business in consideration for the sale of unused transport tickets. 

Rates – Valuation list. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the appellant's appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), dismissing its appeal against a decision of the Valuation Tribunal for England, that an alteration to the 2005 rating list to include the property as a new hereditament, with a rateable value of £62,500, took effect from 1 April 2005, the day on which the 2005 list had come into force. 

Family proceedings – Care proceedings. The Family Division, in a case of alleged sexual abuse of two step children by the step father, made findings of fact. The findings made were such that the threshold conditions for intervention in the case of the second step child and the younger three children had overwhelmingly been met, where the eldest step child had already left the family home. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 should be interpreted as not precluding a national measure, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposed a minimum price per unit of alcohol for the retail selling of wines, provided that that measure was in fact an appropriate means of securing the objective of the protection of human life and health and that, taking into consideration the objectives of the common agricultural policy and the proper functioning of the CMO, it did not go beyond what was necessary to attain that objective of the protection of human life and health. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division found that the claimant was suffering from chronic widespread pain and additional mental illness and which he would not have suffered from but for the accident he experienced whilst in the army and which caused his subsequent discharge. On that finding the court made an award of general damages of £30,000 and other additional awards. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant company's challenge to the decision of the inspector appointed by the defendant Secretary of State, refusing planning permission for a mixed use development, including a supermarket, apartments and townhouses. The inspector's decision was short, clear, succinct and, having regard to the applicable principles, showed no evidence of unlawfulness or irrationality. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The Administrative Court partially allowed the claimant's proceedings for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision rejecting his submissions as a fresh claim. However, it found that the claimant had been lawfully detained and that the Secretary of State had been entitled to issue removal directions before having determined the fresh claim. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appellant's appeal against findings made in the course of care proceedings that he had sexually abused three children, held that no court could have reasonably found that he had abused any of those children on the basis of the evidence adduced before the recorder. 

Local government – Statutory powers. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant autistic 15-year-old's judicial review proceedings, alleging that the defendant local authority's assessment had underestimated his and his mother's needs, and had failed to make proper provision for how those needs were to be met. Further, the authority had not breached its statutory duty to produce a care plan, as it would have been premature until the present proceedings had been determined. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection allowed the application of the Public Guardian to revoke two Lasting Powers of Attorney in relation to a patient following concerns being raised by the patient's eldest son in relation to the conduct of the attorney appointed by the patient.