Latest Cases

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against orders for his extradition to Kenya to face trial for serious allegations of fraud. It rejected his arguments that there was no prima facie case in respect of the charges, that the extradition proceedings were an abuse of the process of the English court and that his extradition would be contrary to his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection accepted the evidence of the Office of Public Guardian that the respondent attorney of the patient C was behaving in a manner that contravened his authority and that the lasting power of attorney for property and affairs would be revoked. 

Employment – Discrimination. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that the employment tribunal's explicit conclusion, that the average shorter length of service of Muslim chaplains had not been the result of any discriminatory practice on the part of the prison service, meant that they had not been put at a particular disadvantage within the meaning of s 19(2)(b) of the Equality Act 2010 and, accordingly, the claim of indirect discrimination had to fail. 

Town and country planning – Trees. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant's appeal, held that there was no merit in any of the points raised by way of challenge to the decision letter of the inspector appointed by the first respondent Secretary of State, in which he dismissed the appellant's appeal against a tree replacement notice. There was no force in the appellant's criticisms of the wording of the inspector's decision letter and, insofar as the second respondent local planning authority and then the inspector had relied upon the inclusion of 'seedlings/saplings' when arriving at an estimate of the number of trees on site before the clearance, they had not erred in law. 

Company – Liquidation. The Chancery Division ruled on an application by liquidators of Premier Motor Auctions Leeds Ltd and another company for orders that litigation expenses of proceedings brought by the companies be approved and authorised by the court, pursuant to r 4.218E of the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 and for orders that the application be heard in private and not be served on a creditor of the companies (Lloyds) until after the final determination of the proceedings. The court held that the circumstances of the case were not sufficiently exceptional to justify derogation from the open justice principle. A question of construction was raised as to whether the condition specified in r 4.218B(1)(c) was satisfied and whether it could be said that the liquidators would have to have recourse to property comprised in or subject to Lloyds' floating charge in order to pay litigation expenses. However, it was not appropriate to deal with the application in the absence of Lloyds and the application and the evidence were ordered to first be served on Lloyds. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed a mother's appeal against the refusal of her application, made in the course of private law proceedings, for contact with her child in Florida. Subject to appropriate safeguards, the mother would be permitted to take the child to Florida for staying contact. 

EU law – Immigration – Free movement of persons – Rights of residence of EEA nationals and family members. Court of Session: In a judicial review petition by a petitioner, a Nigerian national, who applied for an EEA residence card and was issued with a Certificate of Application (CoA) and who claimed damages after the CoA's effectiveness expired and the Secretary of State refused to renew it, averring that the refusal was unlawful and had resulted in him being unable to take up a job offer, the court held that the respondent was in breach of obligations under EU law as there was no basis for refusing to issue the CoA, and the petitioner was in principle entitled to damages. 

Civil procedure – Jurisdiction – Appeal against decision of Upper Tribunal – Competency: Dismissing an appeal to the Court of Session under s 13 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions against a decision of the Upper Tribunal, the court held that the answer to the question of whether the matter which the appellant wished to make the subject of appeal was an appeal 'on any point of law arising from a decision made by the Upper Tribunal' was in the negative, and accordingly the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. 

Practice – Striking out. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the defendant Metropolitan Police Commissioner's appeal against the judge's refusal to strike out the claimants' case. It was impossible to characterise the judge's decision as perverse. 

Trade mark – Community trade mark. The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal against the decision of a hearing officer dismissing the claimant company's application, under s 47 of the Trade Marks Act 1994, for a declaration of invalidity of a trade mark registration for a sign 'Gutterclearuk' in the defendant's name. The hearing officer had not erred in principle and her decision that there was no likelihood of either direct or indirect confusion and that the defendant company had not acted in bad faith in filing its trade mark application had been open to her.