Latest Cases

Insurance – Liability insurance. The Commercial Court allowed the defendant French insurance company's application, in which it disputed the jurisdiction of the English court to hear and determine proceedings brought the claimant insurance company. The court had no jurisdiction pursuant to either art 7(1) or (2) of Council Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 and the proceedings had to be dismissed. 

Family Proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a father's appeal against the recorder's dismissal of his application to enforce indirect contact with his children. The recorder could not be criticised for having rejected an application for 'enforcement' which, in the circumstances, had not been capable of effective enforcement. 

Guarantee – Enforcement. The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal against a district judge's dismissal of the claimant's application to set aside a second statutory demand issued by a bank against him under a guarantee where it had been based on the same argument, promissory estoppel, used in respect of his application to set aside the first statutory demand issued by the bank. Where there was a second statutory demand, an argument that had been run unsuccessfully and abandoned on appeal could not be raised in respect of a second statutory demand unless there was a change of, or special circumstances. There were no special or exceptional circumstances in the present case to justify re-opening or re-arguing the promissory estoppel point, which had previously been rejected and the district judge had been entitled to come to the conclusion that he had. 

Bankruptcy – Trustee in bankruptcy. The Bankruptcy High Court granted the applicant discharged bankrupt permission to bring an action against the respondent, the released joint trustee in bankruptcy, under s 304 of the Insolvency Act 1986 for an order that he repay, restore or account for money or pay a sum by way of compensation in respect of misfeasance or breach of fiduciary duty in carrying out his functions as trustee. There was evidence to suggest that the applicant had a reasonably meritorious cause of action against the respondent on the basis of his having incurred and paid legal fees in excess of what he had had authority to incur. 

Practice – Offer to settle. The Admiralty Court considered an application for a declaration that proceedings concerning a collision between two vessels had been compromised by the claimants' acceptance of an offer made by the defendants. The court declared, among other things, that the claim form had not been validly served and the court had no jurisdiction to try the claim. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division held that, on the facts, it had jurisdiction under, alternatively arts 4, 5 or 7 of Council Regulation (EC) 4/2009 in a case relating to maintenance obligations for a wife and child. Further orders were made. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against orders for her extradition to Romania to serve a sentence of four years' imprisonment for drug offences. She would be entitled to a retrial, her extradition would not constitute inhuman or degrading punishment, and there had been no disproportionate interference with her and her children's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's challenge to the inspector's decision, allowing an appeal against refusal of planning permission for a wind turbine on the basis that the development would not harm the settings of the heritage assets. The inspector had not failed to provide proper and adequate reasons on a principal important controversial issue, and his judgments had been legally flawless. 

Mortgage – Charge by way of legal mortgage. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant bank's appeal against the dismissal of its claim against the defendant, save in one respect, for the repayment of a sum which was alleged to have been due from him under a mortgage. Completion of a re-mortgage transaction ordinarily included the redemption of the prior charges and the discharge of the existing borrowings was a necessary component of completion. There was nothing in the terms of the contract or the instructions to the solicitors to displace that in the present case. 

Immigration – European Economic Area nationals. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed a Nigerian national's appeal against a finding by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) that the First-tier Tribunal had been entitled to conclude that his marriage to a European national had been one of convenience. The documentary evidence had established a strong prima facie case that the appellant and his wife had lived together and the evidence in favour of an alternative finding had not been capable of forming a sufficient basis to reject that documentary evidence.