Latest Cases

Conflict of Laws – Jurisdiction. The Technology and Construction Court ruled that an application to strike out the second claimant company's claim for contribution, under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, in respect of its liability to owners of property damaged in fires, failed where the breaches of duty alleged against it had all occurred within the UK and, accordingly, the English Court had jurisdiction, under art 7(2) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (Brussels I Recast) to hear the claim. In respect of the first defendant, the claim clearly involved matters relating to a contract and, accordingly, the defendant had be sued in Italy, being the member state in which it was domiciled. 

European Union – Copyright. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 3(1) of Directive (EC) 2001/29. That application had been presented in proceedings between SBS Belgium NV and the Belgian society for authors, composers and editors, regarding the obligation to pay a fair amount for the transmission of programmes via the technique of direct injection. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division held that there had been non-compliance with a court order both in the past and continuing into the present and that as a result of that non-compliance the defendant would be committed for contempt of court despite residing in a foreign jurisdiction. 

Sentence – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held, on an appeal referred to it by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, that a defendant was entitled to a reduction of three months in his sentence of 33 months' imprisonment for offences of dishonesty on the basis of fresh evidence that he had provided evidence which had led to the conviction of a defendant in an unrelated attempted rape case. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division made an order by consent which put in place a fresh reporting restrictions order, in place of that which already existed, and amended an order made under the Children Act 1989 in circumstances where a dispute had arisen between a mother and a male couple who had entered into a private arrangement which had resulted in the birth of a child. The new order allowed the mother, to a limited, defined extent to communicate with the press and provide photographs of herself and the child, so long as they were sufficiently obscured. 

Public order – Football. The Administrative Court, in allowing the Metropolitan Police Commissioner's appeal against a limited football banning order, held that the justices had had no power to make a football banning order that had been limited to matches played between three named clubs. Further, no rights under the European Convention on Human Rights were engaged and a comparison with anti-social behaviour order legislation was rejected. 

Environment – Waste. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant quarry operator's appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State's planning inspector that had resulted in the refusal of a standard rules environmental permit in relation to the restoration of a quarry site where the claimant had wished to use inert waste as the backfill material. The backfill operation ought properly to have been classified as a recovery operation within para R10 of Annex II to Parliament and Council Directive (EC) 2008/98 and the inspector's decision was quashed. 

Building contract – Extension of time. The Technology and Construction Court considered claims arising out of a venture to lay oil pipelines in the Shetland Islands. The court made rulings as to the various heads of liability. 

Deed – Trust deed. The Chancery Division set aside a deed purporting to place property into trust for the first respondent's wife, with the result that the claimant loan company was not able to commence possession proceedings against the first respondent. The court made an order restoring the position to what it would have been if the deed had not been made. 

Practice – Pleadings. The Chancery Division allowed the claimant company's application to amend it's particulars of claim and ordered disclosure in respect of a claim for misrepresentation and breach of contract concerning the conduct of the defendant Royal Bank of Scotland in setting LIBOR. The court refused the defendant's application to amend its defence, but accepted its submission that it was open to a party to decide not to rely upon privileged material and, therefore, amend the relevant pleading, in which case, if the amended pleading was permitted, no waiver would have taken place merely by virtue of it having been pleaded before.