Latest Cases

Costs – Order for costs. The Chancery Division, allowed the third to sixth defendants' application under CPR 40.12 seeking clarification or amendment of an order for costs made following the trial of a probate action concerning a will. The amount of the claimant's personal liability for the costs of the third to sixth defendants under the order was not limited by reference to the amount of her pecuniary legacy. The court exercised its inherent power under CPR 40BPD 4.5 that the order be amended to add words to the order to ensure any ambiguity in the order was removed. 

Land – Easement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on an appeal against a judgment in respect of a neighbour dispute that involved allegations of obstruction to the claimant's right of way and trespass on his land. The defendant's appeal was allowed in part, with the court making findings regarding the boundary as defined in a land transfer, the roadway over which the claimant had a right of way as defined by the judge in his order and the erection of electric gates across the roadway. 

Sentencing – Order for lifelong restriction (OLR). High Court of Justiciary: Allowing appeals by two prisoners against OLRs imposed on them in respect of an assault on another prisoner, the court held that there was no sufficient link between the offence and the risk the appellants posed, the risk criteria were not satisfied and the statutory test for the imposition of an OLR was not met: it accordingly quashed the OLRs and substituted extended sentences. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Chancery Division dismissed the defendant directors of Lloyds TSB plc's application for summary judgment on a claim brought by the claimant shareholders, alleging breach of fiduciary and tortious duties concerning Lloyds' acquisition of Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) in 2009, by failing to disclose that HBOS had been manipulating its London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR). Where disclosure had not yet taken place, the court could not say with confidence at the present stage that the claimant's case would turn out at trial to be without substance. 

Mortgage – Sale. The Chancery Division dismissed an application for an order to stop the sale of a property pursuant to a contract that was entered into as a result of an auction. There was no arguable basis upon which the sale of the property which was due to take place should be interfered with. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Editions Quo Vadis (Editions) against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Francisco Gómez Hernández and Éditions, regarding the application by the former for registration of the word sign 'QUO VADIS' as a Community word mark. 

Veterinary surgeon – Discipline. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant's claim for judicial review of the defendant Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' decision to close his complaint against a veterinary nurse at stage three of its investigation and case examination stage. The claimant's complaint succeeded on the basis of the points identified by the judge in granting permission. 

Practice – Procedure. The Chancery Division dismissed the defendants' application for summary judgment on a claim by investors of a Jersey Trust, which alleged that the defendants were liable for the loss of the entire value of their investment due to a breach of duty to take all reasonable care to ensure that facts stated in an information memorandum (IM), given to potential investors, were true and accurate. Even if the court was required to apply settled law and identify the direct consequences of the valuation being inaccurate, the claimants had real prospects of establishing that the loss they had suffered on their investment was attributable to the alleged inadequacies in the IM and, accordingly, the case should go to trial. 

Practice – Family proceedings. The Family Division allowed a wife's application for the committal to prison of her husband for failure to comply with two specific disclosure orders in ancillary relief proceedings. The orders had been validly served by email as ordered by the court and the application notice had been served by the same method. The judge dispensed with the need for personal service and concluded that he was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the husband had not only failed to comply, but had been defiant in his refusal. The sentence was backed by a request for a European arrest warrant. 

Drugs – Drug trafficking. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that the opening words of s 79(2) of the Magistrates' Court Act 1980, should be interpreted as if they read 'where, before or after a period of imprisonment or other detention has been imposed'.