Latest Cases

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection made an order revoking the appointment of the patient's two children and appointing a person from a solicitors' firm to be the patient's deputy for property and affairs. The revocation was made on the basis that the children were not fulfilling their duties having regard to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Code of Practice. 

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. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court made an order regarding the jurisdiction of a possible future secure accommodation order regarding P, who was just over 16 years old and had a history of self-harm and attempted suicide. The court held that the applicant local authority's application for a secure accommodation order would be adjourned generally with liberty to restore should circumstances arise in which it considered it appropriate to do so. 

Company – Winding up. The Companies Court allowed the applicant company's application to restrain the presentation of a winding-up petition made against it. In the circumstances, the inquiries of fact and context required would be far better dealt with by ordinary process. A petition for winding up was not a suitable or even proper way to proceed. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that Directive (EC) 97/67 should be interpreted as meaning that a money order service by which the sender, in the present proceedings, the state, transferred sums of money to a beneficiary through the postal operator entrusted with providing the universal postal service did not fall within the scope of that directive. 

European Union – Consumer protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that arts 6 and 7 of the Directive (EEC) 93/13 should be interpreted as meaning that they precluded a national transitional provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, as regards mortgage enforcement proceedings which had been instituted before the date of entry into force of the law of which that provision formed part and which had not been concluded at that date, imposed a time-limit on consumers calculated from the day following the publication of that law, to object to enforcement on the basis of the alleged unfairness of contractual terms. 

Immigration – Detention. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the defendant Home Office's appeal, upheld the judge's finding that the claimant minor had been unlawfully detained in immigration detention. In particular, the material available to the defendant had not been sufficient to meet the Age Assessment guidance and, therefore, the Enforcement Instructions and Guidance or to enable the defendant to carry out its independent duty to satisfy itself that the assessment had been Merton-compliant. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division refused to grant injunctions in respect of proprietary claims, on the basis that there was no serious issue to be tried and that it was not just and convenient to grant a freezing injunction. 

European Union – Regulations. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Dyson Ltd against the European Commission for annulment of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 665/2013 of 3 May 2013, supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to energy labelling of vacuum cleaners. 

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.