Latest Cases

Solicitor – Breach of duty. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal by the defendant solicitors' firm against a finding that it was liable to make a contribution to the claimant surveyor under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 in respect of a settlement resulting from a lender's loss when a borrower defaulted on his remortgage. The solicitors had been under a duty to have told the mortgage lender about the information obtained from the Land Registry that the property had been purchased recently and at a price that suggested strongly that the valuation was excessive, but the surveyor had not proven that the lender would have reacted differently and not advanced the money. 

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. 

Tax – Closure notice. The Administrative Court, in allowing the claimant's application for judicial review of four closure notices issued by the defendant Revenue and Customs Commissioners, held that there had been obvious unfairness in having subjected a group, including the claimant, to a tax liability, while others in his cohort had escaped. 

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. 

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. 

Companies – Shareholders – Unfair prejudice. Court of Session: In an application under s 996 the Companies Act 2006 in which minority shareholders sought an order for the purchase of their shares, alleging that the company's affairs had been conducted in manner unfairly prejudicial to their interests, the court held that the company could not properly be characterised as a quasi‑partnership, that conduct unfairly prejudicial to the petitioners' interests had been proved in some respects, although not in others, and that it was fair and reasonable to make an order for the purchase of the petitioners' shares at the lower of 75% of fair value and the subscription or par value paid for them. 

Burial – Body. The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal by parents of a deceased to set aside a decision by a deputy judge declaring that the claimant NHS Trust had lawful possession of the body of the deceased and was entitled to make arrangements for the funeral and disposal of the same. Among other things, there was no fair and reasonable basis for the conclusion that the post-mortem of the deceased had been misconducted and no extant proceedings, which would require the body either as evidence or to conduct further tests upon. 

Immigration – Detention. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of his application for judicial review of his detention pending removal to Afghanistan, holding, among other things, that the detention of the claimant impugned in the proceedings had been lawful, as the defendant Secretary of State had been entitled to treat him as an adult. 

Patent – Validity. The Patents Court ruled that the claimant, Saab's, claim for the revocation of patents concerning mine clearance devices succeeded in part on the ground of obviousness. The defendant's counterclaim for infringement succeeded in part in respect of one of its patents. 

Patent – Infringement. The Patents Court considered the claimant company's applications for freezing injunctions to prevent both of the defendant companies from selling a full label generic pregabalin product, thereby infringing the claimant's patent. The court held that, in the circumstances, it was appropriate to grant both injunctions.