Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. A judge in the course of care proceedings had given three judgments. In the third, she reversed her earlier finding that the father had sexually abused one of his children. The mother appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appeal as there had been no satisfactory explanation for the change in decision and a number of factual errors that the judge had not corrected when she claimed that she had. 

European Union – Consumer protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that arts 6(1) and 7(1) of Directive (EEC) 93/13 did not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which allowed a notary who had drawn up, in due form, an authentic instrument concerning a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, to affix the enforcement clause to that instrument or to refuse to cancel it when no review of the unfairness of the contractual terms had been performed at any stage. 

Bankruptcy – Trustee in bankruptcy. The present case concerned a pier, the freehold of which was owned by H until he was made bankrupt and the freehold vested in his trustee in bankruptcy. Among other things, the Chancery Division dismissed H's application for a vesting order, holding that it would not be appropriate in all the circumstances to make an order vesting in H the pier or any part of it. 

Claim form – Service. The Admiralty Court considered a case where the claimant had accidentally issued a claim form in personam, instead of in rem, with the result that the claim form had expired much earlier, preventing proceedings from being properly issued. The court held that the best way to serve the overriding objective of dealing with the case justly was to remedy the error on terms that the claimants paid the costs of the application and the defendants' reasonable opposition thereto. 

Arbitration – Award. The Commercial Court, in dismissing the claimant's challenge to an arbitrator's award, held that there had been no inconsistency between the arbitrator's conclusion and that of a UNCITRAL tribunal by which he had rightly accepted he had been bound. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division found that, for the purposes of art 8 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 (Brussels II), the place of habitual residence of the children with whom the proceedings were concerned was the United Kingdom. The UK was better placed to hear the evidence as, among other things, the options for the children's future care were not focused in Lithuania but in the UK. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that art 1(2) and the first sub-paragraph of art 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 should be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings where the infringement of a provision of EU law had been discovered only after the occurrence of a prejudice, the limitation period began to run from the time when both the economic operator's act or omission that had infringed EU law and the prejudice caused to the budget of the EU or budgets managed by it had occurred. 

Coroner – Jury. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the claimant's application for judicial review, upheld the defendant senior coroner's decision, that the deceased had not been 'in state detention', within the meaning of ss 7(2)(a), and 48(1) and (2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, at the time of her death in intensive care. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division dismissed the father's application, under the court's inherent jurisdiction, for an order that his child should move to live in Algeria and for a stay of the mother's proceedings in England. It held, among other things, that it was clearly not in a position to decide, on a summary basis, that it would be in the child's best interests to make the orders sought. To make a summary order uprooting her from her home and requiring her to move with her mother to Algeria would be contrary to her best interests. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection allowed the application of the Office of Public Guardian to revoke the Enduring Power of Attorney given by the patient S to her son M. In so doing, it found that on the facts, one would be hard pressed to find a more callous and calculating attorney, who had so flagrantly abused his position of trust. A panel deputy would be appointed as S's deputy.