Latest Cases

Social security – Disability living allowance. The claimant appealed against the dismissal of his application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to adopt a 20m walking threshold for personal independence payment enhanced rate mobility. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, rejected claims that the consultation had not provided a proper opportunity to comment on the threshold and had not given sufficient information to enable intelligent responses. 

Practice – Appeal. The parties had agreed by consent that an appeal against a judge's decision that the respondent was not being deprived of her liberty should be allowed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, made a consent order. The judge then reserved the matter to himself and delivered a new judgment, which stated that the Court of Appeal had acted ultra vires in making a consent order without a hearing. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on the substantive issue and held that the original court had not acted ultra vires. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division before a trial of the preliminary issue of whether publications had caused or were likely to cause serious financial loss to the claimants pursuant to s 1(2) of the Defamation Act 2013 made various orders and directions in response to applications by the parties. 

Housing – Homeless person. The European Court of Human Rights held that the determination of the applicant's entitlement to accommodation under Pt VII of the Housing Act 1996 had been a determination of a 'civil right' for the purposes of art 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights and the local housing authority's decision that it had discharged its duty to her under Pt VII of the Act had been subject to judicial scrutiny of sufficient scope to satisfy the requirements of art 6(1). 

Immigration – Detention. The Supreme Court in dismissing the appellant's appeal against his conviction for membership of a proscribed organisation held that the judge had been correct in allowing evidence of the appellants Swedish asylum hearing and in dismissing the appellant's case based on Council Directive (EC) 2005/85 (on minimum standards on procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status). 

Human rights – Right to liberty and security. The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been no violation of art 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights in proceedings leading to the grant of warrants for the applicants' further detention under Sch 8 to the Terrorism Act 2000, in particular, absent express legislative provisions for the appointment of a special advocate. Further, search warrants issued could not be described as excessively wide and they had been necessary in a democratic society, within the meaning of art 8(2) of the Convention. 

Company – Scheme of arrangement. The Chancery Division considered an application for approval of a cross-border merger. It held that, notwithstanding that there were outstanding conditions, the merger was one that the court ought to approve. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission to extend a development, including by constructing a testing and evaluation track for performance cars. The Planning Court held that conditions had failed to give effect to the authority's intention to impose controls with respect to the variable character of the noise, but refused to quash the planning permission. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission for the development of four poultry broiler units on agricultural land. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that it had been entirely open to the authority to have concluded that no environmental impacts justifying refusal had been disclosed and that there had been no error of law in considering the impact on a Grade II listed building. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant applied for an order quashing the decision of the first defendant Secretary of State, dismissing his appeal against the second defendant local planning authority's refusal of planning permission for a bungalow and associated curtilage. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Secretary of State's inspector had applied para 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework, had not elided the impact on the openness of the Green Belt and visual impact, and had given adequate reasons.