Latest Cases

Parliament – Member. The present judgment concerned the hearing of preliminary issues relating to the status, meaning and effect of the Wilson Doctrine, to the effect that there was to be no tapping of the telephones of Members of Parliament. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal gave guidance on its application with respect to s 8(1) and (4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and held that the doctrine was not legally enforceable and that the regime for interception complied with the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 17, had played the leading role in a violent murder, for which a tariff of 14 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as the offender's progress had not been exceptional. 

Negligence – Causation. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claimant's claim on behalf of the estate of her deceased husband against the defendant General Practitioner who had examined the husband and discovered that he had blood pressure in the high range. The court held that, on the evidence, it was satisfied that the defendant had told the husband that his blood pressure was raised and that he should visit his regular GP to get it checked out. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, then aged 17 years, had taken part, with two others, in an unprovoked attack on a man, which had resulted in his death, for which a minimum term of 15 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court held that the offender had clearly made exceptional progress in prison which could not have been foreseen when he had been sentenced and had earned the maximum reduction conventionally allowed of two years. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve a sentence of one year and two months' imprisonment for fraud offences. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not made the wrong decision in concluding that extradition had been proportionate. In particular, there was no basis for the submission that it was extremely unlikely that the care the appellant's wife needed for herself and daughter would be made available and, therefore, the daughter would be placed in foster care. 

European Union – Public procurement. The General Court of the European Union allowed the application by Intrasoft International SA (Intrasoft) for annulment of the decision by the European Commission not to award the consortium to which Intrasoft belonged a public service contract. The General Court decided that the risk of a conflict of interests had not been objectively established and the rejection of the bid of the consortium of which the applicant had been part had not been justified and contrary to the provisions of art 94 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 14, had been one of a number of gang members who had been involved in an attack on a victim, which had resulted in his death for which a tariff of 12 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as there was not the necessary clear evidence that the offender's progress had been exceptional or unforeseen. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the application by Corporación Empresarial de Materiales de Construcción, SA (Corporacion) for annulment of art 1(2) and art 2 of Commission Decision C(2012) 1965 final relating to proceedings under art 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and art 53 of the European Economic Area Agreement. The General Court decided that the European Commission had not infringed art 25(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 on the basis that the fine it had imposed on Corporacion had been adopted within the five-year limitation period provided for in art 25(1)(b) of that regulation. 

Practice – Civil litigation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the defendants' appeal against an order granting the claimants relief from sanctions, pursuant to CPR 3.9(1), in respect of the claimants' failure to service notice on the defendants of the existence of a conditional fee agreement and an after the evident insurance policy within the period specified by CPR 44.15(1) and para 9.3(3) of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. There was no justification for any interference with the exercise of the judge's discretion. 

Criminal law – Evidence of bad character. The defendant appealed against his conviction for possessing a firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence, namely, murder and making a threat to kill, and the sentence of 12 years' imprisonment imposed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the convictions were safe, notwithstanding a misdirection as to bad character and the lack of an effective or qualified direction as to good character. However, it found the sentence was manifestly excessive and substituted a sentence of 10 years' custody.