Latest Cases

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. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. A local authority had applied for care and placement orders in respect of three of six children. It sought care orders in respect of the others. The judge refused the application, relying heavily on the impact of adoption on the relationship between the siblings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the authority's appeal as the judge had had the correct factors in mind and because the court had to consider the relevant child's relationships with all of his relatives and the wishes and feelings of those relatives, which included siblings. 

Mental health – Patient's property. The Court of Protection made decisions regarding the patient's living arrangement and visitation rights of her family between whom there was considerable disagreement about various matter relating to her care and also to previous business dealings. The court held that publication of an anonymised judgment would be futile as so much information was already in the public domain and it was in the public interest for the court to publish its judgment in the case in a form that named individuals. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 16, had been involved in attacks on two men, which had resulted in the death of one and the wounding of the other, and a tariff of 13 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 none of the possible reasons for doing so were met. 

Crown – Prerogative. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision rejecting her application for a British passport as a citizen by descent. The Administrative Court, in declaring the claimant a citizen of the United Kingdom and colonies by descent, held that the claimant was the daughter of a British citizen, she had been born after he was registered as a citizen and her parents had been married. 

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 – 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. 

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. 

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. 

Town and country planning – Building of special architectural or historic interest. The claimant brought three related claims, challenging the decision to construct a proposed elevated chord railway, which would link three main stations in Manchester and improve rail capacity. The Planning Court, in dismissing the applications, held that the decisions of the Secretaries of State for Transport and Communities and Local Government, and the inspector they had appointed, had disclosed no error of law.