Latest Cases

Contract – Terms. The Commercial Court ruled on preliminary issues which arose in a claim brought by Scottish Power against the defendant sellers for breach of long term sale and purchase agreements for the sale of natural gas. The issues concerned the contractual consequences arising from the defendants' failure to deliver gas to Scottish Power over a specific period. 

Police – Unlawful conduct. The claimants sought damages against the defendant Metropolitan Police Commissioner for assault, false imprisonment, racial abuse and breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Queen's Bench Division awarded the first claimant damages of £2,500 for false imprisonment, including aggravated damages for his humiliation and distress. The second claimant was awarded £11,950 for false imprisonment and assault, including aggravated damages for serious racial abuse, humiliation and physical indignities. 

Patent – Infringement. The Patents Court dismissed an application for defendants' summary judgment in respect of a claim for, among other things, declaratory relief that rival products had infringed a patent concerning an electronic cigarette. Further, having weighed the competing considerations, it also dismissed an alternative application for a stay of that claim. 

Contract – Consumer contract. The claimant claims management company brought a claim, under an agreement, for fees for work carried out in negotiating settlement in an insurance claim for the defendant. The Mercantile Court, in dismissing the claim, held that the agreement was unenforceable against the defendant because no written explanation had been given to the defendant as to his rights to cancel the agreement, as had been required under the Cancellation of Contracts made in a Consumer's Home or Place of Work etc. Regulations 2008, SI 2008/1816. 

Negligence – Information or advice. The Technology and Construction Court made findings concerning the liability of the parties following the failure of a project to develop a church. The court held that, although the defendant consulting company had acted negligently, the claimant bank's own negligence was such that it would bear one third of the losses that it had sustained. 

Immigration – Workers. The claimant Indian nationals sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision refusing them entry clearance as Tier 5 temporary workers – religious workers. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) dismissed their claims for reasons including that no applicant could expect exemption from the core requirements set down in the Immigration Rules going to intention and capability, even if they were unworldly. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant issued judicial review proceedings, contending that the defendant Secretary of State's decision to detain him under immigration powers had been unlawful. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the preponderant evidence did not come close to establishing that the claimant had a serious mental health condition that could not be managed satisfactorily in detention or that his food and fluid refusal had been, or might have been, influenced by a serious health condition. 

Minor – Removal outside jurisdiction. A mother had moved to England from the Netherlands with her child without the consent of the father or an order of the court. The Family Division allowed the father's application for summary return of the child. The mother had not made out a defence under art 13(b) of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction as the child's separation from her and his temporary placement in foster care would not expose him to a grave risk of physical and psychological harm or otherwise place him in an intolerable situation upon his return having regard to the protective measures that could be put in place. 

Criminal law – Trial. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed an appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service against a ruling staying an indictment for alleged historic sexual abuse as an abuse of the process of the court. The court held that, among other things, the matters identified by the judge did not lead to a reasonable conclusion that the defendant would not receive a fair trial. 

Child – Care. The Family Division allowed the applicant local authority's application to renew wardship over Y. Y, who was 16 and had been involved in criminal activity, was in danger of travelling to Syria to fight there. The court held that the present case was the classic case of a high risk of very serious harm. In the circumstances, the court was entitled to use the fullest measures at its disposal.