Latest Cases

European Union – EU institutions. The General Court of the European Union upheld the action brought by SV Capital OU (SV) for annulment of Decision 2014-C1-02 of the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities which had dismissed the action brought by SV against the decision of the European Banking Authority to reject SV's request for an investigation to be initiated into the Estonian and Finnish financial sector supervisory authorities, pursuant to art 17(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 as a result of an alleged breach of EU law. The General Court decided that the Board of Appeal had lacked the competence to decide on that appeal on the basis of art 60(1) of that regulation. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that art 24(1) of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 should be interpreted as meaning that the term 'supply of services' included subscription contracts for the supply of consulting services to an undertaking, in particular those of a legal, commercial or financial nature, under which a supplier had agreed to be available to the customer during the term of the contract. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Slovenia to face prosecution on a charge of fraud. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had been entitled to find that the judicial authority had decided to charge him and place him on trial, and that extradition would not be disproportionate, in particular on the basis of the availability of less coercive measures and his rights to a private and family life. 

Immigration – Asylum. The claimant challenged the defendant Secretary of State's certification of her fresh claim for asylum as being clearly unfounded. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that there was no doubt that the decision to certify had been unlawful and that the claimant should not have been removed from the United Kingdom, as she had been. The Secretary of State was directed to ensure that the claimant might re-enter the UK. 

Landlord and tenant – Lease. The Chancery Division held that the claimant was entitled to summary judgment on its claim against the first defendant (Dreamland) for delivery up of a mural, attributed to Banksy, which had been removed by Dreamland from the building of which it was the tenant. Dreamland had no reasonable prospect of establishing that it had been entitled, let alone obliged, to remove the mural in compliance with its repairing obligation under the lease. Further, the contention that, once removed from the building in compliance with its covenants under the lease, the mural became the property of Dreamland, rather than the landlord, by virtue of an implied term in the lease, was unsustainable as a matter of law. 

Local authority – Child protection – Failure to perform statutory duty. Court of Session: Refusing a judicial review petition brought by a father against decisions a local authority had taken in respect of his two sons, the court rejected allegations that the respondents had failed to perform their statutory duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of the two boys, and that the petitioner and his sons' rights not to be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment had been breached, and it also held that the petitioner did not have standing to present the petition and that the respondents' plea of mora was well founded. 

Medical treatment – Withdrawal of medical treatment. The proceedings concerned a twelve-year-old girl, AA, who had been born with a serious brain malformation, which meant that, throughout her short life, she had suffered from multiple, untreatable, medical and developmental difficulties. The Family Division, in granting the declaration sought by the NHS Trust, that it was lawful and in AA's best interests for artificial hydration to be withdrawn, held that to seek to prolong AA's life at the time of the present proceedings was contrary to her best interests. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The General Court of the European Union rejected the applicant's claims seeking the annulment of the respondent European Commission's decision that it had been involved in two cartels and its claim seeking the reduction of the fines imposed. 

Patent – Validity. The Patents Court ruled, among other things, that a patent for the treatment of pain, owned by the defendant company, was not invalid for obviousness. However, some of the claims of the patent were invalid on the ground of insufficiency. 

Solemn procedure – Defective representation. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who was convicted of the murder of his wife, the court, having rejected grounds of appeal based on defective representation (1) in the preparation for trial; (2) in the conduct of the trial; and (3) consisting in a restriction in the appellant's ability to select appropriate representation, added comments in relation to the latter issue, including that the current Rules for the Conduct of Solicitor Advocates 2002 were inadequate and should be amended.