Latest Cases

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. A judge had refuse to extend a worldwide freezing order against the first respondent to nine corporate entities which acted as trustees of trusts of which the first respondent was a beneficiary. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, extended the freezing order as the judge had erred in refusing to grant the application. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection held that in the patient's best interest, the only best interests decision to be made was to give permission for the above knee amputation of the patient's left leg, where she had no understanding that the alternative to amputation was death. 

Commercial contract – Construction. Court of Session: In an action concerning a Minute of Agreement relating to a development site owned by the petitioners which provided that they would reimburse the respondents' professional fees on fulfilment of certain conditions, the court held that the agreement must be construed as submitted by the respondents, who argued that there was no obligation on them to obtain planning consent; the petitioners were obliged to pay if they sold to a third party within five years of the agreement, they did so and therefore they were obliged to pay. 

Husband and wife – Divorce – Financial provision – Pension sharing order. Court of Session: Refusing an appeal concerning a wife's claim for a pension sharing order, in which the issue was what proportion of the value of the husband's rights or interests in an occupational pension scheme was referable the period of the marriage prior to the date of separation, the court held that the sheriff had correctly preferred the husband's approach to the Divorce etc. (Pensions) (Scotland) Regulations 2000, which was to confine consideration to the period during which he had made pension contributions: 'membership', in reg 4, ought, accordingly, to be read as restricted to 'active' membership as defined in s 124(1) of the Pensions Act 1995. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant's application for summary judgment regarding the defendant's default on repayments of a loan. The court held that, although there the claimant's case was strong, it was not possible, in the circumstances, to conclude that there was no real prospect of the defendant successfully defending the claim. 

Company – Director. The Commercial Court dismissed a number of claims made against the estate of G, the deceased director of a nightclub, relating to alleged breaches of duty carried out by G in the course of his directorship. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection considered whether it was in the patient's best interest for her to be deprived of her liberty in a care home under a standard authorisation. It concluded that the current placement had met the needs of the patient and therefore the objection under s 21A of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to the standard authorisation would be dismissed. 

Costs – Assessment. The Senior Court Costs Office made a detailed assessment of the claimants costs for the period both before and after 1 April 2013 in doing so it considered whether the costs claimed were disproportionate and whether the bill should have been divided into parts to reflect the phases of the budget before and after 1 April 2013 and of the costs budgeting, having regard to para 5.8 of PD 47. 

Minor – Removal outside jurisdiction. A relocation order had been granted allowing a mother to move with her child to Germany and the father appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, clarified the current law with respect to any application for the permanent international relocation of a child and held that the judge had erred in having not carried out an overall welfare analysis. 

Prisoner – Rehabilitation – Extended sentence. Court of Session: Refusing an appeal by a prisoner who was serving an extended sentence and who contended that he had not been given certain courses in prison which the Parole Board for Scotland had recommended and that his Convention rights had been breached, the court held that an extended sentence was a determinate sentence and the implied ancillary duty under art 5(1) of the Human Rights Convention to provide a reasonable opportunity to certain prisoners to work towards rehabilitation to facilitate release was confined to cases involving indeterminate sentences.