Latest Cases

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Technology and Construction Court made practice decisions in two applications brought by the defendant in respect of two claims brought by the claimant. In the first claim the court granted relief from sanctions and the necessary extension of time for the particulars of service, and in the second claim it would accede to the defendant's application to strike out the claim. 

Insurance – Policy. The Commercial Court held that the defendant insurer was entitled to deny liability in respect of the claimant's yacht as it had been overvalued and the claimant had failed to make material disclosures in relation to the value. The claimant was however entitled to recover damages from a broker in respect of its failing to take care to ensure that the proposal form for insurance of the yacht stated the opinion of its market value. 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. In the defendant bridge institution's application to set aside or stay the claimants' proceedings against it as successor of debts, the Commercial Court found that it had jurisdiction, under European Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) 2015/2012, which it would not decline to exercise by reason of the principle of non-justiciability or act of state. Further, a stay would not be granted pending the decision of the administrative courts in Portugal, on the basis of case management. 

Housing – Homeless person. The Queen's Bench Division of the Administrative Court allowed the claimant's application for judicial review of the revised Housing Allocations Policy of the London Borough of Ealing in circumstances where the claimant's application to be placed on that local authority's housing register had been rejected on the basis that she had not been resident in the borough for five years. The court decided that, among other things, the policy did not provide for the giving of reasonable preferences to prescribed categories of persons as required by s 166A of the Housing Act 1996 and was therefore unlawful. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Commercial Court recognised that although the claim brought in 2014 could to have been brought in litigation brought in 2011, it nevertheless was not an abuse of process and would not be struck out as such. 

Employment – Trade union. The Privy Council dismissed the appeal by ArcelorMittal Lisas Ltd (ArcelorMittal) against the decision of the Court of Appeal (Trinidad and Tobago) to uphold the judgment of the Industrial Court of Trinidad and Tobago by which that court had granted the Steel Workers Union of Trinidad and Tobago a declaration that ArcelorMittal should be deemed to be the employer under labour only contracts of all those persons employed by so-called contractors and that the employer was bound to apply collective agreements entered into by the parties to those contract workers. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union upheld the action brought by Knauf Insulation Technology (Knauf) against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) concerning opposition proceedings between Knauf and Saint Gobain Cristalería, SL, regarding the application by Knauf for registration of a figurative sign depicting the words 'ECOSE TECHNOLOGY' as a Community trade mark. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection allowed the application to appoint successive deputies for a young woman, H, aged 26, pursuant to s 19(5) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. In so deciding, the factor of magnetic importance was that the appointment of successive deputies would give H's parents peace of mind. 

Medical practitioner – Negligence. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed a claim by the parents of a child in respect of her death at a hospital run by the defendant NHS trust. It found that the expert evidence criticising the care provided the mother was given in hindsight and that the actions on the doctors delivering the child had been in accordance with reasonable practice. 

Terrorism – Prevention of. In the first case in which an application for a notification order under the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 had been contested in respect of a person convicted outside the United Kingdom of a corresponding foreign offence, the Administrative Court refused the order. Given the United States judge's finding that the defendant did not pose a threat, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner had not established that interference with the defendant's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been justified.