Latest Cases

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. 

Arbitration – Award. The appellant appealed against decisions of the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago, following an arbitration concerning the parties' agreement. The Privy Council, in allowing the appeals, held that the Court of Appeal had erred in setting aside the arbitrator's finding that the appellant had validly terminated the agreement. Further, the arbitrator would have to reconsider the sums which he allowed the respondent to raise by way of set-off or cross-claims. 

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. 

Privilege – Legal professional privilege. The claimants applied for declarations that the first defendant law firm had failed to comply with their subject access requests and orders, under s 7(9) of the Data Protection Act 1998, requiring it to do so. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the application, held that the legal professional privilege exclusion included documents in respect of which disclosure could be resisted in Bahamian proceedings and it had not been reasonable or proportionate for the first defendant to carry out the necessary search. 

Family proceedings – Jurisdiction. The present appeal arose from the appellant's attempts to have contact with P, the child of her former partner, in circumstances where, following their separation, the mother had moved with P to Pakistan. The judge had dismissed appellant's applications under the Children Act 1989 and under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant's appeal, held that, as to habitual residence, the judge had applied the proper principles to the relevant facts and there was no reason to interfere with her finding that P had lost her habitual residence in the present jurisdiction when she had left for Pakistan. Further, the circumstances were simply not such as to justify the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the actions of both claimants in respect of a personal injury suffered by the wife and the Post Traumatic Stress suffered by the husband as a result of the witnessing of his wife's injury. Although there had been negligence on the part of the defendant hospital in not administering aspirin, that negligence had not caused the wife's injury and although the husband had been shocked, there had been no appreciation of a horrifying event as required for a secondary victim. 

Employment – Contract. The Queen's Bench Division held that defendant university's behaviour in refusing the claimant employee's request to be accompanied by a colleague at a disciplinary hearing was such as to seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between the defendant and the claimant. On the facts, it would be conspicuously unfair for the defendant to insist on adherence to the literal terms of the conditions so as to deny the claimant the accompaniment at the investigatory meeting. 

Specific performance – Sale of land. The Privy Council dismissed the appellant's appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago, upholding an order for specific performance of an agreement for sale of a property. The Court of Appeal had correctly concluded that the judge had reached a decision which had been correct in law and which should, therefore, be upheld. In the circumstances, it had not been open to the appellant to serve notice to complete, making time of the essence, as he had purported to do, as he had not shown good title by that date. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of its claim for judicial review of a grant of planning permission by the defendant local planning authority for the construction of a link road. The submission that the authority had been obliged to assess the proposal for the link road and the proposal for a residential site as a single project, was unsustainable. Further, the environmental statement had given a fair and more than adequate account of what the cumulative impacts were likely to be. 

Liquidation – Voluntary winding up. The Companies Court held that the respondent directors had known, or ought to have concluded, that there was no reasonable prospect that their company would avoid going into insolvent liquidation and had breached their duties. The directors had failed to establish that they had taken every step to minimise the potential loss. Accordingly, they were liable to contribute to the company's assets.