Latest Cases

Landlord and tenant – Possession. The present appeal turned primarily on whether the judge, in dismissing the claimant freehold owner's claim for possession of a plot on a naturist resort from the defendant tenants, had been right to find that the tenancy had been one under which a dwelling-house was let as a separate dwelling for the purposes of s 1 of the Housing Act 1988, and so gave the defendants an assured tenancy. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that, among other things, the judge had been correct to conclude on the evidence that the chalet, when constructed, had been part of the land. 

Landlord and tenant – Recovery of possession. Sheriff Court: In an action in which landlords sought an order for recovery of possession of heritable property following the tenant's second conviction for being concerned in the supply of a controlled drug, the court held that it was reasonable to grant decree in favour of the pursuer, and having regard to its assessment of the defender's evidence it was not appropriate to adjourn the proceedings to allow him to demonstrate that he could refrain from drug related activities. 

Human rights – Rights to respect for private and family life. The applicants, a professional sportsman and his wife, applied to restrain publication by the respondent newspaper of details of an affair that he had been engaged in before his marriage in circumstances where an amount of information was already in the public domain. The Queen's Bench Division granted a temporary injunction pending a full hearing. The applicants' rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been engaged and the proposed interference with those rights, in exercise of the respondent's rights under art 10 of the Convention, was not proportionate to the intended aim. 

Criminal law – Murder. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that there was an additional common law qualification or exception to the inviolable nature of legal professional privilege. It would be appropriate to impose a requirement that particular individuals could be present at discussions between an individual and his lawyers if there was a real possibility that the meeting was to be misused for a purpose, or in a manner, that involved impropriety amounting to an abuse of the privilege that justified interference. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The defendant transport authority sought to withdraw an admission of liability made by its claims handling company in relation to an accident by the claimant when he fell off his bike. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the application on the basis that the defect was clearly visible and also under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, the defendant was not prevented from obtaining a contribution or indemnity. 

Landlord and tenant – Forfeiture of lease. The appellants had been refused relief from forfeiture following the breaches of a head lease. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed their appeal as the judge had misdirected himself in concluding that relief should be refused in the circumstances. The appellants were given conditional relief from forfeiture, dependent upon their selling their leasehold interest within six months. 

Medical practitioner – Disciplinary proceedings. The Administrative Court held that the question of whether or not, under r 4(5) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, more than five years had elapsed since events giving rise to an allegation of fitness impairment of the appellant general practitioner was an objective question of precedent or jurisdictional fact and the date stated in the complaint against him had been wrong, leading the registrar into material error. Accordingly, the court had power to intervene to quash the decision and remit the matter for reconsideration. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection affirmed an order previously made appointing two of the patient's children to act as deputies for properties and financial affairs following a purported appeal by his other children. The factor of magnetic importance was that the patient had named the two children in his will, which suggested that he trusted them to deal with his affairs and that they would act fairly towards their siblings. 

Equity – Tracing. The Court of Appeal of Jersey had upheld a finding that the defendants were constructive trustees of sums that had been paid as bribes and which the claimants had sought to recover through the doctrine of tracing. The defendants contended that they were not liable for the sum that the court had found. The Privy Council held that it could not be said that there could never be backward tracing, or that the court could never trace the value of an asset whose proceeds were paid into an overdrawn account. On the facts of the case, the defendants were liable to account for the full sum found by the court. 

Housing – Security of tenure. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the first defendant's appeal against an order declaring that she and her husband held a property under a non-secure tenancy. It held, among other things, that the certificate in the tenancy agreement had not functioned as a notification of a secure tenancy for the purposes of para 4 of Sch 1 to the Housing Act 1985.