Latest Cases

Child – Care. In two cases involving the suspected planned removal of children to a war torn country, the Family Division made findings of fact and accepted the parents' submissions that the children should be returned to them with stringent protective measures. 

Police – Negligence. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimants' appeal against the dismissal of their claims for damages resulting from the disclosure of their address to the accused in criminal proceedings in which they were to be called as witnesses. It held, among other things, that the actions of the police in serving a witness summons, making a statement with a view to giving evidence of that fact and producing that statement to the prosecuting authority for the purposes of making an application for a warrant of arrest all formed part of their core function of obtaining and preserving evidence, in the discharge of which they did not owe a duty of care to the public at large. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division held, on a preliminary issue, that the a road traffic accident and/or the treatment the claimant received post-accident had caused or materially contributed to the stroke suffered by the claimant approximately one month later. 

Income tax – Capital allowances. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the appeal by the taxpayer against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to the effect that the taxpayer had not been entitled to an annual investment allowance on the basis that he had permanently discontinued his trade in the tax year ended 31 March 2009, being the effect of s 38 of the Capital Allowances Act 2001. The tribunal decided that a discontinuance of a trade at the end of a chargeable period was a discontinuance of that trade in that period. 

Negligence – Duty to take care. The claimant, who was blind, fell from an open second floor window at the home of the defendants. As a result, he sustained spinal and brain injuries. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendants. The Queen's Bench Division held that, on the evidence, the claimant had proved that his injury had been caused by a breach of duty on the part of the defendants. Accordingly, judgment was given for the claimant on the issue of liability. 

Divorce – Appeal. The wife in divorce proceedings applied for permission to appeal out of time for a consent order to be set aside on the grounds of material non-disclosure. The Family Division gave permission to appeal out of time and allowed the appeal where there had been a breach of the duty of full and frank disclosure. 

Trust and trustee – Trust property. Court of Session: In an action which concerned entitlement to receive the proceeds of two life assurance policies held in trusts created by a Mr P and his late first wife, BP, the policies having become payable on Mr P's death and the defenders having made payment under both policies to a Florida attorney who was the personal representative of Mr P and his late second wife, the pursuers claiming that the personal representative had no title to receive the proceeds of either policy and seeking payment from the defenders of a sum representing the value of the policies at the time when the action was raised, and the court held that the foreign personal representative did not have title, in any capacity, to receive the proceeds of the policy settled in Mr P's trust, and the pursuers had title to sue in the present action for the proceeds of BP's policy. 

Immigration – Appeal. The defendant Lord Chancellor appealed against the judge's decision that the Fast Track Rules (the FTR), which governed appeals to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) against refusals by the Secretary of State of asylum applications, were ultra vires. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the FTR were systematically unfair and unjust, as they had not struck the correct balance between speed and efficiency, and fairness and justice. 

Contract – Construction. The proceedings concerned the proper construction of a clause in a sale and purchase agreement made between the parties. The judge preferred the respondent's construction and the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appeal, preferred the appellant's construction. 

Civil procedure – Personal injury – Expenses – Voluntary pre-action protocol. Sheriff Court: In a personal injury action in which the pursuer rejected the defender's offer to settle his claim and commenced proceedings, and then, the day before the case was to proceed to proof accepted a tender for £4,000 less than the pre-litigation offer, which had included expenses in terms of Voluntary Pre-action Protocol, the court held that the sheriff had erred in following the normal rule and finding the pursuer entitled to expenses to the date of tender and the defender to expenses from that date: there was a degree of unreasonableness in the pursuer's action in commencing proceedings which required that the defender should only be found liable for modified judicial expenses.