Latest Cases

Costs – Criminal cases. The appellant Chief Constable appealed by way of case stated against the justices' order to pay the respondent's costs of a withdrawn application for a sexual offences prevention order. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that the justices had not properly exercised their discretion to award costs against the Chief Constable, as he had not acted unreasonably in having made the application or in withdrawing it. 

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. 

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. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Westermann Lernspielverlag GmbH (Westermann) against a decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Westermann and Diset, SA, concerning the application by the former for registration of a figurative sign depicting the words 'BAMBINO LÜK'. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of his application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision refusing his application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom as a Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) migrant, pursuant to para 322(1A) of the Immigration Rules. The decision under challenge was a decision made in the exercise of the power conferred on the Secretary of State by s 3 of the Immigration Act 1971. It was for the Secretary of State or her officials to determine which provisions of the Immigration Rules applied and whether relevant conditions were satisfied, including the determination of relevant questions of fact. Their findings on such matters were open to challenge in judicial review proceedings only on Wednesbury principles. 

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. 

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. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that English court had jurisdiction pursuant to section 5 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 to determine a dispute arising out of the claimant's employment with an English company whose parent company was a Massachusetts company, in circumstances where the claimant's contract of employment contained an express choice of Massachusetts law and an exclusive jurisdiction agreement in favour of the courts of Massachusetts. The court allowed the claimant's appeal against an order dismissing his application for an anti-suit injunction on the basis that it was bound by the decision in Samengo-Turner v J & H Marsh & McLennan (Services) Ltd [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 813. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 4 and 17 of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388, as amended by Council Directive (EC) 2006/69. The requests had been made in two sets of proceedings, concerning the conditions for deduction of VAT which the applicant holding companies had paid for the procurement of capital for the acquisition of a shareholding in subsidiaries constituted in the form of partnerships and to which they had later made supplies subject to VAT.