Latest Cases

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. In a case in which the defendant local authority had moved residents from a care home, the claimants sought summary judgment on the basis that the authority had no realistic prospect of establishing that the actions of its employees were lawful following a consideration of s 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948. There was also an application for disclosure. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed both applications. 

Solicitor – Negligence. The first claimant engaged the defendant solicitor to draw up an agreement for the transfer of intellectual property rights to the second claimant company for exploitation by a third party through a licence agreement. The claimants brought a claim on the basis that the documents drawn up by the defendant were ineffective and had caused the agreement to fail. The defendant applied for summary judgment and the Queen's Bench Division allowed the application on the basis that the agreements drafted by the defendant had in fact been effective to do what it was required that they should do. 

European Union – European institutions. The General Court of the European Union ruled on the application by Mr Gert-Jan Dennekamp for annulment of Decision A(2012) 13180 of the European Parliament refusing to grant him access to certain documents relating to the affiliation of certain members of the European Parliament to the additional pension scheme. The General Court decided that the contested decision would be annulled in so far as the European Parliament had refused to grant access to the names of the MEPs who had been members of the scheme. However, the action would be dismissed as to the remainder. 

Immigration – Detention. In a claim for damages for unlawful detention arising out of his administrative detention by the defendant Secretary of State, the Queen's Bench Division decided the case on the facts before it and held that the Secretary of State had been justified in reaching a view that, amongst other things, the claimant's risk of re-offending and the risk that he might abscond were he released from detention was sufficient to justify his continued detention. 

Proceeds of crime – Unlawful conduct. In a case where the respondents applied to discharge a property freezing order made under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in respect of proceeds of shares belonging to the respondent. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the application and rejected S's submission that an order for the restoration of the shares to their lawful owner in consequence of the abandonment of forfeiture proceedings in Canada against her, precluded the prosecuting authorities anywhere else in the world from initiating proceedings under their domestic legislation against the proceeds of sale of those shares located within their jurisdiction. 

Contract – Rectification. The Commercial Court, in allowing the claimant insurance company's application for rectification of a contract of insurance, held that the cover provided to an employee of the first defendant company (GSK) who had been involved in an accident while driving a hired car provided by GSK had been wider than intended by the GSK and the claimant. 

Estoppel – Proprietary estoppel. The judge had held that the claimant was entitled to a right of way over land owned by the defendant, relying on the equitable doctrine of proprietary estoppel. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the defendant's appeal, held that: (i) the present court would not be justified in interfering with the judge's finding that the claimant had believed that it had or would have a right of way via the garden access; (ii) the judge's finding that the claimant had believed it had or would have a right of way across the garden because it had been encouraged so to believe by the defendant had been justified; (iii) there had not been any error in the judge's conclusions on detrimental reliance; and (iv) the judge's evaluation of the issue of unconscionable conduct had not been wrong. 

National Health Service – Duty to provide healthcare services. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimants' appeal, rejected their contention that the defendant Secretary of State had acted unlawfully in failing to exercise his power to require abortion services to be provided to women from Northern Ireland on the same basis that they were made available to women in England. The court held that the decision had not been irrational, nor had there been a breach of the claimants' rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Contract – Repudiation. The Chancery Division, in a case concerning the employment status of the claimant fund manager, held that the doctrine of repudiatory breach was implicitly excluded in relation to multi-party agreements that fell within s 5 of the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000. The claimant had locus standi to bring his claim but, in the circumstances, there was no proper basis in law upon which he might be entitled to claim a pro rata share in the profits of the LLP of which he had been a partner. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The appellant appealed against a decision of the Fitness to Practise Panel (the Panel), ordering that her name be erased from the medical register for failure to disclose information. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the Panel had not erred, in particular, there had been nothing wrong with its decision that it had been both necessary and proportionate, in the public interest, to direct that the appellant's name be erased from the medical register.