Latest Cases

Negligence – Professional person. There were before the court claims by a number of claimants who had bought properties off plan under a contract drawn up by the defendant solicitors. The properties failed to be completed and the claimants brought claims against the defendants. The Queen's Bench Division held that there had been breaches of duty by the solicitors but the question of causation in individual cases were not be addressed in the present proceedings. 

Child – Protection. The issue before the Administrative Court was whether it was lawful for the defendant local authority to have a policy of retaining child protection records for a period of 35 years after a case had been closed. The court held that the policy was in accordance with the law, had been carefully considered, adapted to the purposes for which it was required, and was applied proportionately and flexibly. 

Immigration – Offence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed the defendant's appeal against his conviction for conspiracy to facilitate breaches of United Kingdom immigration law, contrary to s 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, in circumstances where, whatever the circumstances of his own marriage, there had been insufficient evidence to establish his involvement in a wider conspiracy to organise sham marriages and the judge had erred in refusing to accept a submission of no case to answer. 

Trust and trustee – Disposal of trust assets. A family dispute had arisen over a trust in a property which was held in beneficial shares and the judge ordered that the first defendant was to have the opportunity to buy the property otherwise it would be put for sale on the open market. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the judge had been correct with regard to the ambit of her jurisdiction under ss 14 and 15 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and had exercised her discretion correctly. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division granted an injunction to the claimant local authority to restrain the defendant from pursuing a course of conduct amounting to harassment. In so doing the court was sure that the defendant would fail to establish one of the statutory defences, under by s 1(3)(a) and (c) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, as he could not satisfy the rationality test in making out his avowed purpose of preventing and detecting crime. 

Bank – Guarantee. The Commercial Court allowed the claimant Russian bank's application to appoint equitable receivers, where membership interests in a company were to be considered the assets of the first defendant, and therefore fell into the category where equitable receivers might be appointed. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to the United States of America to face trial for 21 charges concerning the export of goods, including those capable of use in the development of chemical and biological weapons, from the US to Syria. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the dual criminality requirement had been met and extradition would not be a disproportionate interference with the appellant's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that the provisions of Council Directive (EC) 96/34 and Directive (EC) 2006/54 had to be interpreted as precluding national provisions under which a civil servant was not entitled to parental leave in a situation where his wife did not work or exercise any profession, unless it was considered that due to a serious illness or injury the wife was unable to meet the needs related to the upbringing of the child. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appellant doctor's appeal, held that the Fitness to Practise Panel of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service had been wrong to have taken into account the proven incidents of non-serious misconduct in determining whether her fitness to practise had been impaired and had been wrong to have found each of the four instances of serious misconduct proved. Therefore, it had been wrong to have found that the appellant's fitness to practise had been impaired and the sanction of conditional registration would be quashed. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning art 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The request had been made in proceedings between Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd and ZTE Corp. and another company concerning an alleged infringement of a patent which was essential to a standard established by a standardisation body.