Latest Cases

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. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. In an appeal against a decision to grant summary judgment in respect of enforcing of a default judgment made in the United States in favour of the claimant, the Queen's Bench Division held that the issues on the summary judgment application were arguable and therefore the appeal would be allowed. 

European Union – European arrest warrant (EAW). The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 15 and 17 of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA (on the European arrest warrant (EAW) and the surrender procedures between member states), as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA. The request had been made in the context of the execution, in Ireland, of a EAW issued by the magistrates' courts in Dungannon (United Kingdom) in respect of Mr Lanigan. 

Misrepresentation – Fraudulent misrepresentation. The Chancery Division held, in dismissing the claimant company's claim regarding a failed agreement to jointly purchase property, that there had been no fraud on the part of the defendants, either deriving from a side letter, or otherwise. 

Police – Powers. The complainants contended that the respondent National Crime Agency's authorisation for property interference and for the installation of covert listening devices at their premises was unlawfully obtained. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal, in quashing the authorisation, held that the application for the authorisation had failed to disclose material information and the authorisation probably would not have been made or approved in the form it had been. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The issue for determination was whether the judge had been permitted to make an order for the husband's payment of interim maintenance to the wife into an account in Russia when he was subject to sanctions imposed by Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the husband's appeal, held that the order was lawful, since it contained no provisions dealing with funds or economic resources within the scope of the Regulation without the competent authority's licence. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. An issue arose as to whether there was any material difference between the jurisprudence in respect of the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law as regards the degree of disclosure that was required to secure a fair hearing for an excluded person in a case where national security issues were at stake. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that nothing suggested that the Court of Justice of the European Union's conclusion in ZZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department; C-300/11[2014] All ER (EC) 56 as to the extent of the disclosure obligation in that case applied to all cases within the scope of EU law. Nor was there anything in that judgment to suggest that the CJEU had been purporting to lay down some new general principle of law. 

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 – 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.