Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division, in the mother's absence, made special guardianship orders in favour of the maternal grandparents, together with 12 month supervision orders in favour of the local authority in respect of each of the three children. Parental responsibility for two of the children were plainly made out in the case. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant local planning authority challenged the decision of the inspector appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State to grant planning permission for the construction of up to 150 dwellings on the basis of his adoption of 147 new dwellings per year for the full objective assessment of need for housing. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that the inspector had been using his planning judgment to assess the appropriate full objective assessment of need and he had chosen the figure of 147, as he had been entitled to do. 

Constitutional law – Natural justice. The Privy Council, in dismissing an appeal by the former Premier of the Turks and Caicos and others appellants, who had been charged with, among other things, conspiracy to accept bribes in public office, ruled that a trial without a jury could proceed against them where no objective observer would fear that the trial judge would be unable independently to discharge his duty as a judge because he was in place for a limited period and where he had been entitled to order a trial by a judge alone. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimant was injured and her husband killed while on an excursion in Egypt which they had booked through their hotel. She issued proceedings in contract and tort against the defendant Canadian company on the basis that it was owner of the hotel. The defendant unsuccessfully challenged the grant of permission to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant's appeal in part. The appeal succeeded in respect of the claim for injuries and under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 as the claimant could not show that 'damage' had been sustained within England since the accident had occurred in Egypt. The damage suffered in England had been consequential loss only, which was insufficient to found jurisdiction. The appeal failed in respect of its challenge to the contractual claim and under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. 

Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The appellant appealed against the decision of an inspector appointed by the first respondent Secretary of State, dismissing his appeal against an enforcement notice issued by the second respondent local planning authority. The Planning Court held that the decision could not stand insofar as it had concluded that there had been an intensification having amounted to material change of use, as there had been a defect of natural justice. However, the inspector had not erred in considering the commencement of the existing use, the issue of a further certificate and he had not breached the doctrine that an enforcement notice could not lawfully remove existing lawful uses. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action by Alpinestars Research Srl against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), relating to opposition proceedings between Alpinestars Research Srl and Kean Tung Cho and another, concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign depicting the words 'A ASTER'. 

Barrister – Pupillage. The claimant law student issued judicial review proceedings, challenging the requirement that he retake the whole Bar Professional Training Course, rather than only the module he had twice failed. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant had not shown himself competent in that module by other means and that the Bar Standards Board (the BSB) could not have acted unlawfully in not having considered exempting the claimant from the requirements absent an application to do so. It further dismissed the claimant's claim the decision was disproportionate and found that the BSB had given reasons for its decision. 

Trade mark – Infringement. The proceedings concerned alleged infringement and passing off of the claimant's Community trade marks. The claimant sought permission to carry out a survey and adduce the results as evidence of passing off. The Chancery Division dismissed the application, holding that, among other things, there was nothing in the present case such as would tend to suggest that the trial judge was likely to need, or derive assistance from the admission of, the results of the survey. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) dismissed the application by the taxpayer charity and the Revenue and Customs Commissioners for a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the course of proceedings between the parties which had raised issues concerning the concept of 'economic activity' in the definition of 'taxable person' in art 9 of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 (on the common system of value added tax). 

Terrorism – Prevention of. The appellant appealed against the revival of his terrorism prevention and investigation measure and the respondent Secretary of State's decision to extend it. The Administrative Court held that the requirement that the appellant wear an electronic monitoring tag was such that there was a breach of art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further, restrictions on the use of electronic communications had become disproportionate due to the serious effect on the appellant's children. Accordingly, the monitoring measures would be quashed and the electronic communication measures would be varied, but the other measures could remain as they were.