Latest Cases

Will – Forgery. The Chancery Division considered the validity of a disputed will. It held that, while the circumstances of the making of the will gave rise to suspicion, on the evidence, the will had been made validly and there was no room for finding that the testatrix's signature had been forged. 

Income tax – Corporation tax. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) dismissed the appeal by Wintershall (E&P) Ltd against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to uphold the view taken by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners that the term 'adjusted ring fence profits' on which the supplementary charge was levied in terms of s 501A of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 meant Wintershall's 'ring fence profits' as adjusted to remove financing costs from the calculation, with the result that the aggregate chargeable gain arising from the transaction in the present case fell to be included in Wintershall's calculation of its liability to the supplementary charge. 

Medical practitioner – Appeal against determination of disciplinary committee. The appellant Band 6 midwife appealed against the decision of the Conduct and Competence Committee (the Panel) of the respondent Nursing and Midwifery Council, finding that her fitness to practise was impaired and striking her off the register. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, rejected the appellant's grounds of appeal, including that there had been delay, changes in the charges, discrimination based on her disability, and that the sanction had been unreasonable and disproportionate. 

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'. 

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. 

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). 

Contract – Construction. The claimant had undertaken work on a project, pursuant to a contract with the defendant for the provision of environmental training. The judge dismissed the claimant's claim for unpaid invoices, holding, inter alia, that it was a contractual requirement that sufficient evidence be provided of the actual content of the workshop and that evidence had not been provided, in particular, no presentation slides had been produced. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the claimant's appeal, held that the material provided had complied with the workshop requirements. Further, if the judge had been intending to say that there had been a contractual obligation to provide slides, the present court disagreed. 

Practice – Civil litigation. In the course of a building dispute, the claimants sought a declaration in relation to the right of adjudication. The Technology and Construction Court refused to give the directions that the claimants were seeking. The claimants persisted in seeking directions as to that issue. The court held that no useful purpose was to be served by the pursuit of the claimants' application for a declaration. The claimants' application would be stayed and the proceedings would continue. 

Injunction – Interim injunction. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant company's application to continue an interim injunction, which had been granted to restrain the enforcement of orders made against it in foreign proceedings brought by the defendant, where the claimant had delayed in bringing arbitration proceedings in England and where it was not arguable that the subject matter of one set of the foreign proceedings fell within the arbitration agreement. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division, in response to letters of request send from United States Court for information needed in the US proceedings, made an order agreeing to the disclosing of certain information by the respondents. The respondents were corporations based in the UK specialising in corporate investigations so therefore it was in the public interest that the respondents did not disclose their individual sources.