Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The local authority applied for a care order in respect of a young child, N, as a result of his attendance at hospital following his collapse. There was radiological evidence of possible hypoxic-ischemic brain injury. The Family Court held that, on the evidence, N's injuries had resulted from an innocent, but ill-advised, resuscitative shake by his mother. However, in the circumstances, the threshold criteria of s 31(2) of the Children Act 1989 were not satisfied and, therefore, the application for a care order would be dismissed, with the consequence that N would return to the care of his mother and father. 

Freedom of information – Local government. Court of Session: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who was dissatisfied with the response to his request for information relating to the process of revision of a local authority's disciplinary policy and applied to the Scottish Information Commissioner, who decided that all relevant information held by council had been identified and disclosed to him, the court held that the first ground of appeal raised no point of law and appeared to proceed on a misunderstanding of the role of the Commissioner and of the appeal court, a similar misconception appeared to run through the second ground of appeal, and the third ground, which appeared to be dependent on the first two grounds and identified no relevant point of law, was also without merit. 

European Union – Finance. The Court of Justice of the European union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of various provisions of Directive (EC) 94/19 (on deposit-guarantee schemes), as amended by Directive (EC) 2009/14, and of Directive (EC) 97/9 (on investor-compensation schemes). The request had been made in proceedings brought by 'Indėlių ir investicijų draudimas' VĮ and Mr Nemaniunas concerning the validity of an agreement for the acquisition of a certificate of deposit and a number of bond subscription agreements. 

Arbitration – Commencement. The buyer appealed against an arbitration award as to the price of cotton. The Commercial Court held that the award would be upheld in relation to the first issue. On the second issue, the court held that the issue of law as to which permission to appeal had been given only answered a part of the question as to what had been the applicable price it would be appropriate to remit the matter to the Tactical Appeal Committee. 

Adoption – Order. The applicant family members sought to remove two children to the United States of America where they hoped to adopt them. The Family Division held that the applicants were unable to bring themselves within s 84 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 for the purposes of obtaining parental responsibility and removing the children from the United Kingdom, as they did not and had never had a home in the UK. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The issue for determination was whether the judge had erred in admitting an Interpol 'red notice', which was not duly authenticated under the Extradition Act 2003. The Divisional Court held that the correct test was whether a document, not authenticated under s 202(3) of the Act, was admissible as evidence of the facts stated in it according to the English rules of criminal evidence. It allowed the appellant's appeal against the judge's decision to send his case to the Secretary of State, as the red notice had been inadmissible and it could not be proved that the appellant was the requested person. 

Immigration – Asylum – Fresh claim. Court of Session: Granting a judicial review petition by a failed Sudanese asylum seeker, who challenged decisions refusing to treat his further submissions as a fresh claim, the court held that had the respondent Home Secretary's decision-maker properly applied the relevant test in terms of Immigration Rule 353, the respondent would have accepted the petitioner's further submissions as constituting a fresh claim for asylum. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. In deciding that the child should go to live with the mother in France rather than in the United Kingdom, the Family Divison found that having regard to the welfare checklist, it was in the child's interests to live in France. Contact with the father could be maintained and the impact of her application being refused was likely to have a profound impact on the mother. 

Adoption – Practice. In circumstances where the child's paternal family sought leave to challenge an adoption order under s 47(5) of the Adoption and Children Act 200, the Family Court held that as the court had to have regard to the ability and willingness of any of the child's relatives to provide the child with a secure environment in which the child could develop, there were strong welfare reasons for granting the father leave to oppose the adoption application. 

Personal injury – Health and safety – Liability. Court of Session: Granting decree of absolvitor in an action by a shop assistant who was injured when she fell off a footstool she was using to hang clothing up on racks in the defenders' shop, the court held that it had not been shown that the accident happened as a result of any use of the stool in breach of the employer's duties.