Latest Cases

Criminal law – Appeal. The defendant appealed against his convictions for assault with intent to rob and assault by beating. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that whilst the judge's conduct had been deficient, it had not been tantamount to having invited the jury to disbelieve the defendant's defence and the jury had not been left with that impression. However, despite the deficiencies in the manner in which the judge had dealt with the trial, the convictions were safe. 

Disclosure and inspection of documents – Order for disclosure. The claimant firm brought an action seeking payment for outstanding invoices in relation to professional services provided to the defendant in relation to a project to develop a property in Lancashire. The defendant counterclaimed, alleging professional negligence. Shortly before the trial, the claimant applied for specific disclosure and permission to rely upon the expert evidence of a forensic accountant. The Chancery Division dismissed the application where the matter in respect of which specific disclosure and expert evidence was sought, was not a key issue in the context of the case, and considering the lateness of the application. 

Medical negligence – Negligent surgery/ failure to organise appropriate surgery – Quantum. Court of Session: In an action in which the defenders admitted liability for negligent operations on the pursuer, who had fractured the neck of his left femur in a fall, and negligent failure to organise appropriate surgery when he was suffering chronic infection, which resulted in him becoming effectively wheelchair‑bound, the court held that an appropriate award for solatium was £135,000, that no deduction in relation to accommodation costs should be made because the pursuer now had a bigger and better property, that a total of 49 hours of care per week should be allowed, but that the costs of setting up and administering a personal injury trust and the costs of a case manager were not recoverable from the defenders. 

European Union – Taxation. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 6(3) TEU, arts 34, 36, 52(1), 56 and 61 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and arts 1, 8 and 9 of Directive (EC) 98/34. The request had been made in proceedings brought by Berlington Hungary Tanácsadó és Szolgáltató kft and other companies against Hungary concerning an action seeking compensation brought by those companies for the damage that they had allegedly suffered as a result of the application of national legislation concerning the operation of slot machines contrary to European Union law. 

European Union – Freedom of establishment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding, among other things, that the first paragraph of art 51 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be interpreted as meaning that the derogation from the right of establishment contained in that provision did not apply to certification activities carried out by companies classified as certification bodies. 

Vexatious proceedings – Civil proceedings order. The proceedings concerned the rights to certain performances by Jimi Hendrix. The claimant, M, had made a number of applications and claims that had been found to be without merit. The Chancery Division struck out his current claims and made an extended civil restraint order against M. 

Trust and trustee – Trustee. The Chancery Division held that, on the true construction of trust deeds in respect of family land, the sons would not at any stage acquire an absolute interest in any share which passed to them on the death of the survivor of their parents. Further, the court had the power to give to retrospectively approve a transaction, which would otherwise be a breach of the self‑dealing rule, which prevented trustees from purchasing trust property. 

Extradition – Passage of time. Sheriff Court: In a case in which the Slovakian authorities sought the respondent's extradition to serve an 8-month prison sentence for 'joyriding' when disqualified from driving in July 2004, he having been convicted of the offence in absentia in September 2009, the court held that 

Practice – Injunction. In the course of proceedings concerning a claim alleging deceit and misrepresentation, among other things, a freezing order had been granted, without notice, against the defendant company, which was alleged to have deceitfully promoted a scheme, which the claimants had invested in. The defendant applied to discharge the injunction or for summary judgment on the claim. The Chancery Division held that there were grounds for discharging the freezing order where there had been material non-disclosure and misrepresentations at the without notice hearing. However, it granted the claimants an opportunity to adduce a further amended pleading and, accordingly, declined to grant summary judgment. 

Adoption – Consent. The mother's daughter, CB, was removed from her care and accommodated pursuant to s 20 of the Children Act 1989. She was placed with prospective adopters. The mother sought permission to, among other things, oppose the adoption. The Family Division dismissed the mother's applications and held that the only outcome that could provide sufficient stability and security was adoption.