Latest Cases

Practice – Summary judgment. The claimant Middle Eastern banks (the banks) claimed that the first defendant had falsely claimed to have an irrevocable power of attorney from them and had purportedly entered into partnerships, governed by English law, under which the relevant bank was the general partner and he was the limited partner, which he had then registered with the Registrar of Companies (the Registrar). They alleged that he had then used the certificate of registration as an instrument of fraud. The Chancery Division granted the banks summary judgment, holding that the first defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending the claims. However, the court declined to order the Registrar to delete the registration of the limited partnerships, holding that notwithstanding the circumstances which had led to the registration, once the certificate of registration had been issued, that was conclusive evidence that a limited partnership had come into existence, for the purposes of s 8C(4) of the Limited Partnerships Act 1907. The principle that fraud unravelled all was not a sufficient basis to go behind the conclusive evidence provision in s 8C of the Act. 

Education – Local education authority. The defendant local education authority proposed to amend its policy so that pupils attending faith schools would be entitled to free public transport only if the relevant distance criteria were met and no suitable alternative school, including a non-faith school, was located within two or three miles of home. The claimants, who were affiliated with faith schools, sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that black and minority ethnic origin children suffered a particular disadvantage as a consequence of the amended policy, which was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Further, the report relied on in making the decision had misstated the law. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the appeal brought by Mr Ralf Schrader by which he sought to set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in which the General Court had dismissed his action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office, concerning Mr Schrader's application for annulment of the Community plant variety right granted for the plant variety 'LEMON SYMPHONY'. 

Practice – Parties. The Queen's Bench Division considered whether it was permissible to change the name of a party after default judgment had been obtained and the procedure to be adopted when the party to be joined disputed the factual basis on which that party was being joined. The court held that the master had had jurisdiction to join the defendant and, in the circumstances, had been right to make the order that he had. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The present proceedings concerned the retrial of the issue of the claimant Eritrean national's age. The Administrative Court held that the claimant's account and her chronology were true, and her date of birth, as she had consistently maintained, was 27 September 1994. Further, the procedural failings in the second defendant local authority's age assessments had been so serious as to be unfair and unlawful. Accordingly, they would be quashed. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The local authority issued care proceedings concerning a seven-year-old boy, N, who was the subject of a shared residence order. The issue for the Family Court was whether N should be removed from the care of his parents. It held that N had suffered and continued to suffer significant emotional harm. Persisting with the present shared care arrangement was not in his present welfare interests and placement with his father was inappropriate. Accordingly, the change required was that N be removed from the care of his parents and placed with experienced foster carers. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that art 23(2) of the Brussels I Regulation should be interpreted as meaning that the method of accepting the general terms and conditions of a contract for sale by 'click-wrapping', concluded by electronic means, which contained an agreement conferring jurisdiction, constituted a communication by electronic means which provided a durable record of the agreement, within the meaning of that provision, where that method made it possible to print and save the text of those terms and conditions before the conclusion of the contract. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The father applied for variation of a shared residence order concerning a seven-year-old boy, N. The Family Court held that N had suffered emotional harm both as a result of the ongoing hostility between his parents, and because of the way his mother had immersed him in her religious beliefs and practices as a Jehovah's Witness. As neither of the parents could be relied upon to meet N's emotional needs, the shared care order should not continue. Interim removal would be a proportionate response to N's need for protection and an interim care order would be made. 

Land registration – Rectification of register. The proceedings concerned a dispute as to whether or not a loan advanced by the claimant's predecessor (the bank) to the defendants in 2005 was secured on their property (the property). The issue was whether a charge, securing a previous loan to the defendants, who were made bankrupt, was effective to secure the 2005 loan. The Chancery Division held that the charge, on its terms, was so effective to secure the 2005 loan on the property. The terms of the mortgage conditions, which applied to the charge, were sufficiently wide and clear to include the 2005 loan. On the defendants' bankruptcy, their estate vested in the Official Receiver as trustee, subject to the bank's charge. It was further held that the bank had made a distinct mistake in issuing form e-DS1 to the Land Registry, acknowledging that the property was no longer charged, in circumstances where the 2004 loan had been redeemed. Accordingly, it was entitled to be re-registered as proprietor of the charge which secured the 2005 loan. 

Copyright – Ownership. A dispute arose as to the division of publishing or performing rights in a song written by the band The Fall, entitled 'Touch Sensitive'. The dispute centred on whether an agreement as to the distribution of the rights was to be regarded as valid. The claimants submitted that the agreement had been the result of improper pressure being placed on the second claimant songwriter. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court held that the agreement had not been obtained improperly and, in the circumstances, the claim would be dismissed.