Latest Cases

Patent – Practice. The claimant company, TT, was the proprietor of a patent for a ticketing system. It entered into a dispute with the defendant company, BB, as to whether BB needed to use its ticketing system and intimating patent infringement proceedings. BB sought pre-action disclosure of information from TT, including the prices of licensing its system to its various customers. TT resisted the application. The Patents Court held that the rules in CPR 31.16(3) were satisfied and that it was appropriate to exercise its discretion with regard to licences issued by TT in the transport sector. 

Solicitor – Disciplinary proceedings. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (the SDT) found allegations against the appellant proved, and ordered the appellant to be suspended for two years and to pay £4,000 in costs. The appellant appealed against the sanction. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that a suspension for two years would only be appropriate where the facts had been close to warranting an order striking the solicitor off. In the present case, the period of suspension had been much too long and the appropriate period of suspension was one year. However, a one-year condition would be attached to the appellant's practising certificate. 

Practice – Family proceedings. The husband and wife separated and a consent order was made regarding ancillary relief. Shortly after, the husband's father died and the husband received an inheritance. The wife appealed against the consent order, relying on the principle in Barder v Caluori ([1987] 2 All ER 440), in particular, that the inheritance was a Barder event, which invalidated the basis or fundamental assumption upon which the order had been made. The judge allowed the appeal and varied the order. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the husband's appeal, held that the judge had not erred in having found that the death of the husband's father and the husband's consequent inheritance had invalidated the basis or fundamental assumption upon which the consent order had been made. 

Negligence – Causation. The claimant suffered a severe trauma to his knee and attended at the defendant Hospital for medical intervention. He underwent an operation and following the operation was unable to move his toes and foot. The claimant claimed damages in respect of the personal injury and loss which it was alleged was caused by the clinical negligence of the defendant NHS Trust. The Queen's Bench Division, following a testing of the claimant's evidence, allowed the claim. 

Bankruptcy – Appeal. The Chancery Division considered an appeal by the petitioning creditor, W, against findings of the Chief Registrar regarding a bankruptcy order and a statutory demand made against the respondent wife and husband respectively. In dismissing the appeal, the court held that, using the correct test, the wife's application to annul the bankruptcy order would be allowed and that the other issues raised by W required further examination at a full hearing. 

Company – Winding up. The Revenue and Customs Commissioners (the Revenue) presented a creditor's petition to wind up the applicant company based on assessment for alleged unpaid corporation tax and alleged VAT fraud. The company appealed against the Revenue's tax assessments and applied to dismiss petition on the basis that the debt was disputed in good faith on substantial grounds. The Companies Court held that, on the evidence, the applicant's appeal had no real prospect of success and the application for the petition to be dismissed was, therefore, dismissed. 

Sentence – Suspended sentence. The offender, aged 77, had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity to ten counts of indecent assault, contrary to s 14(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 and was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, suspended. The offending had taken place during the late 1960s and early 70s, when the complainants were both under the age of 14. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the judge had made too great an allowance for the mitigating features and had paid insufficient attention to the current guidelines. The suspension was removed and the offender was ordered to serve an immediate custodial sentence of two years' imprisonment. 

Statement of claim – Amendment. The claimant entered into a loan agreement with the defendant banks (together the bank). Under the conditions of the loan, the claimant entered into an amortising base rate swap with the bank (the swap). The claimant brought proceedings, contending, among other things, that it had been mis-sold the swap. Only weeks before the trial, the claimant applied for permission to amend its particulars of claim. The Chancery Division ruled that the present case was one where the balance came down firmly in favour of refusing permission for the disputed amendments where the application had been made too late, the amendments were formulated with insufficient clarity and particularity, and where the bank would face real and substantial prejudice if the application were allowed. 

Disclosure and inspection of documents – Disclosure against parties to proceedings. In the course of a tendering dispute, the claimant, which was an unsuccessful tenderer, made applications for disclosure and for the future conduct of the case. The Technology and Construction Court allowed the application in part and made findings regarding the extent of disclosure permitted. 

Housing – Local authority. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local housing authority's decision, approving designation of four areas in its boundary as being subject to selective licensing. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that it was clear from the evidence that there had been very substantial consideration of the options of selective licensing and voluntary accreditation. There had been no perversity and/or irrationality in the authority having chosen a mandatory scheme over a voluntary one.