Latest Cases

Ward of court – Practice. The Family Division considered two cases, both of which were brought ex parte by local authorities who were concerned that a number of young people, all minors in their areas, were at risk of leaving the United Kingdom to travel to ISIS countries, particularly Syria. In both sets of proceedings the young people were made wards of court and orders were made relating to the retrieval of the passport of each of the young people concerned. The court considered the core principles which were applicable to such applications. 

Tort – Wrongful interference with goods. The applicant company leased cars and sub-leased them to the first respondent company, pursuant to two contracts. The applicant brought a claim, contending that the first respondent had breached its obligations under the contracts. It applied for interim orders for delivery up and for preservation of the cars, contending that the refusal to deliver them up amounted to the wrongful interference of its goods in breach of s 4 of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. The Chancery Division dismissed the application, ruling that the balance of convenience clearly laid in leaving the cars in the possession of the first respondent. 

Professional negligence – Solicitors – Duty of care. Court of Session: In an action in which a property company sought reparation from a firm of solicitors for loss it claimed to have sustained as result of breach of contract and negligence, the loss consisting of the cost the pursuer incurred in entering into a forward starting hedging instrument which its lender insisted upon after the pursuer was found to be in breach of loan‑to‑value covenants in two revolving credit facility agreements, the court concluded that the pursuer had sustained loss as a result of the defenders' negligence. 

Public procurement – Public contracts. The proceedings concerned whether the way in which it had been decided to deliver the new government policy of tax-free childcare was lawful under domestic and EU public procurement legislation. The judge dismissed the claimant's claim that the proposed arrangements were in breach of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, SI 2006/5, and art 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal. 

Damages – Personal injury. Following a delay in diagnosis and treatment of the claimant's back injury, the claimant suffered very serious injuries for which she sought damages from the defendant hospital. Judgment was entered for damages to be assessed and the court was concerned with the quantification of those damages. Having regard to the facts and established law, the court made an appropriate award under the various heads. 

Income tax – Discounts. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) affirmed in part a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) which had upheld the decision by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners to amend the taxpayers' self-assessment tax returns on the basis that the profits made by the taxpayers on fixed rate notes stripped of interest coupons amounted to a discount of an income nature. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant Chinese national issued proceedings against the defendant Secretary of State for unlawful detention between 2 March 2012 and 17 June 2014. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the claimant's detention had been unlawful from 16 July 2013 for breach of public law, but the claimant was only entitled to nominal damages until 2 May 2014, as her condition could be satisfactorily managed in detention. However, as thereafter the detention had breached the second principle in R v Governor of Durham Prison, ex p Singh ([1984] 1 All ER 983), she was entitled to damages to reflect that. 

Civil procedure – Contempt. Court of Session: In a petition to the nobile officium, asking the court to quash a sheriff's interlocutor which found that two social workers had failed to obey an earlier interlocutor by not making two children available for contact with their mother from 11 July until 22 August 2013, and that they were guilty of contempt of court, the court held that the sheriff had not made any findings which justified her conclusion that the social workers' conduct was a contemptuous affront to the dignity and authority of the court, and it followed that her interlocutor should be quashed. 

Arbitration – Award. Following an oil spillage, Spain and France had commenced proceedings to recover damages under the Spanish Penal Code. The claimant, as insurer, was involved in those proceedings. The claimant commenced arbitration proceedings in England and contended that Spain and France were bound by the terms of its contract. The claimant then applied to enforce the arbitrator's awards. Both Spain and France unsuccessfully sought to challenge the awards on the basis of no jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, upheld the dismissal of those challenges, as the obligation which Spain and France had wished to enforce against the claimant had been governed by English law. It could not be enforced otherwise than by arbitration in accordance with the contract's rules and the states had submitted to the jurisdiction of the English courts in relation to the determination of the arbitrator's jurisdiction and the claimant's application to enforce the award as a judgment. 

Income tax – Profits. In dismissing the taxpayer's appeal, the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber upheld the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) that the profit of £2.21m realised by the taxpayer following the sale in the market of a floating-rate promissory note was profit of an income nature, subject to income tax in the taxpayer's hand, under Case III of Sch D to the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988.