Latest Cases

Limitation of actions – Prescription. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuers, who had instructed the defenders, a firm of solicitors, to serve notices to quit on a tenant to terminate agricultural holdings tenancies over three fields, averred that by serving defective notices to quit the defenders were in breach of an implied term of their contract with the pursuers to exercise the degree of knowledge, skill and care expected of a reasonably competent solicitor, the court sustained the defenders' plea-in-law that any obligation on the defenders to make reparation to the pursuers had prescribed and pronounced decree of absolvitor. 

Criminal law – Murder. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, quashed the defendant's conviction for murder in circumstances where the jury could not have safely excluded the possibility that the victim's death had been an accident. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The appellant Bangladeshi national appealed against the decision of the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), refusing permission to seek judicial review of the decision of the respondent Secretary of State, refusing him leave to remain in the United Kingdom. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held, inter alia, that, in the circumstances, even if the Secretary of State had made an error of law, it had not been a material one, because, on the basis of the best possible way in which the appellant's case could have been considered, it had been bound to fail. 

Commons – Registration. The claimants sought judicial review of the defendant commons registration authority's decision, refusing their application to register rights of common. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that the reason the claimants' application had failed had been that they could not establish that they had acquired rights of common when they had applied to register them. Accordingly, the authority's decision had been correct in law. 

Intestacy – Distribution of intestate's estate. A dispute arose between two brothers as to whether a property purchased by their father, but registered in the name of the defendant, was held on trust for the father's estate entirely. The Chancery Division held that the property had been held on trust for the father's estate entirely, and that, on the evidence, the claimant was not guilty of laches. 

Health and safety at work – Employer's duties. The first defendant company, P Ltd, was convicted of gross negligence manslaughter of one of its employees, who had died after becoming trapped in an industrial oven. It was further convicted of offences under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, along with the second defendant director, M. In sentencing, the judge expressed his intention to that the penalty should bite against the director shareholders whilst at the same time ensuring that the company was preserved for the benefit of its employees. The judge imposed a fine of £200,000 on P Ltd and £25,000 on M. M was also given a suspended sentence of nine months' imprisonment. 

Elections – Local government. The applicant sought to challenge the election of a candidate in local government elections. His petition was struck out on the basis of failure to comply with a technical rule in s 136 of the Representation of People Act 1983 that At the time of presenting an election petition or within three days afterwards the petitioner shall give security for all costs which may become payable by him to any witness summoned on his behalf or to any respondent. The applicant appealed the striking out of the petition. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the appeal on the basis that the requirement in the 1983 Act was clear and it had not been complied with. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Jamaican national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision, refusing him leave to remain with his partner. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that there was no error of law in the Secretary of State's decision, refusing him leave to remain. However, even if there had been, relief would be declined in the light of the Secretary of State's subsequent letter, setting out her reasons for continuing to refuse the claimant leave to remain after further consideration of his case. 

Environment – Site of special scientific interest. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Welsh Ministers' decision to adopt a plan for a new stretch of the M4 motorway across an area comprising several sites of special scientific interest and a special area of conservation. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Welsh Government had not failed to consider reasonable alternatives. Further, it had not failed to take reasonable steps to further the conservation and enhancement of the flora and fauna. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Nigerian national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision, refusing her leave to remain in the United Kingdom. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Secretary of State had not taken into account letters from the claimant's mother and grandmother. However, there was nothing in the application which set out what, if any, links there were with Nigeria or the lack of them and the assessment of the claimant's ties to Nigeria would have produced exactly the same result. Accordingly, the error had not been a material one such as would justify the quashing of the decision.