Latest Cases

Arbitration – Award. The claimant applied, under s 67(1)(a) and/or (b) of the Arbitration Act 1996, for an order setting aside an amended award, following arbitration proceedings concerning the termination of a commercial agreement. The Commercial Court, dismissing the application, held that the complaint raised on behalf of the claimant was not one that properly fell within s 67 of the Act. 

Damages – Personal injury. Whilst working for the defendant employer British Telecom, the claimant was injured. He brought an action for damages against the defendant alleging, inter alia, breach of Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 SI2306/98 and regulation 4(3) of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989, SI 635/1989. The Queen's Bench Division held that the breach had been made out and that the claimant was entitled to damages to be assessed, subject to a reduction of one third in respect of contributory negligence. 

European Union – Consumer protection. The Court of Justice made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 1, 6(1) and section (a) of the first paragraph of art 9 of Council Directive (EEC) 85/374 (on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the member states concerning liability for defective products). The requests had been made in an appeal on a point of law between Boston Scientific Medizintechnik GmbH (BSMG), and AOK Sachsen-Anhalt — Die Gesundheitskasse and Betriebskrankenkasse RWE, compulsory health insurance organisations, concerning requests for reimbursement of the costs relating to the implantation of pacemakers and an implantable cardioverter defibrillator imported and marketed in the European Union by G. GmbH a company which subsequently merged with BSMG. 

Financial services – Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). The applicant, a former junior trader at an investment bank in London, sought judicial review of the Financial Conduct Authority's decision to terminate an investigation into him. The Administrative Court dismissed the application and held that the decision to terminate the investigation had been rational. The matters which it had taken into account had been legitimate considerations and it had been for the FCA to determine what weight to give to them. It could not be said that the weight given to any consideration had been manifestly disproportionate. Further, the decision had been lawful. 

Sentence – Imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, increased the offender's sentence for offences of possession of a prohibited firearm from a total of 20 months' imprisonment to a total of five years' imprisonment, in circumstances where the sentencing judge had been very much affected by a medical report on the critical condition of the offender's infant daughter. 

Sentence – Imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that a suspended sentenced imposed for the offence of attempted robbery had been unduly lenient and substituted it for one of five and-a-half years' detention in a young offender institution. The court held that the recorder had given too much weight to the offender's circumstances and the fact that it was his first offence and an offence which had been well out of character. 

Building contract – Insurance. Following an incident, in which a crane toppled from the concrete supporting structure that had been built by the defendant, the claimant insurance company had sought a declaration of non-liability under the defendant's Miles Smith Building Services Combined Contractors' Liability Policy. The judge had refused to grant the declaration sought. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal and made a declaration that: (i) on the proper construction of the foundation clause in the policy, the crane had been a 'superstructure' within the meaning of the policy; (ii) the works carried out by the defendant in constructing the crane base and installing the dowel bars had been foundation works within the meaning of the policy; and (iii) any liability that might be established against the defendant in respect of the damage to the crane itself was a liability excluded under the foundation clause. 

European Union – Value Added Tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union granted the application by the European Commission for a declaration that, by applying a reduced rate of VAT on the supply of digital books (or electronic books), France had failed to fulfil its obligations under arts 96 and 98 of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 (on the common system of value added tax), as amended, read in conjunction with Annexes II and III to that directive and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 282/2011 (laying down implementing measures for Directive (EC) 2006/112). 

Company – Derivative action. The claimant brought a derivative action on behalf of the third defendant company. The Chancery Division considered an application by the claimants under s 261(1) of the Companies Act 2006 to continue the derivative action. It held that, on the evidence, that all the factors in the case pointed in favour of granting the permission sought. 

Practice – Preliminary point of law. An arbitral tribunal had found in favour of the defendants that the claimant had breached its obligation to deliver goods, under the terms of a contract, which was governed by the Laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, with the seat of the arbitration in London. The claimant challenged the award on the grounds of jurisdiction and serious irregularity. The defendants applied for certain matters to be determined as preliminary issues. The Commercial Court held that it was just and convenient, on case management grounds, to order a trial of the suggested preliminary issues, save for one issue, which had to go to trial.