Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. Care orders were made in relation to two children, who were to live with their mother and have limited supervised contact with their father. The father appealed against the judge's order, challenging, among other things, the judge's treatment of the evidence of a clinical psychologist, G, which it was said to have been allowed to assume disproportionate importance. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the father's appeal. It held that, among other things, the judge had produced a most thorough judgment, drawing together all the strands of the evidence. From it, it was quite clear that her decision had not been based upon an unquestioning acceptance of G's evidence, whether as to physical risk or as to emotional considerations. 

Town and country planning – Planning authority. The claimant developer applied, under s 113 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, to quash or remit parts of the local plan core strategy adopted by the defendant local planning authority. The Planning Court held that the assessed need had never been expressed or included as part of the objectively assessed needs and the inspector had not dealt with affordable housing, contrary to the relevant policy. Further, there had been substantial non-compliance with the requirements of Sch 2 to the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004, SI 2004/1633. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant Afghani national issued judicial review proceedings, challenging his detention and removal from the United Kingdom. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the claimant's removal had been unlawful, as there had been an undetermined claim for asylum or one which had not been notified to him, either at all or at such short notice that he had been deprived of the opportunity of dealing with it. Further, the reason for his initial detention had been insufficient and, therefore, unlawful. Declarations to that effect were made, and the Secretary of State was ordered to pay damages to be assessed and to procure the claimant's return to the UK. 

Criminal Law – Trial. The defendant contended that his plea of guilty had been obtained through improper pressure following a proposal by the prosecution to drop proceedings against two of his co-defendants, including his partner who was the mother of his two young children. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the defendant's appeal, held that the plea had not been improperly induced and an application to vacate the plea had been rightly refused. 

Police – Powers. The claimant teenager had been arrested and taken to a police station. An assessment was made that she might use her clothes as a ligature to attempt suicide, so they were removed by three female police officers. Her claim for damages was dismissed by the county court. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that while she had been strip searched, within the meaning of s 54(6A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and para 4.1 of Code C and para 9 of Annex A of Code C of the PACE Codes of Practice, there had been no breach of para 11 of Annex A. While the recorder had not directly applied para 11, he had made a finding that established that there had been compliance with the spirit of that requirement. 

Human rights – Right to life. The Administrative Court, held that the Lord Chancellor's Exceptional Funding Guidance (Inquests) was inadequate, incorporated an error of law and provided a materially misleading impression of what the law was. That was by virtue of the fact that there was no recognition that there was a category of case where the investigative duty under art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights arose irrespective of the existence of an arguable breach by the state. Those errors could lead to erroneous decision being taken by caseworkers. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Argo Development and Manufacturing Ltd (Argo) for annulment of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) in relation to invalidity proceedings between Argo and Clapbanner Ltd concerning the application by Argo for a declaration of invalidity in respect of a Community design held by Clapbanner Ltd intended to be applied to advertising articles, namely foldable cardboard signboards. 

Costs – Order for costs. In a previous case, the claimants lost and they asserted that there should be no order for costs because the defendant had refused to engage in ADR. In response, the defendant sought an award of costs against the claimants on an indemnity basis. The Queen's Bench Division noted the defendant's failure to engage in ADR but held that such a shortcoming was not sufficient to disentitle it from claiming any costs. 

Immigration – Education. The claimant college sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to refuse its application for highly trusted sponsor status and to maintain that decision. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Secretary of State had not acted irrationally in her approach to the refusal rate of student visa applications, the enrolment rate or failure to report on unrolled students. 

Shipping – Charterparty. A charterparty contained an 'in-transit loss' clause (ITL clause) and a further clause, providing that the respondent owners were entitled to the protection of the relevant articles of the Hague-Visby Rules in respect of 'any claim' made under the charterparty. En route, pirates took control of the vessel and some cargo was lost. The appellant charterer contended that the owner was liable under the ITL clause. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the words 'in-transit loss' connoted loss 'incidental to the carriage of the cargo'. Further, even if the ITL clause had had the meaning for which the charterer contended, the Rules would apply to exempt the owner from liability.