Latest Cases

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve an activated suspended sentence for burglary of items valued at approximately £50. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that it would not be proportionate to order the appellant's extradition. The important factors in the present case included: (i) the limited value of the items stolen; (ii) the appellant had been subjected to lengthy electronically monitored curfews; (iii) the length of his sentence and the fact that he had had no idea that the sentence had been activated; and (iv) the delay in seeking extradition. 

Contract – Contract for supply of services – Identity of contracting parties. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuers sought repayment of fees paid for an adjudicator's services from his executor on the basis of unjustified enrichment, the adjudicator's decision having been held unenforceable and reduced by the court, the court held that the adjudicator had not entered into the adjudicator's agreement in his personal capacity but as employee of a law firm, and it followed that any claim by the pursuers for repayment of the fee they paid for his services would require to be directed against that firm, as the other party to the contract for supply of those services. 

Trust – Administration of trust. In the course of proceedings, the claimant companies sought two declarations. The first, which related to the status of trust monies, would be granted. The second, which concerned the status of an injunction granted by the New York courts, would not be allowed since, in the circumstances, it would be qualified to the point where it would serve no useful purpose. 

Sentence – Length of sentence. The offenders had taken part in a conspiracy to steal from vehicles, during the course of which the victim had been fatally injured. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, increased the first offender's sentence for manslaughter from ten-and-a-half years' imprisonment to 12 years' imprisonment in order to reflect the totality of the offending. The court declined to interfere with the sentence of the second offender, whom it was acknowledged had played a lesser role. 

Immigration – Rules. In dismissing appeals against refusal of leave to remain in the United Kingdom, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the changes made to the Immigration Rules by HC 194 had not been applicable to applications for leave to remain made or pending at the time that the changes had been implemented, but had applied to such applications after the implementation of the subsequent statement of changes HC 565. The court considered the conflicting decisions in Edgehill v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2014] All ER (D) 14 (Apr) and Haleemudeen v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2014] All ER (D) 50 (May) and preferred the former. 

European Union – Social security. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 46a(3)(c) of the Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 had to be interpreted as encompassing the part of the benefit resulting from a period of insurance during which the person concerned had the right to obtain an exemption from affiliation to the compulsory insurance scheme, in a situation where such affiliation, during the period in question, affected the extent of the social security benefit. 

Immigration – Human rights – Leave to appeal – Judicial review. Court of Session: Dismissing a judicial review petition by a 69-year-old citizen of India, whose application for variation of her leave to remain in the UK was refused, and who challenged a decision of the Upper Tribunal refusing her permission to appeal against the First Tier Tribunal's refusal of her appeal, the court held that the petitioner did not present an arguable case for meeting the 'second appeals' test. 

Education – Higher education. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education's decision, affirming the termination of her medical studies. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that it had been open to the defendant to look critically at the assertion that the decision had been immune from review as an academic judgment and to consider the university's failure to take relevant matters into account. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, then aged 16, was convicted of murder and sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure, with the minimum term of 14 years, less 367 days spent on remand. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court held that the offender's progress was not such that it satisfied the extremely high hurdle of being exceptional and unforeseen. Accordingly, the present was not a case in which any reduction in the offender's tariff could be recommended. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Annex I, No 14, to Council Directive (EEC) 85/337 (on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment), as amended by Directive (EC) 2009/31. The request had been made in proceedings between the municipality of Strasswalchen, Austria, and other applicants and the Austrian Federal Minister for Economy, Family and Youth, concerning a decision authorising Rohöl-Aufsuchungs AG to carry out exploratory drilling on the territory of the municipality.