Latest Cases

Prison – Release on licence. In circumstances where the claimant sought judicial review of the delay in the determination of her application for release from custody, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that there had been no breach of the obligation under art 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights, as a speedy determination could not have been made more quickly than it had been. 

Minor – Abduction. E's parents had separated and he lived with his mother in Spain. Following an extended stay visiting his father in England, he did not return to Spain. The judge refused the mother's application for an order, pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980, that he be returned to Spain. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the mother's appeal, held, inter alia, that the judgment allowed one to be satisfied that the judge had had the relevant features well in mind and had balanced them in a way that had been open to him. 

Constitutional law – Diplomatic privilege. The claimant domestic workers issued proceedings in the employment tribunal against the defendant Saudi diplomatic agent and his wife. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (the EAT) upheld the defendants' claim to diplomatic immunity, but held that service had been validly effected. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimants' appeal and the defendants' cross-appeal, held that, on the proper construction of art 31(1)(c) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, the EAT had been right to uphold the defendants' claim to diplomatic immunity. Further, service at the defendants' private residence by post had constituted good service. 

Criminal evidence – Res gestae. The appellant appealed, by way of case stated, against his conviction for assault by beating. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the justices had been correct in admitting the out of court statements of the complainant to police and evidence of her 999 calls. The circumstances surrounding the incident meant that the evidence of the telephone calls, together with the conversations with the police officers that had occurred shortly afterwards, had fallen well within the res gestae principle. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant Lee Valley Regional Park Authority challenged the defendant local planning authority's decision to grant the interested party planning permission. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, accepted the claimant's submissions that the authority had misinterpreted Green Belt policy in the National Planning Policy Framework in an unlawful manner, particularly with reference to the concepts of openness and previously developed land. Further, the development had not been in accord with the development plan. 

Local government – Statutory powers. The claimant disabled children sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's proposed cut to the budget for the integrated disability service in its local offer. The Administrative Court held that the proposed local offer fell a considerable distance short of the statutory requirements and that the authority was over 20 years late in complying with its duty, under para 2 of Sch 2 to the Children Act 1989, to maintain a register of disabled children. As the claimants' did not seek substantive relief beyond factual findings, those factual findings were made. 

Solicitor – Client account. In two claims, the claimants brought proceedings against the defendant solicitors' firm, Mishcon. Mishcon had indirectly received payments from the claimants, which it then passed to third parties on the instructions of one of its claims. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claimants' claims, held that there had been no Quistclose trust created, nor would the claimants' claims in dishonest assistance or unlawful means conspiracy succeed. 

Vicarious liability – Employer and employee. An incident at the defendants' bodywork repair shop occurred when a co-employee of the claimant, PW, used a cigarette lighter in the vicinity of the claimant, whose overalls had been sprinkled with a highly inflammable thinning agent. As a result, the overalls caught fire and caused the claimant injury. The judge found that the defendant was not vicariously liable for PW's actions. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that the real cause of the claimant's injuries had been the conduct of PW, which could not be said to have occurred in the course of his employment. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The first defendant resigned from his employment with the claimant and the claimant sought to enforce the terms of certain contractual post-termination restrictive covenants and covenants relating to confidential information. The claimant had previously obtained an interim injunction in relation to the first defendant's activities and applied to continue the injunction. The principal issue in the action was whether the first defendant had signed or had otherwise agreed to be bound by the written contract on which the claimant relied. The Queen's Bench Division, on established principle, continued the injunction and ordered a speedy trial. 

Trade Union – Member. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (the EAT) dismissed the appeal by a member of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) against a decision of the Certification Officer (CO) to reject all but one of his complaints that the NUM had breached its Rules by the matters set out by that member in his complaints. However, the EAT accepted that the CO had erred in including in the enforcement order on Complaint 1, text which had formed no part of remedying the breach of rule which he had found to have occurred. Accordingly, that text was deleted from the enforcement order.