Latest Cases

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. There were two applications before the court, the first was the claimant company's application to continue the interim injunction and freezing injunction against the defendants (in liquidation and bankruptcy) and secondly an application by the second and third defendants to set aside those injunctions on the grounds of material non-disclosure. The Queen's Bench Division continued the freezing order and injunction and dismissed the defendants application. 

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. 

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. 

Costs – Order for costs. The defendants had been found liable for passing off and were ordered to pay the claimants' costs of the action. The defendants' main appeal in the proceedings was dismissed. They then appealed as to costs, contending that, even if it had been open to the judge to have found them liable for passing off, there had been no proper basis for having made an order that they should pay the claimants' costs. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not fallen into error in the manner for which the defendants had contended and his order was well within the bounds of a reasonable exercise of the wide discretion which he had had. 

Immigration – Leave to enter. The applicants had been excluded from the United Kingdom as being conducive to the public good under the unacceptable behaviours list. They were refused permission to apply for judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, refused the applicants' appeal, holding that an application for judicial review had no prospect of success. It further found that the Secretary of State's unacceptable behaviours policy was not unlawful. 

Costs – Order for costs. Capita Translation and Interpreting Ltd had a contract with the Secretary of State to provide interpreters for court and tribunal hearings. The court had booked two interpreters for an application for leave to oppose an adoption, but the interpreters were not provided and the hearing was adjourned. The local authority sought recovery of its costs of that hearing against Capita. The Family Court granted the application and held that Capita had failed to discharge its obligations under the contract with the Secretary of State and, where there had been a background of serial failures by Capita in the proceedings, it was just for the company to pay the authority's costs. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant applied to quash the decision of the inspector appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State, refusing the claimant's appeal to grant planning permission for a wind energy development. The Planning Court, in allowing the application, held that the inspector had proceeded on the basis of an error of fact, which had played a material part in the decision she had reached. That had given rise to unfairness to the claimant and amounted to an error of law. 

Libel and slander – Malice. The claimant Member of Parliament brought proceedings for libel against the defendant newspaper publisher. The claim contained allegations of malice. TNL applied to strike out the claim of malice. The Queen's Bench Division held that, among other things, the allegations had failed to plead clearly and distinctly the factual case relied on to establish dishonesty on the part of the two journalists concerned, and that the application to strike out would succeed. 

Criminal law – Trial. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed the defendant's appeal against his conviction for dangerous driving and taking a conveyance without authority, in circumstances where the prosecution's case, based on DNA evidence, that the defendant had been the driver of the vehicle had been very strong indeed. 

Insurance – Liability insurance. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that professional indemnity insurers were obliged to indemnify solicitors who were liable to reimburse the loans made to their clients in order to defray the disbursements made by those clients. Obligations arising out of such loans were essentially part and parcel of the obligations assumed by a solicitor in respect of his professional duties to his client, rather than obligations personal to the solicitor. They were inherently part of his professional practice and were assumed, as an essential part of his duty was to advise the client as to the likelihood of success in the intended litigation.