Latest Cases

Criminal law – Detention in custody. The claimant sought judicial review of the decision to extend his custody time limit. The Divisional Court held that, although no judicial consideration had been given to whether there had been 'good and sufficient cause' for extending the custody time limit, the decision of the first judge to fix a trial date beyond the expiry of the custody time limit had not been amenable to judicial review by virtue of s 29(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981. Further, the discrete decision of the second judge to extend the time limit contained no discernible error. 

Title to land – Title to sue. Court of Session: Refusing an appeal from the sheriff principal in an action in which the pursuers sought to remove the defender from land, averring they were pro indiviso proprietors of the land and that he occupied it without right or title, and he denied that they owned the land but asserted no right or title himself, the court held that the pursuers, or one or other of them, had an ex facie valid title which was good enough to pursue an action against a defender who advanced no competing writ. 

Hospital – Liability for negligence of members of staff. The claimant issued proceedings, contending that the defendant NHS Foundation Trust had handled her birth process negligently, resulting in her having a limited range of motion in her right arm. The Queen's Bench Division held that negligence was established, as the decision not to proceed to caesarean section at 13:50 had lacked logical force. However, the claimant had not established that the delivery had been negligently handled. 

Adult incapacity – Power of Attorney – Validity. Court of Session: In a special case which was presented to the court to determine whether a particular power of attorney, in similar form to many other powers of attorney, was valid as a continuing power of attorney for the purposes of s 15 of the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, the court held that the special case was competent, that the power of attorney was a valid continuing power of attorney for the purposes of s 15 of the 2000 Act, and it resolved the conflict of authority which had created doubt about the legal position. 

Bank – Contract. The parties made a contract, whereby the claimants, Decura, would exclusively supply the defendant company, UBS with financial products and services. A dispute arose out of Decura's asserted right to terminate pursuant to cl 20 of the contract. The Commercial Court, in finding for UBS, held that the word 'material' would be defined as 'substantial' or 'insignificant', and that, on the wording of the contract, there had been no cessation of a part of UBS' business that proved Decura's case. 

Registered land – Rectification of Land Register – Standard security – Disposition by creditor on sale. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuer sought rectification of the Land Register in relation to a property he had purchased from a bank, the bank having obtained a warrant from the court to sell the property under the power of sale in its standard security, without serving a calling-up notice, and the first defender, on the pursuer applying to register the disposition, having deleted the bank's standard security from the charges section of the title sheet but retained entries for the second and third defenders' securities, the court held that on the disposition being duly recorded in the register the property was disburdened of the bank's standard security and of the second and third defenders' securities and the retention of the entries for the latter was an inaccuracy in the register requiring rectification. 

Professional misconduct – Disciplinary proceedings. The appellant appealed against the decision of the respondent General Pharmaceutical Council's Fitness to Practice Committee (the panel), finding charges against him proved and removing him from the register. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that there had been no serious procedural or other irregularity which cast any doubt on the fairness of the hearing. Further, the panel had not erred in law in deciding that essentially factual issue against the appellant and it could not be said that it had been wrong. 

Sentence – Detention. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, substituted a sentence of five years' detention in a young offender institution for one of seven years' detention, in circumstances where the offender had committed a string of robberies and attempted robberies, including whilst on licence and latterly whilst on bail. 

The petitioners were both experienced midwives employed by the employer health board. Both were practising Roman Catholics who objected to 'delegating, supervising and/or supporting staff to participate in and provide care to patients throughout the termination process'. The question was the meaning of the words 'to participate in any treatment authorised by this Act to which he has a conscientious objection' as set out in s 4 of the Abortion Act 1967. The Supreme Court held that it was unlikely that, in enacting the conscience clause, Parliament had in mind the host of ancillary, administrative and managerial tasks that might be associated with those acts. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimants entered into loan arrangements with the first defendant bank's predecessor. They fell into arrears and the bank subsequently appointed receivers. The claimants brought claims alleging that the bank was in breach of contract by appointing receivers. The claimants further alleged that the receivers were in breach of duty in failing to secure best price for properties. In allowing summary judgment against the claimants, the Chancery Division held that there was no evidence of the bank giving up its rights under various security documents, or varying them. The bank had had the right to appoint receivers on an unsatisfied demand. Further, the claim against the receivers had to fail on the facts.