Latest Cases

Human rights – Inhuman or degrading treatment. The Secretary of State had endeavoured to deport the appellants to Algeria for national security reasons. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) had considered evidence as to detention conditions in Algeria at a facility where the appellants would be held and interrogated and found that, while conditions were primitive, there would be no breach of art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appellant's appeal and remitted the matter for redetermination in circumstances where the SIAC had misdirected itself as to the correct approach. 

European Union – Legal basis of regulation. The General Court of the European Union granted the application by the applicants in Case T-420/11 for annulment of: (i) Council Decision 2011/299/CFSP; (ii) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2011; (iii) Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012, in so far as those measures concerned the applicants. The General Court further granted the application by the applicants in Case T‑56/12 for the annulment of: (i) Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP; (ii) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011; and (iii) Regulation No 267/2012, in so far as those measures concerned the applicants. 

European Union – Legal basis of regulation. The General Court of the European Union granted the application by Bank Tejarat for annulment of certain decisions and regulations of the European Council concerning restrictive measures against Iran in so far as they concerned Bank Tejarat. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant company challenged the defendant Secretary of State's decision, refusing planning permission for demolition of existing buildings and the construction and operation of a recycling and energy recovery facility. The Planning Court, in allowing the application, held that the Secretary of State had failed to consider the allocation of the site as a waste management facility in the Green Belt and a statement that the site would be removed from the Green Belt in the future, and to weigh those factors in the very special circumstances balance alongside those matters which he had taken into account. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Spain to face trial for rape and attempted murder on the basis that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him given his psychiatric illness, which gave rise to a risk of suicide. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that there was no proper basis for supposing that the Spanish authorities would not discharge their obligations to take appropriate steps to protect the appellant from the risk of suicide. In particular, there was no evidential basis for supposing that the communication difficulties he feared would materialise. 

European Union – Pensions. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 7(2)(c) of Regulation 1408/71 should be interpreted as meaning that a bilateral agreement which related to the social security benefits of nationals of one of the signatory states which had been concluded on a date when one of the two signatory states had not yet acceded to the European Union and which was not listed in Annex III to that regulation did not continue to apply to the situation of political refugees who were repatriated to their state of origin before the bilateral agreement had been concluded and the regulation had entered into force (see 45] of the judgment). 

Crown Court – Costs. In a Crown Court ruling, the judge held that where 'cell site', telephone and similar material was served by the prosecution upon the defence in digital form, such material had to be included as 'pages of prosecution evidence' for graduated fee purposes, and payment made to defence advocates on that basis. 

National Health Service – Dentist. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on the proper interpretation of the Standard General Dental Services Contract entered into in accordance with the National Health Service (General Dental Services Contracts) Wales Regulations 2006, SI 2006/490. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against the judge's decision sending his case to the Secretary of State for her decision whether the appellant was to be extradited in order to face trial for the war crime of shooting dead a civilian in 1991. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that it would not be unjust to extradite the appellant due to the passage of time and it would not be oppressive to extradite him on the basis of his physical and mental condition. 

Arbitration – Adjudication. St Austell Printing Company Ltd (St A) engaged Dawnus Construction Holdings Ltd (Dawnus) to design and construct two warehouse/industrial units. A dispute arose about payment, and the matter was considered by an arbitrator. St A raised two grounds of objection to the arbitrator's conclusions. The Commercial Court held that both grounds of objection would fail, and Dawnus was entitled to summary judgment on the sums ordered by the adjudicator.