Latest Cases

Injunction – Interim injunction. The proceedings concerned an alleged unlawful means conspiracy between the defendants to steal business from the claimant companies. The claimants made an application for urgent injunctions on notice against a number of the defendants. The Queen's Bench Division made rulings with regard to the undertakings and springboard relief arising from them. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to face trial for thefts dating from 2002. The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal, held that there had been a culpable delay of four years due to failure to make inquiries of the Home Office as to the appellant's contact details. Given that delay coupled with the eight year passage of time since the alleged offences, the appellant had established that to order his return would be a disproportionate and unjustified interference with his rights and those of his family under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Turkish nationals sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to grant them three years' discretionary leave to remain in the United Kingdom, rather than indefinite leave to remain. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Secretary of State's failure to act in accordance with her promise to the claimant's Member of Parliament that she would treat the case as a priority within the legacy programme had not led to historical injustice. There could be no illegality in denying an entitlement to a decision any earlier, as no such entitlement had existed. 

Immigration – Deportation. The issue in the judicial review proceedings was whether the claimant European Economic Area citizens were entitled to apply in country for revocation of the deportation orders made against them and to appeal in country against the refusals to revoke the deportation orders. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the applications, held that the Secretary of State had been entitled to refuse to consider in-country revocation applications and appeals. Further, on the proper construction of the legislation, the Secretary of State had made no immigration decisions in the claimants' cases. 

Child – Protection. The claimant convicted sex offender sought judicial review of the legality of arrangements made by the police for the retention and disclosure of information and data relating to him. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights were engaged, but the schemes were in accordance with the law because they were not arbitrary or disproportionate and could be justified. Further, the schemes gave full effect to X (South Yorkshire) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2012] All ER (D) 232 (Oct)). 

Civil procedure – Breach of interdict – Preliminary applications and objections. Court of Session: In proceedings by the Law Society of Scotland for breach of interdict by a solicitor who was interdicted from holding himself out as entitled by law to practice as a solicitor and from pretending to be a solicitor, the court, refusing several preliminary applications and objections in a motion by the respondent, held that the Law Society was not in contempt of court, the petition was not irrelevant, the proceedings were not raised in bad faith, and that the diet of proof should not be discharged because of the respondent's lack of representation. 

Road traffic – Accident. The claimant brought a claim against the defendant driver, contending that she had suffered injuries which had been caused when the defendant's car had come into contact with her, sending her to the ground. The Queen's Bench Division, in giving judgment for the claimant with damages to be assessed, held that primary liability had been established and that the evidence did not justify a finding of contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a member state under which an exemption from gift tax relating to certain properties that were protected on account of their forming part of the national cultural and historical heritage was limited to those properties situated in the territory of that member state, provided that that exemption was not excluded in the case of properties that could form part of the cultural and historical heritage of that member state despite being located in the territory of another state. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The claimant Albanian national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decisions to certify his human rights claim as clearly unfounded and to detain him pending removal. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that, despite interference with the claimant's family life, the Secretary of State's decision to certify that the claimant's human rights claim had been clearly unfounded had been rational and lawful. Further, it had been lawful for detention to be maintained, in particular, when family proceedings had been contemplated. 

Negligence – Damage. The deceased was admitted to the accident and emergency department of the defendant hospital, she died and her husband, the claimant brought a claim on behalf of her estate. The defendant admitted some of the breaches of duty pleaded but maintained that the deceased would have died even if there had been earlier diagnosis and she had received reasonably competent treatment within the time available. The Queen's Bench Division held that had the deceased been treated non-negligently during and following her arrival at the hospital, she would probably have survived.