Latest Cases

Consumer credit – Agreement. The claimant was the successor company to which Northern Rock Building Society transferred its business in 1997. It brought a claim against the defendant borrowers seeking declarations, among other things that the rights and remedies available under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 Act, or protections equivalent to such rights and remedies, had not been imported into unregulated agreements, notwithstanding that they fell outside the statutory scheme and that it had not breached of its obligations under the agreements. The Chancery Division ruled that the rights and remedies in relation to s 77A had been imported into the agreement and that the claimant was in breach of its obligations under the agreements by issuing the defendants with statements which did not comply with s 77A and by not repaying or re-crediting to the defendants interest or default sums paid by them during the alleged period of non-compliance and by virtue of its failure to indemnify the defendants in respect of its breach of s 77A. 

European Union – Regulations. The General Court of the European Union ruled on the action brought by Sport-pari ZAO (Sport-pari) for annulment of certain decisions and regulations adopted and maintained by the European Council concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus. The General Court allowed the action and annulled the contested acts on the basis, amongst other things, that the European Council had not established that the ground alleged against Sport-pari to justify its continued listing had been well founded. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal by the claimant company against the discharge of three interim third party debt orders which had been obtained by the claimant on a without notice basis. 

Crown – Prerogative. The claimant Yemeni national issued judicial review proceedings, seeking the quashing of the defendant Secretary of State's decision refusing her application for a British passport and a declaration that she was entitled to rely on DNA testing. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Secretary of State had been entitled to conclude that the claimant had failed to establish her identity and, accordingly, the stage of establishing her relationship had not been reached, such that the issue of DNA testing had not arisen on the evidence available to the Secretary of State. 

Loan – Recovery. The claimants brought proceedings, seeking to recover a loan that they claimed to have made to the defendants to allow them to purchase a farmhouse. The Chancery Division held that the relevant loan and charge deeds had been validly made, and that the defendants could not deny that the loan was recoverable. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action by Formula One Licensing BV (Formula One) for annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning opposition proceedings between Racing-Live and Formula One regarding the application for registration of a figurative sign depicting: 'F1-LIVE' as a Community trade mark. 

Trust and trustee – Constructive trust. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the defendant's appeal against the decision of a judge in the county court in which he made a declaration that the defendant held a property on trust for herself and the claimant in equal shares. The court held, amongst other things, that the facts found by the judge were not inconsistent with a common intention to share the beneficial interest in the property equally, in circumstances where that property and a previous property had been held in the defendant's sole name. The judge had found that the properties had been held in the defendant's sole name to enable her to claim benefits as a single women and then as a single mother. However, the court further held that it had not been necessary for the claimant to advance his unlawful agreement in order to make good his claim to a constructive trust. 

Contract – Breach of contract. The claimant's company issued proceedings against the defendant bank (Lloyds) for breach of contract and/or negligence on the basis that its liquidation was the reasonably foreseeable consequence of Lloyd's failure to pay funds to a third party. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that Lloyds was in breach of contract in not honouring an instruction to pay. However, assuming that there had been no break in the chain of causation, the claim was too remote, as Lloyds had not taken the risk of being liable for the consequences of a default in the event of the payment being late because of bank error. 

Injunction – Mandatory injunction. The parties, which were both involved in insurance, entered into a standard terms of business agreement. The claimant company sought a mandatory injunction that money which had been removed from an account by the defendant company be repaired. The Commercial Court held that, on the evidence, the claimant had made out its case for a mandatory injunction that the money be paid back into the trust account. 

Solicitor – Costs. The proceedings concerned a claim by Edwin Coe LLP (Coe) against the first and second defendants, for sums said to be due in respect of the provision of legal services. Neither defendant had sought assessment, pursuant to s 70 of the Solicitors Act 1974, of any of the bills which formed the subject of the claims within one month of delivery. The defendants brought CPR Pt 20 proceedings against Coe, alleging negligence. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the CPR Pt 20 claim and gave judgment for Coe against the first and second defendants.