Latest Cases

European Union – Regulations. The General Court of the European Union ruled on the action brought by BT Telecommuications PUE for annulment of certain decisions and regulations adopted and maintained by the European Council concerning restrictive measures adopted against Belarus. The General Court annulled certain of those decisions and regulations but dismissed the rest of the action as being inadmissible. 

Animal – Protection. In judicial review proceedings, the claimant sought declarations that certain types of conduct did not fall within the prohibition, in art 18(1)(b) of European Parliament and Council Regulation 1223/2009, on the placing on the Community market of cosmetics containing ingredients which, in order to meet the requirements of the Regulation, had been tested on animals, and so would not involve the commission of a criminal offence. The Administrative Court held that there was a real issue of law that needed to be resolved. Accordingly, it referred questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling. 

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. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the defendant local planning authority to discharge a condition of the planning permission for a nine-turbine wind farm. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority had not acted unlawfully in discharging the condition and the claimant had no expectation of consultation. Further, no exceptional circumstances had existed which had led to the conclusion that the authority had acted so unfairly as to have abused its powers. 

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. 

Power of attorney – Lasting power of attorney. The Court of Protection allowed an application by the Public Guardian for the court to revoke a Lasting Power of Attorney for property and affairs made on the ground that the donee of the power had behaved in a way that contravened her authority or was not in the donor's best interests. 

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. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The husband had been excluded from the family home, following the grant of a non-molestation order made following a without notice hearing. During the subsequent proceedings, the husband's application for relief from sanction was dismissed. In allowing the husband's appeal, the Family Court highlighted important principles applicable to such cases. 

European Union – Regulations. The General Court of the European Union ruled on the action brought by BelTechExport ZAO for annulment of certain decisions and regulations adopted and maintained by the European Council concerning restrictive measures adopted against Belarus. The General Court annulled certain of those decisions and regulations but dismissed the rest of the action as being inadmissible. 

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.