Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The child, on the father's admission, had been battered on several occasions, between birth and the age of four months. The court was asked to decide on the scale or degree of the mother's knowledge of what the father was doing. The Family Division held that it was satisfied that the mother had known that the father had been harming their daughter, but for certain reasons, she chose not to take any action to protect her. 

Divorce – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing a wife's appeal in respect of the distribution of property and allocation of spousal maintenance following divorce, held that none of the grounds of appeal had persuaded it that the judge had been in error either in the internal elements of the analysis which she had undertaken or in the overall conclusions to which she had come. 

Negligence – Defective premises. The claimants were owners of some apartments in two blocks built by the defendant company. They brought proceedings under the Defective Premises Act 1972, alleging that their apartments had not been fit for habitation when completed. The Technology and Construction Court made findings on the scope of the Act, and the different heads of damage. Awards were made for residual blight on the value of the properties following remedial work, and for damages for damages for distress and inconvenience. 

Criminal law – Conviction. The defendants, D1 and D2, had been convicted of the murder of a British soldier. D1 had been sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order and D2 had been sentenced to life imprisonment, with a minimum term of 45 years. D1 sought permission to appeal against conviction and sentence and D2, having been granted leave, appealed against sentence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, refused D1's applications. The submission that the judge had erred in law in his direction to the jury as to the definition of murder, namely, that the 'Queen's peace' meant no more than the deceased had not been engaged in a war or rebellion against the state, was rejected. Further, the court dismissed D2's appeal and held that the judge had been entitled to pass the sentence he had. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The General Court of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 56 and 57 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The request has been made in criminal proceedings brought against Mr Edgard De Clercq and others, inter alia, for having infringed, on several occasions, an obligation to make a declaration in respect of posted workers imposed by Belgian national legislation. 

European Union – Immigration. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 4 of Council Directive (EC) 2004/83 (on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted) and arts 3 and 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The requests had been made in proceedings between A, B and C, who were third country nationals, and the Netherlands State Secretary for Security and Justice concerning the rejection of their applications for asylum in the Netherlands. 

Local authority – Statutory powers. The claimant issued proceedings against the defendant local authority for its allegedly negligent failure to remove her from her mother's care, and its liability for the physical and sexual abuse allegedly suffered in foster care. The Queen's Bench Division, in dismissing the claim, held that the negligence allegations failed on the facts. Further, as the authority had no control over the foster parents, it was not vicariously liable for their acts and it would not be fair, just and reasonable for a non-delegable duty to be imposed. 

Damages – Personal injury. The claimants had a baby that was still-born. They sued the defendant hospital. The hospital admitted negligence in the case of the wife but disputed that the husband could be a secondary victim of the still birth. The Queen's Bench Division held that the authorities showed that the control mechanisms in relation to secondary victims often had the effect of excluding worthy cases and, on the facts, the husband could not succeed and his claim would be dismissed. 

Mental health – Persons who lack capacity. A dispute arose concerning the capacity of CT. The Court of Protection found in favour of CT's daughter, EY, and held that CT had had capacity to sever a joint tenancy on property that he owned. EY sought an order for costs against the Office of the Public Guardian. The court held that, in the circumstances, EY had been aggressive and disingenuous, and would be required to pay her own costs. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Max Mara Fashion Group Srl for the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Max Mara Fashion Group Srl and Mackays Stores Ltd (Mackays) regarding the application by Mackays for registration of a figurative mark 'M&Co.' as a Community trade mark.