Latest Cases

Employment – Unfair dismissal. The employee had committed assaults in the workplace because of his paranoid schizophrenic illness. The employment tribunal found that the employer had dismissed him because of him having committed acts of gross misconduct and that it had had reasonable grounds for its belief in that regard. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employee's appeal, held that the tribunal's apparent failure to consider whether there had been mitigating circumstances had made its decision unsafe. 

Insurance – Contract of insurance. The claimant brought a claim against his insurers in respect of damage inflicted by former tenants to the property when they left. The insurance company disputed certain aspects of the claim. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claim had not been fraudulent however, not all the damage was 'malicious' damage and therefore not all could be claimed for on the policy. 

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. 

Injunction – Summary procedure. On an application for summary judgment for trespass to land, the Chancery Division gave summary judgment in respect of certain issues in which it held that the defendants had no realistic prospect of defending the claim for an injunction at trial. 

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. 

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. 

Practice – Interim remedy. The claimant sought, amongst other things, a stay of art 5A of the Export Control (Russia, Crimea and Sevastopol Sanctions) (Amendment) Order 2014, SI 2014/2932. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the provisions were sufficiently certain and there was no risk of serious or irreparable damage to the claimant. Further, interim relief would inevitably risk lessening the effectiveness of the European Union sanctions, such that the balance of convenience plainly favoured allowing art 5A of the Order to come into effect. 

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. 

Contract – Condition. The defendants paid a deposit for the purchase of a property, but failed to complete the purchase. The claimants commenced proceedings. The Chancery Division held that, on the true construction of the contract between the parties, the claimants were entitled to damages of £210,000 in respect of the defendants' breach of contract. 

Compensation – Criminal Injuries. The appeal concerned the ability of a child, CP, to claim criminal injuries compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), as a result of being born with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, as a direct consequence of her mother's excessive drinking while pregnant. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed CP's appeal against the determination of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber). Among other things, the court rejected CP's contention that a foetus was capable of being 'any other person' within the meaning of s 23 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and held that, if the foetus was not another person at the time of the administration of the noxious substance, the offence could not be complete at that point.