Latest Cases

Unfair dismissal – Constructive dismissal. The present appeal against a decision of the employment tribunal raised questions as to the interpretation and effect of a list of issues. The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the employee's appeal against the tribunal's decision, deciding that a list of issues was not a pleading, but a tool to facilitate a hearing, and could not be approached with the formality one might approach a commercial contract or pleading. Even if it was, the issues list in the present case could not be construed as the employee had contended. 

Employment – Transfer of trade, business or undertaking. The third respondent, who was employed by the second respondent, carried out harassment of the employee before and after her transfer to the first respondent. The employment tribunal held, among other things, that the second respondent was vicariously liable for the third respondent's acts while the employee was employed by it, but not after her transfer. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, among other things, held that the employee's appeal against the tribunal's failure to hold the first respondent liable for the acts of harassment committed by the third respondent had to be allowed. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection considered an application by a health provider to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration from AB, who had been unconscious since 2005 with no prospect of recovery. The court held that it was in AB's best interests for artificial nutrition and hydration to be withdrawn. 

Criminal procedure – Apparent bias – Application to decline jurisdiction. High Court of Justiciary: In an application by the Crown to set aside an acquittal and grant authority to bring a new prosecution, a trial judge in 2007 having acquitted the respondent of charges of the rape and murder of two girls in 1977, the court rejected the respondent's application submitting that the Lord Justice Clerk, who had presided over another trial involving him 12 years earlier, should decline jurisdiction to hear the double jeopardy application, as the impartial and informed observer would not suspect bias as a result of the Lord Justice Clerk's past involvement with the respondent. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that cl 5(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work should be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, pending the completion of competitive selection procedures for the recruitment of tenured staff of schools administered by the state, authorised the renewal of fixed-term employment contracts to fill posts of teachers and administrative, technical and auxiliary staff that were vacant and unfilled without stating a definite period for the completion of those procedures and while excluding any possibility, for those teachers and staff, of obtaining compensation for any damage suffered on account of such a renewal. 

Criminal procedure – Leave to appeal. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a conviction for carrying out a fraudulent scheme, the court held that it would not be appropriate to grant leave to appeal on any of the three grounds, alleging contraventions of art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and presented as compatibility issues, on which the application was based. 

Pension – Pension scheme. In the course of references made to the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) concerning contribution notices issued against two controlling shareholders in a company in liquidation which had operated an occupational pension scheme, the tribunal ruled on two applications made by: (i) one of the controlling shareholders (DG); and (ii) the trustee of that scheme, relating to the question as to whether certain documents held by DG could not be disclosed in the proceedings relating to those references on the grounds that legal professional privilege attached to them. 

Divorce – Jurisdiction. The parties had been married. The husband sought a separation order from the Italian court and the wife issued divorce proceedings in England. The wife's proceedings were stayed. The Italian court confirmed its jurisdiction and granted the husband the order, which was a precursor to divorce in Italy. The wife issued a second petition for divorce and the husband applied for a divorce in Italy. The Family Division, in dismissing the wife's petitions, held that the Italian court had been seised when her first petition had been made and that that had not been lost by the time the wife had issued her second petition. 

Minor – Abduction. A Maltese girl was brought by her mother to the United Kingdom without the knowledge or consent of the father. The father applied to the court for her return to Malta. The mother and K opposed the application. The Family Division dismissed the application and found that all three defences under the Hague Convention had been made out and K would not be returned to Malta as she had successfully established family life in the UK. 

Compensation – Crime. The claimant sought compensation, under s 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, following the quashing of his conviction for possession of a false identity card with intent. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant's conviction had been quashed on the basis of a newly discovered matter of law on the already known facts. Accordingly, the subsequent appreciation, on facts and circumstances known at the time of the proceedings, that the claimant had had an available statutory defence was not capable being a 'newly discovered fact' within the meaning of s 133 of the 1988 Act.