Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. Following the main judgment in the proceedings, in which orders were made against a number of websites that had been selling fake goods, the Chancery Division made similar orders against two further websites. 

Landlord and tenant – Leasehold enfranchisement. The claimant freeholders had successfully issued proceedings contending that a notice served by the defendants claiming collective enfranchisement had not complied with the requirements of s 13(3)(e) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that those matters required to be included on the notice by s 13(3)(e) went to the very heart of the right to collective enfranchisement and, consequently, the statutory scheme, on its proper interpretation, pointed clearly in favour of the invalidity of the notice by virtue of the non-compliance. 

Estoppel – Issue estoppel. The claimant had issued proceedings in the employment tribunal against the defendant employer. He had brought his claim out of time and the tribunal declined to exercise its jurisdiction to hear the claim. Subsequently, the claimant issued proceedings in negligence and breach of contract in the High Court. His claim was struck out on the ground of issue estoppel. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal. It held that there was no justification for the principle applying in circumstances where there had been no actual adjudication of any issue and no action by a party which would justify him as having consented, either expressly or by implication, to having conceded the issue by choosing not to have the matter formally determined. The fact that there had been a substantive hearing of the issue of jurisdiction had not been enough to have brought the principle of issue estoppel into play. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant was granted permission to seek judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision 15 months after she had made another decision, granting the claimant discretionary leave to remain for 30 months. The claimant sought permission to amend the application to go forward on the basis that the discretionary leave to remain decision was the decision under challenge. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the case was not arguable and it was substantially out of time. Further, permission had been granted on a completely false basis, which had been unexplained. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant bus and coach company sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's decision to serve a breach of condition notice, alleging a failure to comply with a condition of the planning permission, requiring that no repairs or maintenance of vehicles, or other industrial or commercial activities take place outside specified hours. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the words 'industrial or commercial activities' included the activity of starting a bus or coach in readiness for its departure from the depot and that the authority had been aware that buses and coaches had a 'warm up' time. 

Family proceedings – Evidence. During the course of care proceedings the Family Division considered what further assessment, if any, there should be of the father, in circumstances where the father, who lived in Somaliland, wished to care for the children himself. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office had advised against travel to Somaliland and the court held that it would not be appropriate for the court to authorise an independent social worker travelling to the region to assess the father. 

Immigration – Asylum. The appellant was a national of Belarus, whose principal claim to remain in the United Kingdom was based on his allegation that he had a well-founded fear of persecution if he were to be returned to Belarus, on account of his political opinions and activities there some 15 years ago. The First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (FTT) dismissed his claim. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held, inter alia, that there had been no error of law in the way in which the FTT had approached its task or in its reasoning or conclusions. 

Sale of goods – Delivery. The proceedings concerned a claim against the defendant for alleged non-payment of a series of invoices relating to the sale of pharmaceutical goods by the claimant to the defendant. Judgement was given against the defendant and it appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the appeal had amounted to no more than an attempt to re-litigate the issues of fact and credibility which had been decided by the judge at trial. 

Costs – Summary assessment of costs. In a costs application for summary assessment, where the interested party had failed to comply with the practice direction, the claimant submitted that the sanction for late failure to comply should be no costs. The Technology and Construction Court held that there was no sanction specified in CPR PD 44 and in any event having decided that in principle that the interested party should have its reasonable costs. To punish the interested party for its failure in effect to the tune of some £40,000 would be wholly disproportionate. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The claimant Eritrean national contended she was a former relevant child and, as such, the defendant local authority owed duties to her, even though she had never been a looked after child on account of her age having been assessed as being over 18. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the claimant had not been a former relevant child, even if she had been 16 when she had entered the United Kingdom, as she had not, in fact, been looked after by the authority. However, her age was relevant, as the discretion to provide her with accommodation might arise if the authority had acted unlawfully in failing to accommodate her, if she had been 16 when she had arrived in the UK.