Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. The proceedings concerned renewed applications for permission to appeal against decisions of the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) dismissing the applicants' appeals against the refusal of their application for variations of their existing leave to remain as Tier-1 (Post-Study Work) Migrants. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in refusing the applications, held, inter alia, that, in the circumstances, it was not arguable that the applicants had had a legitimate expectation that, after 6 April, their applications would be determined in accordance with the former policy. 

Criminal law – Offensive weapons. High Court of Justiciary: Allowing an appeal against conviction by an appellant who was found guilty of having a bladed article, namely two knives, with him in a public place, without reasonable excuse, the court held that where lack of knowledge of the offending item was proffered as an excuse by an accused person in evidence, as in this case, it was almost inevitable that an appropriate direction should be given that the jury might find such an excuse to exist, however the sheriff had made no mention of the defence of reasonable excuse in his charge to the jury. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employer appealed against an employment tribunal's finding that the employee was a disabled person during two periods of absences. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that there was no evidence justifying the tribunal's finding in respect of the first period of absence. 

Professional misconduct – Disciplinary proceedings. The appellant pharmacist appealed against the decision of the Fitness to Practise Panel (the FPP) of the respondent General Pharmaceutical Council to remove his name from the register of pharmacists. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the FPP had not erred in finding that the appellant had not been subjected to unacceptable, inappropriate or undue pressure and had lacked insight into his actions. It concluded that there was no error in the imposition of the sanction. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The proceedings concerned the mother's appeal against a decision about her contact with her children and the imposition of a restriction order, under s 91(14) of the Children Act 1989, on her making further applications in relation to the children for two years. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appeal, held that the judge's omission to set out his conclusions about the contact centre material in his judgment was fatal to his decision. 

Warranty – Breach. The claimant company, THG, bought shares in a company controlled by the defendants. It commenced proceedings, seeking damages for breach of warranty. The defendants counterclaimed, seeking damages for breach of warranty regarding THG's accounts and damages for deceit. The Commercial Court held that, among other things, the claimant's warranty claim succeeded, the defendants' warranty claim also succeeded, but the defendants' claim in deceit would fail. 

Company – Scheme of arrangement. The Chancery Division sanctions schemes of arrangement in respect of the Apcoa group, a leading pan European car park operator. 

Criminal law – Fraud. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed the prosecution's application for leave to appeal a terminating ruling pursuant to s 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The judge had upheld the defendants' submission of no case to answer in respect of a count of fraud, contrary to s 1(4) of the Fraud Act 2006. The court held that the prosecution had been entitled to suggest that the defendants, who were accused of acting as unlicensed gangmasters, had occupied a position where they had been expected to safeguard or not to act against the interests of the workers pursuant to s 4 of the 2006 Act. 

Marriage – Validity. The parties were parents to two children. The petitioner wife was a Sunni Muslim, whereas the respondent husband was a member of the Ahmahdi faith. At the time of the celebration of their marriage in Lahore in September 2005, both parties were resident and, it appeared, domiciled in Pakistan. The petitioner sought a declaration pursuant to s 55(1)(a) and (b) of the Family Law Act 1986 to the effect that the marriage was at its inception a valid marriage and that it subsisted as such on 18 March 2013, being the date upon which her current divorce petition had been issued. The Family Division held that the marriage had indeed been valid. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of outline planning permission for the development of up to 400 dwellings and full planning permission for the change of use from agricultural land to use as a suitable alternative natural greenspace. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that, reading the officer report as a whole and in the context of oral advice given to members, it could not be said that the members had been significantly misled by the advice given to them.