Latest Cases

Mental health – Court of Protection. The proceedings concerned the question of where an adult, SW, who lacked capacity, was habitually resident, for the purposes of determining whether the English court had jurisdiction to deal with applications under the Metal Capacity Act 2005. The Court of Protection held that the definition of 'habitual residence' under the Act should be the same as that applied in other family law instruments, including Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003, and SW had been habitually resident in England for purposes of the Act. 

Landlord and tenant – Lease. The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the defendant First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (the FTT) making a further management order. It alleged that the FTT had had no jurisdiction to make the order under s 24 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the order was in respect of land outwith the leaseholders' premises, but which was properly 'in relation' to those premises. Accordingly, it was within the scope of s 24 of the Act and within the FTT's jurisdiction. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant Gambian national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision that she had not met the requirements of para 284 of the Immigration Rules and that she had not qualified under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that there had been no error as to para 284 of the Immigration Rules. Further, despite the Secretary of State's error in having assessed the matter by reference to Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules, when that provision had not applied to the claimant's application, no injustice had been caused. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The claimant bank applied to commit the first defendant to prison for contempt for breaching two worldwide freezing orders. The Commercial Court found that the first defendant had failed to provide disclosure of his assets and had knowingly assisted companies' failure to provide disclosure of their assets. However, the other three grounds of alleged contempt were rejected, as the claimant had not established breach of the orders to the criminal standard. 

Police – Disclosure of information. The claimant doctor sought judicial review of the defendant Metropolitan Police Service's (the MPS) decision that unlawfully obtained material should be provided to the General Medical Council. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the MPS had erred by failing to carry out the careful balancing exercise of competing interests required by art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the fact that the material had been obtained unlawfully did not outweigh the legitimate aim served by its disclosure and the claimant's rights under art 8 of the Convention had not been violated. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union granted the declaration sought by the European Commission that by failing to ensure the collection and treatment of urban waste water in certain agglomerations, Belgium had failed to fulfil its obligations under arts 3 and 4 of Council Directive (EEC) 91/271 (concerning urban waste water treatment). 

Habeas corpus – Grounds for writ of habeas corpus. The mother of two children had been found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to 28 days' imprisonment. The Administrative Court refused to grant a writ of habeas corpus and stated that, in the circumstances, habeas corpus was an entirely misconceived remedy, there was a right of appeal, the mother was represented and she had legal aid. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that the Administrative Court had been entirely right to have proceeded as it had and for the reasons it had given. 

European Union – EU Institutions. The Court of Justice of the European Union allowed the appeal by Mr Nencini, a former member of the European Parliament, against a judgment of the General Court of the European Union in which the General Court had dismissed his action for annulment of the decision of the Secretary General of the European Parliament regarding the recovery of certain expenses received by Mr Nencini in respect of, inter alia, travel and parliamentary assistance expenses unduly paid. 

European Union – Public procurement. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the application by Computer Resources International (Luxembourg) SA for annulment of the decision of the Publications Office of the European Union to accept the tenders submitted by the consortium formed by the applicant and another company, concerning the provision of computer services for software development and maintenance, consultancy and assistance for different types of information technology, and to award the framework contracts to other tenderers. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The Fitness to Practise Panel (the FPP) of the respondent General Medical Council found that the appellant psychiatrist had given evidence outside his professional competence and had failed to explain the reasons for his opinion. The appellant appealed against those findings and the suspension of his registration for a period of three months. The Administrative Court held that the FPP's findings that the allegations against the appellant had been proved had been correct. However, the FPP had not explained why the imposition of a condition on the appellant's registration had not been a sufficient sanction, resulting in a disproportionate sanction.