Latest Cases

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimants challenged the defendant local planning authority's grant of outline planning permission and conservation area consent for redevelopment of a retail centre. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimants had not suffered any prejudice from non-disclosure of a viability report, nor had the authority's committee been misled or not given proper information. Further, nothing required a review mechanism to ensure a maximum of affordable housing and a sequential test to planning applications was not required. 

Contract – Construction. The claimant's husband had been engaged by the defendant under a contract for services as a security escort in Iraq. He died in the course of carrying out his duties and an issue arose as to the payment to which the claimant was entitled under the contract. She contended that she was entitled to a minimum lump sum payment of US$200,000. The judge dismissed her claim. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed her appeal as, on the true construction of the contractual documentation, there had been no obligation that the sums due to her were to be paid by way of lump sum and, so long as she had received US$200,000, there had been no breach of contract. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2, 6(1) and 16 of Council Directive (EC) 2000/78 (establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation). The request had been made in proceedings between Mr Schmitzer and the Austrian Federal Minister for the Interior concerning the legality of the system for remuneration of public servants adopted by the Austrian legislature with a view to ending age-based discrimination. 

Trust and trustee – Removal of trustee. The proceedings concerned the administration of an estate. The claimant, who was the beneficiary of the trust affecting the estate, brought proceedings against the trustees. The Chancery Division held that, among other things, it would be appropriate to replace one of the trustees, and for the trustees to pay compensation for failure to achieve the repair and re-letting of a house and to take steps to obtain possession of a cottage on the estate. 

Immigration – Leave to remain – Fresh claim. Court of Session: Dismissing a judicial review petition by a failed Zimbabwean asylum seeker challenging a decision refusing to treat her further submissions as a fresh claim, the court (the asylum claim having been abandoned), concluded that the decision-maker had not erred in addressing the petitioner's case based on the right to a family and private life. 

Immigration – Leave to enter. MK was a dissident Iranian politician resident in Paris. She had been excluded from the United Kingdom by the Secretary of State, on the advice of the Foreign Office, on the ground that her presence would not be conducive to the public good. The Supreme Court dismissed the claimants' appeal arising from the Secretary of State's decision and held, amongst other things, that to reject the Foreign Office assessment of the risks to national security, public safety and the rights of others would be to step beyond the proper function of a court of review and would involve rejecting by far the strongest and best qualified evidence before it. 

Landlord and tenant – Tenancy. The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against a judgement of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, which had upheld an order for possession made against the appellant in circumstances where the appellant's wife, as joint tenant of a secure weekly tenancy, had unilaterally terminated the tenancy. The Court held that the appellant's arguments based on art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and art 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention failed. 

Will – Family provision. The claimant brought a claim in respect of her deceased mother's estate, after she was excluded from her mother's will. The issue was whether she had a claim on the basis of proprietary estoppel or under the under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that, on the facts, any mention of inheritance had not been intended to be taken seriously or been such that might reasonably have been expected to have been relied on by the claimant. Further, taking into account all the factors under s 3 of the Act, the value judgment was that the claimant's conduct outweighed all of the factors in her favour and her claim under the act had to fail. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission to erect a wind turbine to the interested party. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the authority had not made information available to allow effective participation in democratic decision-making and could not demonstrate that it would inevitably have come to the same conclusion. Further, the authority had been wrong to assume that there had been a financial involvement, allowing a higher noise level. 

Electricity – Supply. The defendant Gas and Electricity Markets Authority decided that the claimant company was subject to the duty to secure access to rival electricity suppliers, under European Parliament and Council Directive (EC) 2009/72 and that the duty could never be shared. The claimant sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that, on the proper construction of the relevant 'system' for the purpose of applying the duty to secure third party access, the Authority had erred in holding that there could only be one distribution exemption holder per network.