Latest Cases

Advertising – Comparative advertising. Sainsbury's sought judicial review of the decision of the defendant Independent Reviewer of Advertising Standards Authority Adjudications that there had been no substantial flaw in a decision of the first interested party, the Advertising Standards Authority (the ASA) with respect to Tesco's price comparison scheme. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the Independent Reviewer had not been wrong in law or Wednesbury unreasonable in concluding that the ASA's decision had not been substantially flawed. 

Extradition – European arrest warrant. By a European arrest warrant (EAW), the respondent sought the appellant's surrender from Gibraltar to face criminal proceedings for an offence allegedly committed in 1992. The appellant's challenges to the validity of the EAW were rejected and he appealed. The central issue was whether the charge intended under the present penal code involved a real risk that the appellant would be pursued for acts which had not, in 1992, constituted such an offence. The Privy Council, in dismissing the appeal, held, inter alia, that there was nothing in the language of the Spanish Constitution or in common sense to compel a conclusion that there should be no surrender unless the relevant provision under the current penal code had had a single analogue in the previous penal code. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings and development of an energy recovery facility on a site. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority had not erred in its interpretation of the relevant waste plan or in its assessment of Metropolitan open land. Further, the authority had not fettered its discretion or erred in failing to assess the environmental impact of combined heat and power pipes. 

Deed – Construction. The proceedings related to a collection of books, photographs and the like owned by the Warburg family. The collection was given to the first claimant university, and a trust deed was made regarding the care of the collection. The claimants brought a construction claim regarding the interpretation of the deed. The Chancery Division made a number of findings of fact as to its construction. 

Family proceedings – Jurisdiction. Since April 2014, two Czech children had been subject to care proceedings in the United Kingdom. The issue before the Family Court was whether to request the appropriate district court in the Czech Republic to assume jurisdiction in relation to the children. Having considered art 15(1) of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 (concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility), the Family Court concluded that the children had a particular connection with the Czech Republic, that the district court in the Czech Republic would be better placed to hear the case and that the transfer was in the best interests of the children. 

Financial services – Financial Conduct Authority. The Chancery Division gave directions relating to the distribution of sums to depositors, on an application by the Financial Conduct Authority pursuant to s 382 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, in respect of a tiered Ponzi scheme. The court gave guidance on how the discretion was to be exercised. 

Criminal law – Indecent assault. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed the defendant Max Clifford's appeal against sentence in respect of eight counts of indecent assault. The court held that, after consideration of the individual offences and the application of modern sentencing attitudes reflected in the guidelines, but tempered by the need to have regard to the statutory maximum available at the time, an overall sentence of eight years' imprisonment had been justified and correct. 

Landlord and tenant – Leases from year to year – Notice of termination – Period of notice required to prevent tacit relocation. Court of Session: In an action by the landlords of urban lands in Glasgow the court held that in order to prevent tacit relocation a tenant of lands exceeding 2 acres in extent which were let from year to year (including lands occupied by tacit relocation) did not require to give not less than 6 months' notice of termination; not less than 40 days' notice of termination by a tenant would suffice for that purpose. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The patient was born in 1927 She had five children. namely JG, her eldest daughter, RS, who was born in 1950. Her middle daughter, KH and her younger son, MG. Her youngest daughter, DG, was born in 1964. The patient had Alzheimer's type dementia. DG and RS applied to be appointed jointly as her deputies for property and affairs. JG opposed the application on the basis that it was not in the patient's best interests but had been made maliciously. The Court of Protection held that he court was satisfied that it would be in the patient's best interests to appoint the applicants as her joint deputies. 

Town and country planning – Development consent. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing an appeal in respect of the proposed redevelopment of a site on the seafront at Margate, found that the Secretary of State had not unlawfully failed to consider the cumulative effects of the proposed development with the effects of the redevelopment of an adjacent site.