Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

Competition – Competition Appeal Tribunal. The Competition Appeal Tribunal (the tribunal) allowed the application by British Telecommunications plc to vary an interim relief order made by the tribunal pending an appeal by British Sky Broadcasting Ltd (Sky) against the decision of the Office of Communications to vary the conditions in the broadcasting licences of Sky for its core premium sports channels. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The claimants brought a contractual claim against the defendants, alleging, among other things, asset stripping. The claimants applied for an order that the fourth, fifth and sixth defendants be committed to prison for civil contempt of court for breach of a worldwide freezing order, alleging their failure to provide adequate disclosure of documents and information in accordance with the freezing order and order continuing it. The Commercial Court held that, on the facts, contempt had been proved against some, but not all defendants. 

Employment – Sex discrimination. The employee brought a claim for indirect sex discrimination. The question arose as to whether the employment tribunal had correctly construed a reference to the phrase 'power to afford access' in s 56(5) of the Equality Act 2010. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that, on the evidence, the tribunal had not erred, and the narrow construction sought by the employee would deprive the phrase of any real meaning, which could not have been Parliament's intention. 

National Health Service – England. The claimant unsuccessful asylum seeker sought judicial review of provisions of the National Health Services (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 2001, SI 2011/1556, on the basis that they gave rise to unlawful disability discrimination and had breached the public sector equality duty. The Administrative Court held that the Regulations had not failed the test of being manifestly without reasonable foundation, as the Secretary of State had justified the discrimination. However, the Secretary of State had not had due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity for disabled people. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. PC executed an Lasting Power of Attorney in favour of her two sons JC and AC. JC conceded that he had intermingled his mother's money with his own but also with his company's funds. AC had also benefited by such behaviour. The Court of Protection General Visitor indicated that PC lacked capacity to revoke the LPA herself. The Public Guardian applied for the court to revoke the LPA. The Court of Protection allowed the application and a member of the panel of deputies was to apply to be appointed as PC's deputy for property. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. In deciding whether to make an interim supervision order, the Family Division considered the child's best interests. When those criteria were considered, it was apparent that the local authority's plans for immediate action were in the child's best interests. 

Education – Teacher. The claimant was a teacher who had qualified in South Africa. He challenged the defendant local authority's decision that he had not completed the requisite statutory induction period (the SIP) and not to grant him an exemption from that requirement. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant had failed to complete the SIP, there was no power to grant an exemption and the authority had not acted irrationally or unfairly in refusing to accede the claimant's request to deem that the obligations had been met or to waive such requirement. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed a mother's appeal against an order that she pay the father's costs in respect of all applications relating to the children since May 2012 and held that it had been wrong in principle and on the facts for the judge to have made an order for costs against her.