Latest Cases

Mental health – Court of Protection. AC, the patient, was born in June with significant learning disability. She came to the attention of adult social services when she presented to medical services as pregnant in 2012. Following various serious developments, a meeting was convened by the local authority at which it was resolved that AC required the protection of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and that the only way to provide this protection was to move AC into residential care and to deprive her of her liberty if necessary. The Court of Protection held it was AC's best interests that she should move to, and reside at the residential care home and although she lacked capacity to make decisions in respect of contact with other people, she had capacity to enter into sexual relations. 

Practice – Striking out. The Chancery Division struck out part of the claimant solicitors' firm's claim for unpaid fees and costs on the basis that it had been guilty of abuse of process in reliance on deliberately exaggerated fees, fabricated documents and on a bill of costs which had been drawn up knowing it to be inaccurate. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender was 15 years old when she stabbed the deceased to death with a kitchen knife, for which she was sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's pleasure with a minimum term of 12 years, less the time spent on remand. She sought review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that it was clear that the offender had made exceptional and unforeseen progress such that it was clear that the tariff presently applicable to her was too long. Accordingly, the minimum term was to be reduced to 11 years, less time spent on remand. 

Practice – Hearing. The appellants' extradition to Rwanda was sought to stand trial for offences committed in the course of the civil war. They sought to adduce witness evidence in a closed material procedure or for it to be disclosed only to the third respondent Crown Prosecution Service. The Supreme Court held that there was no basis for recognising or creating a closed material procedure as a new exception to the principle of open inter partes justice. Further, the judge had no special statutory power which could enable her to make a non-disclosure order in relation to the requesting state. However, anonymous evidence could be admitted only if the proceedings were fair. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection dismissed an application by the patient's brother-in-law and his wife to be appointed as deputies in place of her husband who had had a stroke. The court held that it was in her best interests for the application to be dismissed and for the two named solicitors to be appointed jointly and severally to be her deputies for property and affairs, in circumstances where there were allegations of misconduct on the part of the applicants. 

Sentence – Custodial sentence. The applicant prisoner serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection complained of breaches of art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, given the delay in commencing the sex offenders treatment programme required to show he was no longer a risk. The European Court on Human Rights, in dismissing the application, held that there had been no violation of art 5(1) of the Convention. A real opportunity for rehabilitation had been provided to the applicant, and there had been no unreasonable delay in providing him access to assessments and courses. 

Practice – Striking out. The claimant was a sound engineer who specialised in restoring historic classical recordings. He entered into a contract with the defendant whereby landmark opera recordings would be restored, reproduced and sold in CD form. The claimant brought a claim for breach of contract against the defendant. The defendant and its operational arm applied for the action to be struck out for, among other things, extraordinary and inexcusable delay. The Chancery Division held that the claimant's conduct, taken overall, was in breach of CPR 1.3 (d), (e) and (f) and that the claim should be struck out for abuse of process and/or for failure to comply with an order of the court. 

Landlord and tenant – Determination of lease. In the course of a dispute with the local authority, the defendants sought to determine the lease on premises rented from the claimant company, Sirhowy. Sirhowy contended that breaches committed by the defendants were such as to prevent the lease from being determined. The Chancery Division held that, on the evidence, the defendants could not be considered to have observed and performed all their covenants when they had served notice to determine the lease. It followed that the notice had not have taken effect. 

Sentence – Several offences. The offenders had been convicted of various offences arising out of the robbery and attempted robbery of bank ATMs which had involved the use of explosives. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, gave the Attorney General leave to appeal the sentences imposed and increased the sentences in respect of the explosion offences. 

Proceeds of crime – Civil recovery of proceeds of unlawful conduct. The National Crime Agency (NCA) made a claim, pursuant to s 243(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA), for a civil recovery order concerning various properties and accounts owned by the first defendant or held in the names of various members of his family, including his wife. The main issue was whether a civil recovery order should be made in respect of two properties to which the wife contended she had a claim under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1984. The Queen's Bench Division held that the court was obliged to make an order under s 266(1) of POCA and did not have an unfettered discretion or indeed any discretion at all in respect of it. Part 5 of POCA was deliberately structured in favour of the making of a CRO once the court had determined that a particular property was 'recoverable property.'