Latest Cases

Costs – Order for costs. The proceedings concerned a claim by assignees in respect of alleged defects at a large development on the site of the former children's hospital. Issues arose as to whether it was appropriate for the court at a case management conference to grant a 'window' of three or four months whilst the parties engaged in alternative dispute resolution and whether the Technology and Construction Court had discretion to order the production of costs budgets in the case. The court declined to order a window of four months prior to disclosure in the case and, further, held that it had a complete discretion to decide whether costs budgets should be filed and exchanged. 

Charity – Charitable trust. The husband and wife were involved in the conservation of the rare Chinese tiger. Their relationship broke down and the wife petitioned for divorce. She sought financial relief. The issue arose as to whether a charitable organisation controlled by the husband and wife was a post-nuptial settlement (PNS). The Family Division held that, on its true construction, the organisation was not a PNS. 

Time – Extension of time. The applicant had applied for permission to extend the time for filing its respondent's notice to an appeal. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the principles laid down in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd ([2014] 2 All ER 430) as explained in Denton and others v TH White Ltd and another; Decadent Vapours Ltd v Bevan and others; Utilise TDS Ltd v Davies and others ([2014] All ER (D) 53 (Jul)) applied to applications for an extension of time. Applying those principles, the application was allowed. 

Local authority – Statutory powers. The claimants sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's policy for calculating the amount of financial assistance to be provided, under s 17 of the Children Act 1989, by reference to the amount that the Secretary of State would provide to a failed asylum seeker and his dependants. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the policy had been lawful. Further, although the authority had failed to appreciate the claimants' derivative rights of residence, as the primary carers of a British national child, that had not invalidated the authority's policy or the individual decisions in the claimants' cases. 

European Union – Medicinal products. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Directive (EC) 2001/83 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use), as amended. The request had been made in proceedings between Olainfarm AS (Olainfarm) and the Latvian Ministry of Health and another, concerning the latter's decision to grant to Grindeks AS a marketing authorisation (MA) for a generic of a reference medicinal product for which Olainfarm held a MA. 

Sentence – Confiscation order. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the defendant's appeal against a confiscation order, held that funds and credits paid into the defendant's bank account by a friend, whom he had allowed to use the account, had fallen squarely within the benefit provisions of s 76(4) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. 

Limitation of actions – Triennium. Court of Session: In an action in which the executors of a deceased woman sought damages in respect of injuries she suffered following a fall at defenders' premises, it having been discovered that she had died from an unrelated medical condition two months before an action in her name was raised, the court decided to exercise the discretion conferred on it to allow the executors' action to proceed though commenced after the expiry of the triennium. 

European Union – Civil and commercial matters. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 1, 22(2), 34(1) and 35(1) of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 (on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters). The request had been made in proceedings between flyLAL-Lithuanian Airlines AS (in liquidation), a company incorporated under Lithuanian law, and Starptautiskā lidosta Rīga VAS (a company incorporated under Latvian law) and another company, concerning a request for recognition and enforcement in Latvia of a judgment of a Lithuanian court ordering provisional or protective measures. 

Winding up – Liquidator. In the course of the liquidation of the Comet group, the claimant liquidators made an application for disclosure. In allowing the application, the Companies Court held that the benefit likely to be gained by the liquidators as a result of making the order substantially outweighed the burden likely to be imposed on the respondent companies. 

European Union – Conflict of laws. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 4(1), (2), (4) and (5) of the Convention on the Law applicable to Contractual Obligations. The request had been made in proceedings between Haeger & Schmidt GmbH, a company governed by German law, and Mutuelles du Mans assurances IARD, Va Tech JST SA (Va Tech) and others, concerning compensation for loss suffered by Va Tech during the carriage of a transformer it had purchased for the purposes of its business.