Latest Cases

Family provision – Order. The Family Division ruled that the husband should make payments to his wife, including maintenance payments. The wife brought a judgment summons against him, submitting that he had failed to make the payments as required. The Family Division held that, the wife's case was made out, and a sentence of four weeks' imprisonment would be imposed, suspended for three months on condition that the husband paid the sum of £360,200 within that period. 

Damages – Breach of statutory duty. The Court of Appeal had allowed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal by the trial judge of his claims for damages against National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) in respect of the cause of his mesothelioma, on the basis that NGET had been in breach of its statutory obligations pursuant to reg 2(a) of the Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931, SI 1931/1140. However, the Court had upheld the judge's decision to dismiss the claim in respect of breach of statutory duty pursuant to s 47 of the Factories Act 1937. The Supreme Court dismissed both NGET's appeal and the claimant's cross-appeal against the Court's judgment. 

Tort – Harassment. The Queen's Bench Division granted interim injunctions in harassment to claimants who were all casework managers in the Independent Police Complaints Commission and had been the subject of allegations made largely on the internet by the two defendants. The court held, amongst other things, that the claimants were each likely to establish at trial that publication should not be allowed. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory words. The claimants came before the court with a libel action in respect of a press release issued by the defendant police force in which the headline was 'Three jailed for murder of [the victim]'and in which the claimants were mentioned in the body of the text. It was the claimants case that the words meant that each was involved with four others in the murder of [the victim] and imprisoned for such. The Queen's Bench Division held that no such meaning could be attributed to the words and further the meaning of the words complained of was that the claimants were each jailed for a total of six years' imprisonment for offences of grievous bodily harm and false imprisonment, committed in the course of their involvement in the lead-up to the murder of the victim. 

Mortgage – Equitable interest. The present appeal was one of ten test cases in which the defendant home owners (the vendors) were persuaded to sell their properties to purchasers who promised the vendors the right to remain in their homes after the sale. The purchasers bought the home with the assistance of mortgages from lenders, who were not given notice of the promises to the vendors. The purchasers defaulted on the loans and the lenders sought possession of the homes. The Supreme Court held that the vendors had acquired no more than personal rights against the purchasers when they agreed to sell their properties on the basis of the purchasers' promises that they would be entitled to remain in occupation. Accordingly, the vendors did not have interests whose priority was protected by virtue of s 29(2)(a)(ii) of, and Sch 3, para 2, to the Land Registration Act 2002. 

European Union – Income tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling that arts 52 and 56 of the treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be interpreted as precluding legislation of a member state which subjected winnings from games of chance obtained in casinos in other member states to income tax and exempted similar income from that tax if it was obtained from casinos in its national territory. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. Following the father's acquittal of grevious bodily harm of his youngest child, the local authority brought care proceedings in respect of the child and the three other children of the family. There was a fact finding hearing in which the Family Division found that he criteria under s 31 of the Children's Act 1989 had been in respect of all four children, and particularly so in respect of the youngest and oldest child. 

Constitutional law – Crown dependency. The Administrative Court made a declaration that the decision of the Standing Committee of the Privy Council for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey, which had recommended the approval of the passing of a law in Sark, had been an unlawful decision in that, in certain respects, it was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Supreme Court held that, as a general proposition, the courts of the United Kingdom did have jurisdiction judicially to review an Order in Council which was made on the advice of the UK government, but that, in the present case, the court should not have exercised that jurisdiction. 

Health and safety at work – Duty to employees. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in allowing the defendant company's appeal, held that a fine of £100,000, given to the company following the death of one of its employees in an accident at work, had been too high and that the fine should have been £65,000. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. In care proceedings concerning an eight-month-old child, the Family Court held that, in all the circumstances, the father had to be given parental responsibility for the child and that an interim care order would be continued so that the authority could pursue the plan with vigour.