Latest Cases

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. 

Contract – Breach. The parties were involved in the construction of seats for trains. The defendant company agreed to purchase the goods and materials for the seats and supply them to a third party for the seats to be constructed. The claimant company brought a claim for unpaid invoices. The Queen's Bench Division made a number of findings about, among other things, the amounts recoverable on individual invoices. 

Local authority – Transport. The claimant adults with severe disabilities sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to cease providing directly a transportation service for eligible adults living in its area to enable them to attend adult day centres. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority had not breached its statutory duty, under s 2 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970. Further, the consultation had been fair and the authority had complied with its public sector equality duty. 

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. 

Social security – Housing benefit. The housing benefit payable to the claimants, who were parents with secondary responsibility for their children, had been reduced as a result of the Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2012, SI 2012/3040. They sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that, as a result of the discretionary housing payments received by each of the claimants, which had completely compensated for the reduction in housing benefit paid to them, none of the claimants had suffered any interference with their family life capable of amounting to a breach of art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Practice – Public procurement. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendant Cabinet Office, in respect of an unsuccessful bid concerning a public procurement project. The claimant sought early disclosure of specific documents relating to the tendering process. The Technology and Construction Court adjourned the application as being premature where it had been made before the defendant's grounds for seeking to lift a statutory suspension on the placing of the contract with the successful bidder had been spelled out and before the defendant had served its defence. 

European Union – State aids. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the appeal brought by British Telecommunications plc (BT) against the judgment of the General Court of the European Union which had dismissed the actions brought by BT and by BT Pension Scheme Trustees Ltd for annulment of Commission Decision (EC) 2009/703 concerning the state aid implemented by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, declaring that the aid granted to BT by the UK authorities in the form of an exemption, granted to that company's pension fund, from the obligation to pay a contribution to a pension protection fund in respect of persons employed by BT before its privatisation constituted state aid which was incompatible with the common market. 

Family proceedings – Child. The proceedings concerned a child in respect of whom care proceedings were brought by the local authority. The whereabouts of her mother, who was Albanian, and her father were unknown. The Family Court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the case as the child was habitually resident in England. 

Defamation – Libel. The claimant brought an action against the defendant in libel following the uploading of a video onto the internet. by the defendant regarding the safety of a pony sold by the claimant to the defendant for the purposes of children. The Queens Bench Division held, inter alia, that there had been a defamatory allegation of fact. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The appellant, G, acquired a loan from the respondent company, BMS. BMS brought proceedings when he defaulted on the loan. The deputy master awarded summary judgment to BMS. The Chancery Division dismissed G's appeal and refused permission for him to adduce further evidence.