Latest Cases

Infant – Care. The proceedings concerned an application by the local authority for anticipatory declaratory relief sanctioning a birth plan in respect of a vulnerable adult. Following an adjournment, the authority sought permission to withdraw its application. The Family Division, in granting the authority permission to withdraw its application, held that it had not been persuaded of the necessity for, or proportionality of, the relief sought. 

Solicitor – Negligence. A company, Beacon, provided loans secured by mortgages over residential property. Beacon then sold the mortgages to the claimant company, Redstone. Redstone brought proceedings, contending that the defendant conveyancing solicitors, whom Beacon had employed on a retainer, had acted negligently. In a preliminary judgment, the Chancery Division made rulings as to whether the defendant had discharged its contractual duties to Beacon or its common law duties to Redstone regarding four cases. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's refusal to accept her further representations as fresh claims and not to treat her case on an exceptional basis. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the claim, held that the Secretary of State had been fully entitled to determine that there had been no fresh evidence which had disclosed a real possibility that the findings of the immigration judge might be undermined before a new immigration judge. Further, there had been no public law error refusing to grant the claimant exceptional leave. 

Insurance – Fraudulent insurance claim. In the course of a shipping claim, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, considered whether the rule whereby a fraudulent claim deprived the insured of any right to recover anything applied also in the case of 'fraudulent devices', namely statements made recklessly or with knowledge of their untruth to support a claim that was honestly believed to be true. In dismissing the claimant owners' appeal, the court held that the rule was to be applied in such circumstances and that it was proportionate for it to do so. 

Sale of land – Trustee. The claimant trustees of the Savernake estate sought the approval of the court for their decision to sell Tottenham House under a conditional contract for sale for £11.25m, which had been concluded following a limited marketing process. The first defendant beneficiary of the trust appealed against two orders which, in effect, approved the sale. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judges had been right to approve the claimants' decision to sell Tottenham House under the intended sale arrangements. The claimants could reasonably have accepted the view that an open market campaign would be risky and undesirable. 

Estoppel – Conduct. The parties had been in a relationship and had lived together in a house bought by the defendant for that purpose. When the relationship ended, the claimant issued proceedings contending that the property had been held for the benefit of both of them in equal shares. The judge upheld the claimant's claim to an enforceable equity by operation of proprietary estoppel. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the defendant's appeal as the judge had not erred in finding that the defendant had made representations to the claimant, on which she had relied and acted to her detriment, regarding the provision to her of a home for life. 

Criminal law – Sexual activity. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, on an application by the Attorney General, substituted a sentence of three years' imprisonment, in circumstances where the offender had been convicted of inciting his granddaughter, a child under the age of 13, to engage in sexual activity contrary to s 8(1) of the Sexual Offences Act, and had been given a community order. The court held that, in the circumstances, there were no exceptional factors which might have permitted the Recorder to justify a sentence outside the guideline range. 

Statutory duty – Breach. The claimant company was an unsuccessful tenderer in a tendering process managed by the defendant local authority. It brought a claim for breaches of statutory duty against the authority. The Technology and Construction Court held that, among other things, there had been no breaches of the principles of equality and non-discrimination, and no room for the implication of breach of contract. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Slovakia to stand trial for minor theft and minor property damage, relying on art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and alleging that the judge had erred in finding that to discharge him would be 'endorsing his behaviour'. The Administrative Court held that the judge had taken account of a factor which had been no proper part of the balancing exercise. Approaching the balancing exercise afresh, the hardship to the appellant and his family was not such as to overcome the public interest in extradition. 

Telecommunications – Mobile telephone networks. The Privy Council allowed an appeal by an electricity provider against a decision of the Turks and Caicos Islands Court of Appeal, in which it had held that the appellant had required both a spectrum licence and a carrier licence for the operation of its meters on the 900MHz frequencies and that, since it had held neither of those licences, it had been operating unlawfully for lack of a licence. The Privy Council held that it had not required either licence.