Latest Cases

Local authority – Residential care home. The claimant 101-year-old British Asian woman sought judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision close her care home. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority had carried out adequate inquiries concerning the levels and nature of demand for residential care homes. There was no merit in any of the grounds in relation to the public sector equality duty and the authority had not failed to take into account relevant considerations, including the claimant's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and her claimed legitimate expectation that she had a home for life. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court quashed the decision of the defendant local planning authority to grant planning permission for an out-of-town supermarket, in circumstances where an earlier decision had been quashed by the Administrative Court. The court held that the committee had failed to grapple with a number of crucial issues identified by the Administrative Court. 

Counsel – Fees. The Chancery Division gave summary judgment in a claim brought by a barrister in respect of unpaid fees. The court rejected the defendant's defence, namely that the relationship by which he had instructed the claimant was not contractual and that the claimant's fees was an honorarium, which was not legally enforceable against him. 

Negligence – Duty to take care. The claimant issued negligence proceedings against the defendant banks in respect of economic loss allegedly suffered as a result of their advice or statements. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that the banks had owed the claimant no duty to use reasonable skill and care in the giving of advice, as they had successfully disclaimed responsibility for any advice. However, they had come under a duty to explain fully and accurately the nature and effect of the products in respect of which a explanation had been volunteered, which they had not breached. 

Tort – Harassment. The claimant partner in, and chairman of, a firm of solicitors applied for an interim injunction, under s 3(1) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, to obtain removal of the defendants' allegedly harassing material from the internet and to prevent its re-instatement. The Queen's Bench Division did not proceed against the second defendant without notice, but found that the first defendant had been serve and proceeded in his absence. Finding no defence to the claim of harassment and that the claimant was likely to establish that publication should not be allowed, it granted the injunction, but excluded 'future employees of the firm' from its scope. 

Local authority – Powers. The defendant local authority decided to increase the rent payable by allotment holders over a three-year period. That, together with other cost-cutting measures, would reduce the loss to the authority of administering the allotment facilities. The claimant sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the decision of the authority's executive board had been unlawful because, inter alia, s 10 of the Allotments Act 1950 had plainly been a material consideration which had not been drawn to the attention of the executive board in form or in substance. 

Expenses – Adoption. Sheriff Court: Refusing an appeal in a local authority's application for a permanence order with authority to adopt a child, the court rejected the authority's contention that a sheriff's order in respect of a curator ad litem and reporting officer's expenses was incompetent because the sheriff had no power to pronounce an interlocutor dealing with a curator and reporting officer's remuneration, and held that reg 10(1A) of the Curators ad Litem and Reporting Officers (Panels) (Scotland) Regulations 2001 imposed an obligation on the appellants to defray expenses without limiting their liability as to those expenses. 

Marine insurance – Loss. The present proceedings concerned a dispute about earlier proceedings which had been brought by a vessel's owners and managers in Greece against the insurers, despite the parties having previously concluded settlement agreements. Relief was sought in respect of the Greek proceedings. The Commercial Court granted the relief sought, namely declaratory relief, specific performance and damages. 

Competition – Competition Appeal Tribunal. The appellant price comparison website appealed against the Office of Fair Trading's (the OFT) decision, accepting commitments from intervening companies in the hotel industry to modify their behaviour by limited discounting of room-only rates to closed groups. The Competition Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the appeal, held that the OFT had acted unfairly in failing to consider the appellant's objections, which had resulted in a procedurally unfair and irrational decision. However, it was not ultra vires for the OFT to accept commitments which affected the terms upon which the parties to those commitments might contract with third parties. 

European Union – Action for annulment. The European Commission approved a measure which Denmark was planning to implement in the form of duties for online gaming in the Danish law on gaming duties. The Commission found that the measure was compatible with the internal market, within the meaning of art 107(3)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The applicant, an association representing some 86% of the operators of games played on slot machines in Denmark, brought an action for the annulment of the decision. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the action as inadmissible on the ground that the applicant lacked the necessary legal interest in bringing proceedings.