Latest Cases

Mental health – Court of Protection. There was an application before the court in respect of DD, a 36 year old woman with learning difficulties, who was pregnant with her sixth child. The applicants sought for declarations and orders in relation to the care and health of DD during the final stage of her current pregnancy, and in the safe delivery of the unborn baby. The applicants applied for a further order authorising the conduct of an assessment of DD's capacity to make decisions about contraception, following the imminent birth. The Court of Protection made the orders as requested based on the evidence before the court and taking into account the Metal Capacity Act 2005. However the court held that it was not in DD's best interest that she should be subject of a one day assessment of her capacity to make decisions about contraception at the present stage. 

Immigration – Asylum/deportation – Refusal of leave to appeal. Court of Session: Dismissing a judicial review petition by a Gambian national who sought reduction of the Upper Tribunal's decision to refuse leave to appeal against the First Tier Tribunal dismissal of his appeal against refusal of asylum and against deportation, the court rejected the petitioner's argument that there were two compelling reasons and one important point of principle which justified the further progress of the case. 

Value added tax – Input tax. The Upper tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (FTT) in which the FTT had upheld the partial exemption special method (PESM) proposed by LOK'nSTORE group plc for the purposes of apportioning its residual input tax. The tribunal decided that there had been no error of law in the FTT's decision. 

Evidence – Without prejudice correspondence. The first defendant applied to exclude evidence of a draft complaint concerning proposed New York proceedings filed by the claimants in support of their application for an anti-suit injunction on the grounds that the evidence was covered by without prejudice privilege. The claimants sought permission to adduce evidence of New York law. The Commercial Court refused the claimants permission to adduce evidence of New York law, as it was not reasonably required. It further held that, as a matter of English law, the draft complaint and its sending fell within the scope of without prejudice privilege. 

Costs – Order for costs. The court previously gave judgment in favour of the claimant solicitors and ordered that they should be paid their costs of the claim. The Divisional Court summarily assessed their costs in the sum of £63,508.17. 

Company – Administration. A company entered into administration. The company was exposed to possible claims for breaches of trust after it failed, as required by the rules contained in the Financial Services Authority Handbook, to segregate money received from or on behalf of clients. The administrators of the company and the company, as trustee of the client money trust, applied to the Companies Court to enable a settlement agreement to be made between the company, as trustee of the trust, and the general estate of the company, acting by its joint administrators. The court, in allowing the application, held that the terms of the proposed settlement were in the best interests of both the client money pool and the general estate. 

Civil procedure – Form of action – Competency of action as framed. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuers―three local authorities being named in instance but not designed separately but rather as the collective entity 'Tayside Contracts'―sought damages for an alleged breach of contract, and the defenders asked the court to dismiss the action as incompetent on the basis that 'Tayside Contracts' did not have an independent legal personality, the court held that the action as framed was competent and appropriate. 

Employment – Restrictive covenants. Court of Session: In an action in which a financial services company sought interdict and interim interdict to prevent alleged breaches of covenants by a financial advisor after he left their employment and joined a rival company, the court held that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case of breach of non-solicitation/non-dealing provisions but not as regards use of trade secrets and, concluding that the balance of convenience favoured the petitioner, it granted interim interdict in terms of part of the prayer of the petition and refused it in relation to the other part. 

Immigration – Asylum – Fresh claim. Court of Session: Dismissing a judicial review petition by a failed Iraqi asylum seeker challenging a decision refusing to treat his further submissions as fresh claim, the court, inter alia, rejected contentions that the decision-maker had taken irrelevant matters into account, had failed to consider that another immigration judge might depart from country guidance and had failed to apply anxious scrutiny. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 should be interpreted as meaning that a company established in a state that was a party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA Agreement) and which was proprietor of a vessel flying the flag of a third country, by which maritime transport services were provided from or to a state that was a party to the EEA Agreement, could rely on the freedom to provide services, provided that it could, due to its operation of that vessel, be classed as a provider of those services and that the persons for whom the services were intended were established in states that were parties to the EEA Agreement other than that in which that company was established.