Latest Cases

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to remove her and her children to Pakistan. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant had failed to avail herself of opportunities to make further representations, the best interests of the children had been considered, there had been no manifest irrationality in the Secretary of State's reconsideration letter and there was no illegality sufficient to trigger the exercise of the court's discretion to require the Secretary of State to bring about the return of the claimant and her children. 

Interdict – Wrongful interdict– Damages. Court of Session: In an action in which a landlord sought damages in respect of losses caused by wrongful interdict, a sheriff having granted interim interdict against him from encroaching on premises leased to the defender but subsequently recalled the interim interdict and ordered rectification of the relevant lease and land register, holding that they erroneously showed both a shop and yard as leased to defender whereas the correct position was a lease of the shop alone, the court allowed a reclaiming motion against the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor dismissing the action, holding that the defender acted at her own risk and was liable to the pursuer for any loss caused by her unjustified use of interdict. 

Contract – Breach. In the course of the purchase of a nightclub, a dispute arose as to the entitlement of the claimants, who had assisted with the purchase, to remuneration. The Chancery Division held that, on the evidence, most of their claims would be dismissed, although they would be entitled to restitutionary relief in relation to payments and services made in connection with the nightclub. 

Tax – Avoidance. The claimants applied for permission for judicial review of the provisions of s 194(1)(a) and 194(2) of the Finance Act 2013 which, by amending s 45 of the Finance Act 2003 with retrospective effect, made it plain that stamp duty land tax was chargeable in full on transactions structured in accordance with a tax avoidance scheme in which the claimants participated. The Administrative Court, in refusing permission to proceed with the application, held that the arguments alleging breach of art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights fell short of the real prospect of success threshold by a considerable margin. 

Practice – Service out of the jurisdiction. The claimant bank, which was incorporated in England, brought claims in England, seeking to recover funds loaned to the first defendant Kuwaiti company, pursuant to an Islamic finance agreement. The bank further brought claims against the second and third defendants, the general manager and alleged chief executive officer of the first defendant. The Commercial Court dismissed the second and third defendants' application challenging the jurisdiction of the English Court and a grant of permission to the bank for service out of the jurisdiction. Applying settled law, England was the appropriate forum for the trial of the bank's claims against the second and third defendants. On the facts, the bank had a good arguable case that its claim against the second and third defendants fell within CPR PD 6B, para 3.1(3). 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. In the course of a patent dispute, the defendant company (B&S) challenged the jurisdiction of the English court. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court held, in dismissing the application that, because B&S had entered an appearance before a court of the United Kingdom within the meaning of art 24 of the Brussels Convention on the Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968, the English Court had jurisdiction. 

Carriage by air – International carriage. The claimant sought compensation for his flight delay, under Regulation (EC) 261/2004. The judge found that the exception in art 5(3) of the Regulation applied and awarded the claimant compensation. The defendant air carrier appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that judge had adopted a mistaken reading of European case law, as he had focused on the consequences of the technical problem instead of the source. However, the defendant's submissions as to the meaning of art 5(3) of the Regulation failed to give proper effect to the language of the exception. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that art 13(B)(d) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388 should be interpreted as meaning that the sale of a discount card, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, did not constitute a transaction in 'other securities' or concerning 'other negotiable instruments', within the meaning, respectively, of paragraphs 5 and 3 of that provision, which referred to certain transactions which the member states should exempt from VAT. 

Data protection – Processing of information. Following an allegation of sexual assault against the claimant resulting in no further action, 40 pages of information had been retained. The claimant's application for judicial review of the decision to retain the information was dismissed and he appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that it was in no position to hold that the records should be destroyed or deleted. 

Immigration – Asylum/humanitarian protection – Leave to appeal. Court of Session: Refusing an application by a Zimbabwean applicant seeking leave to appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (UT) dismissing her appeal against the First Tier Tribunal (FTT)'s rejection of her claim for asylum/humanitarian protection, the court held that the proposed grounds of appeal―that a country guidance case had been superseded by a report placed before the FTT and that both tribunals had failed to apply the correct test for internal relocation―did not give rise to any important point of principle or practice, and there was no other compelling reason for the court to hear the appeal.