Latest Cases

Court-Martial – Judge-Advocate. The defendants were convicted of negligently performing his duty following the first defendant's discharge of a round from a general purpose machine, which occasioned death. They were sentenced to a term of 21 months' service detention for the first defendant and 14 months for the second defendant, and dismissal from the service. The first defendant appealed against conviction and both defendants appealed against sentence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed the first defendant's appeal against conviction. However, it reduced the sentences to 15 months' detention for the first defendant and 12 months' detention for the second defendant. It further quashed the sentence of dismissal from the service and ordered the reduction to the rank of private soldier. 

Patent – Infringement. The claimant was the patentee of a European patent for a tilting device for a seat back. The defendant manufactured a seat with a tilting back. The claimant issued proceedings against the defendant for patent infringement. The judge found that the defendant's seat did not infringe and the claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the short answer to the claimant's point was that the language of the claim did not support its construction. 

Licence – Licensing authorities. The claimant applied for judicial review of the decision of the district judge to uphold the decision of the interested party licensing authority to modify the conditions of the claimant's nightclub premises licences notwithstanding two errors in the notice advertising the licence review. Dismissing the claim, the Administrative Court held that minor errors on a notice of advertisement for a licensing review should not make any subsequent consideration of the licence void. The claimant's suggestion that there had been a total failure to comply with a significant part of a requirement had not reflected the reality of what had occurred. The district judge had considered the errors in the notice to be 'minor irregularities.' In the context of the instant case that had been an entirely reasonable conclusion. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The defendant Secretary of State refused the claimants further leave to remain and ordered their deportation. The First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) affirmed that decision, but the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the UT) set aside the deportation order. The claimants appealed on the ground that the UT had failed to deal with their case under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that if there had been an error of law in failing to formally dispose of the claim under art 8 of the Convention, it had not been material and the UT had been right to refuse permission to appeal in respect of it. 

Criminal law – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, provided guidance in the approach to be taken when defendants' representatives apply for leave to appeal or appeal against conviction and/or sentence in circumstances when the defendant has absconded during the criminal prosecution process. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. The Employment Appeals Tribunal considered the employee's appeal in a case relating to alleged race discrimination, victimisation and harassment. It held that the employment tribunal had erred in finding that, without more, to conduct a case by not telling the truth was to conduct a case unreasonably, and that the case would be remitted to the employment tribunal for reconsideration. 

Personal injury – Damages. Court of Session: In an action for damages for a lower back injury the pursuer suffered after falling down a flight of stairs in the course of her employment, the court awarded total damages of £89,302, including £18,000 for solatium, £35,397 for past wage loss, £6,000 for future wage loss, and £4,400 (past) and £14,720 (future) for necessary services rendered to her by her daughter. 

Criminal law – Appeal. The defendant had appealed against two convictions of rape and three counts of indecency with a child, where he received a total sentence of 12 years' imprisonment. The defendant contended that the judge had erred in allowing the prosecution to adduce bad character evidence based on previous convictions and that the judge's summing up at the trial, focusing on those previous convictions, had been erroneous. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal held that there could be no fault on the part of the judge and that he had been entitled to allow such evidence to be adduced and that his summing up had been entirely proper. 

Company – Scheme of arrangement. The Chancery Division sanctioned a scheme of arrangement in respect of the Stemcor steel-trading group where the test of fairness had been satisfied. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimant bank sought to enforce a judgment granted in its favour against Mr Ablyazov. The Commercial Court granted the bank a declaration that Mr Ablyazov was the beneficial owner of shares in a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands where new evidence substantiated that as fact.