Latest Cases

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant local authority's application to quash the decision of the first defendant Secretary of State's inspector to grant outline permission for residential housing development. In the instant case, the reasons given by the inspector had been sufficiently clear and precise and the decision had not been irrational 

Land registration – Rectification of register. The Chancery Division held that a bank was entitled to seek rectification of a deed where, on the facts, there had been a common continuing intention that a proposed loan would be secured against a first fixed legal charge against the whole of a property. A declaration was granted that the discharge of the charges against the titles constituting the property had been procured by a forged instrument. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Council Regulation (EC) 1383/2003, art 4(1) of Directive (EC) 2001/29 of the European Parliament and of the Council, art 5(1) and (3) of Directive (EC) 2008/95, and art 9(1) and (2) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009. The request had been made in proceedings brought by Rolex SA and Manufacture des Montres Rolex SA against Mr Blomqvist concerning the destruction of a counterfeit watch which Mr Blomqvist had bought through a Chinese online sales website and which had been seized by the customs authorities. 

Misrepresentation – Fraudulent misrepresentation. The claimant company advanced a sum by way of loan to a company owned by the defendants, in return for shares in the company. The claimant commenced an action seeking to recover the sum primary basis of the claim was that it was contended that the claimant had entered into the whole arrangement with the defendants as a result of what were said to be fraudulent misrepresentations made by the first defendant. The Queen's Bench Division held that none of the fraudulent representations pleaded had been made out and therefore the claim failed. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employment tribunal found that the employee had been subject to two acts of direct discrimination by his immediate line manager and a subcontractor. The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that the employer Ministry of Defence was not liable for the act of the subcontractor and reduced the damages for the act of the manager. The employee appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the employer could not be liable for the act of the subcontractor, as she had not acted as its agent. Further, the initial award of damages had been manifestly excessive. 

Local government – Council tax. The appellant listing officer held that the annex at the respondents' property was a self-contained unit, amenable to a separate charge for council tax. The Valuation Tribunal for England (the tribunal) allowed the respondents' appeal. The appellant appealed on the ground that the tribunal had failed to apply the physical characteristics test. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appeal, held that the tribunal's decision had not set out the correct test, nor had its terms, as a whole, suggested that the correct test had been applied sub silentio. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. NL was the eight child of the mother who had a history of substance abuse and involvement of social services with her previous seven children. On the evidence of a hastily instructed independent expert, the justices made a decision to separate the mother and NL and an interim care order was made. The mother appealed and the Family Division held that due to procedural unfairness the decision could not stand and that NL was to be returned to his mother forthwith. 

Limitation of action – When time begins to run. In August 2000, the claimants' employment with the British Telecommunications (BT) ceased and they transferred to another company. In August 2002, the claimants ceased to be members of BT's pension scheme. In August 2008, the claimants issued proceedings against BT in contract and tort, based on representations that their employment terms, including pension, would not change. The master struck out the contract claim as time-barred, but not the tort claim and BT appealed. The Queen's Bench Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the master's decision on the accrual of the cause of action in tort had been correct, as actual damage had been suffered by the claimants when they had ceased to be members of the BT pension scheme. 

Town and country planning – Enforcement of planning control. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to take no further action in respect of a development which was in breach of planning permission as that decision had been perverse and there had been a failure to have proper regard to relevant factors set out in the authority's earlier assessments. 

Solicitor – Disciplinary proceedings. The first appellant firm of solicitors and second and third appellant equity partners of the firm were found guilty of misconduct in respect of the use of the firm's client account and fined a total of £75,000. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellants' appeal against the fine as the total fine of £75,000 for the misconduct in question had not been disproportionate or excessive, let alone clearly so.