Latest Cases

European Union – Freedom of establishment. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The request had been made in proceedings brought by Mrs Sokoll‑Seebacher, concerning the opening of a pharmacy in the municipality of Pinsdorf, in the Province of Upper Austria. 

Prison – Life sentence. The claimant was charged with conspiracy to possess firearms with intent to endanger life and conspiracy to damage property with intent to endanger life. He escaped custody and remained unlawfully at large for eight months. He was convicted and sentenced in his absence to two discretionary life sentences. After he was recaptured, he was placed in a category A prison with an 'exceptional escape risk' classification. On two subsequent occasions, the Director of High Security Prisons reviewed and decided to maintain that classification. The claimant sought judicial review of those decisions. Dismissing the claim, the Administrative Court held that what was required for the relevant classification was valid intelligence that cogently established to the satisfaction of the director that an attempt was being planned. In the instant case, such intelligence had existed and there had been a reasonable basis for the director's decision. 

Child – Protection. A mother had been charged with offences of infanticide and wounding. She had surviving children. The local authority had obtained a reporting restriction order due to concerns that the media was about to reveal details of the case on the television. Subsequently, the authority applied to extend the order until the youngest child reached the age of 18 in order to protect the welfare of the children. The media agreed that, due to the exceptional circumstances of the case and the risk to the children, that the mother should remain anonymous. The Family Division of the High Court gave its judgment specifying what could, and could not, be reported in order to protect the children. 

Power of attorney – Lasting power of attorney. The respondent had been appointed by DP under a lasting power of attorney which had been registered with the Office of the Public Guardian. The Public Guardian had received two separate referrals regarding the respondent's conduct in his capacity as attorney. The Public Guardian applied for the LPA to be revoked and cancelled and for an order that a member of the panel of deputies be invited to apply for appointment as a deputy. The Court of Protection allowed the application and made the orders requested. The respondent had, in all the circumstances, behaved in a way which had contravened his authority and which had not been in DP's best interests. 

Fraud – Misrepresentation. The Commercial Court considered two allegations of extremely large-scale fraud alleged to have been carried out principally by two traders, U and P. The court held that, on the evidence, U and P were responsible for fraudulent misrepresentations, deceit and/or conspiracy in both frauds, and that, in the second fraud, they had been assisted by a number of the other defendants. 

Coroner – Inquest. The claimant was the widow of AL who died in London from radiation poisoning. She sought judicial review of the refusal by the defendant Secretary of State to order the setting up of a statutory inquiry under s 1(1) of the Inquiries Act 2005 into the circumstances of Al's death (the decision). The Secretary of State had been asked to set up such an inquiry by the first interested party Assistant Coroner (the Coroner), who was the judge appointed to conduct the inquest into AL's death. Allowing the claim, the Divisional Court held that taking everything together, the reasons given by the Secretary of State for refusing the Coroner's request to set up a statutory inquiry had not provided a rational basis for the decision. 

Misrepresentation – Negligent misrepresentation. The respondents were the owners of a grouse moor, over which commercial shooting took place. The appellant (the company) had been formed by E and his wife as a vehicle for entering into contract with the respondents for the lease of the moor. The company unsuccessfully brought proceedings, alleging that it had been induced to enter into the contract by negligent misrepresentation. The Supreme Court, in allowing the company's appeal, held that the respondents had owed a duty of care to the company and to E, which they had breached and that, accordingly, the company was entitled to recover damages for any loss suffered as a result of that breach. The case was remitted to the Court of Session for further procedure. 

Minor – Removal outside jurisdiction. AB was the daughter of the Italian mother and the Scottish father. The mother took AB to Italy. The Family Division held that A, was to be returned to the jurisdiction of England and Wales from Italy in order for the court to assess under at 15 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2203, the child's best interests. 

Immigration – Appeal. In dismissing the applicant's appeal against a refusal to allow his application for judicial review of the Secretary of State's refusal to revoke a deportation order made against him, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the word 'matter' in s 96(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 included evidence that could have been raised, but had not been, on an actual or possible appeal against an earlier decision. 

Vicarious liability – Employer and employee. The claimant issued proceedings against the defendant following his assault by the defendant's employee. The recorder dismissed the claim, as the claimant had failed to satisfy the test of vicarious liability. The claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that, on the basis of the facts found by the recorder, both as to the nature of the employee's employment and the particular circumstances of the assault, there had been no element which could bring the claimant's case within the close connection test so as to properly enable a finding of vicarious liability.