Latest Cases

Practice – Order. The Commercial Court granted relief from sanctions in respect of one of two actions, which had been tried together, where the default complained of (failure to comply with disclosure) had occurred in respect of the latter action only and where it was appropriate to grant relief. The court refused to grant relief from sanctions in the second action where, on the facts, there were no compelling circumstances which justified the grant of relief. 

Criminal law – Appeal. The case concerned the sentencing of a defendant to 12 years' detention following conviction for the offence of encouraging or assisting suicide pursuant to s 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961 (the offence), and his appeal against that sentence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in its judgment, provided guidance on the relevant factors a court would have to take into consideration when dealing with cases concerning the offence. On consideration of the specific facts of the present case, the defendant's sentence of 12 years was quashed and substituted with a sentence of 10 years' detention in a Young Offender Institution. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant company applied for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to approve an order (the order) made under the Planning Act 2008 in relation to a nationally significant infrastructure project, and his decision not to use his power to revoke the order. Dismissing the claim, the Administrative Court held that in the instant case: (i) adequate reasons had been given; and (ii) the requirement for an up-to-date Environmental Impact Assessment had been fulfilled. 

Local authority – Residential care home. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to uphold its reversal of a previous decision to disregard a property (the property) owned by the claimant's mother, MW, in calculating MW's ability to pay care home charges pursuant to s 22 of the National Assistance Act 1948 and the National Assistance (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1992, SI 1992/2977. For the purposes of para 2(1)(b) of sch 4 to the Regulations, 'home' was to be construed as 'only or main home.' In the instant case, the authority had not adopted the correct legal test as it appeared to have applied a test of actual occupation and/or permanent residence. Further, the authority had erred in interpreting the Regulations as requiring it only to review the position that pertained at the time that MW went into long term care, and in failing to consider whether the claimant had occupied the property as her home since that point. Finally, the authority had failed to take into account relevant considerations. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employment tribunal (the tribunal) found two complaints of direct racial discrimination made by the employee against the employer South Wales Police Authority's personnel made out. The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that the tribunal's reasoning for extending time had been flawed, but that the findings on the complaints had not been perverse. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the employer's appeal, held that there had been no evidence that the personnel's conduct had been motivated by the employee's race. 

Sentence – Forfeiture order. The Administrative Court allowed the appellant's appeal by way of case stated against the Crown Court's decision to uphold the forfeiture order made by the magistrates' court. It had been perverse for the Crown Court to find that the sum had been recoverable property under s 304 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. 

Criminal law – Appeal. The defendant had sexually assaulted, murdered and then attempted to destroy the victim's body by setting it alight. He was charged with murder and convicted after a contested trial. The judge had sentenced him to imprisonment for life with a minimum term of 35 years' imprisonment. He appealed against sentence, stating generally that the sentence had been manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, on dismissing the appeal held that in all the circumstances of the case, the sentence imposed had not been a day too long. 

European Union – State aids. The claimant local authorities sought judicial review of decisions of the defendant Secretary of State in relation to the allocation of European Union structural funds for the period 2014 to 2020. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the allocation had been rational, proportionate and permissible. However, the Secretary of State had breached the public sector equality duty, as the allocation had not been preliminary or provisional. 

Evidence – Admissibility. In the course of proceedings, the claimant company applied to the court, seeking an order that issues arising from an arbitration between the defendant company and a third party supplier be treated as settled in the instant proceedings. The Commercial Court held that to allow the application would lead to a result by which a man facing serious charges of fraud would not be able to defend himself again, and would suffer a greater unfairness than the claimant. That was sufficient to decide the application against the claimant. 

Tribunal – Upper Tribunal. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the application by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners (the Revenue) for an extension of time for the filing of a notice of appeal. The tribunal decided that the two requirements specifically mentioned in the new CPR 3.9, namely the need for appeals to be conducted efficiently and the need to enforce compliance with the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, SI 2008/2698, led ineluctably to the conclusion that the Revenue's application to submit a notice of appeal after the time limit had expired should be refused.