Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

Costs – Order for costs. The cost appeals raised the question of whether, where a party lost mental capacity in the course of proceedings, such loss of capacity had the automatic and immediate effect of terminating their solicitor's retainer, particularly where solicitors were conducting personal injury claims pursuant to conditional fee agreements entered into before 1 April 2013, in respect of which success fees continued to be recoverable from defendants. The Queen's Bench Division held that to automatically terminate a solicitor's retainer in such circumstances would be contrary principle. 

University – Examination. The claimant medical student failed his final year exams on the first and second attempt. His appeal was unsuccessful and he applied for judicial review of the way in which his grade had been calculated and the conduct of the appeal process. The Administrative Court dismissed his claim as the university had acted in compliance with the relevant handbook and the appeal had been conducted reasonably and rationally. 

Extradition – Hearing. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against the decision to extradite him pursuant to s 21(3) of the Extradition Act 2003. The district judge had been correct in his conclusion that the respondent was a judicial authority within the meaning of s 2 of the Act. The judgment in Ministry of Justice, Republic of Lithuania v Bucnys [2013] UKSC 71 could not be read as seeking to cast any doubt upon the conclusion reached in Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] 4 All ER 1249 that a public prosecutor within a member state was a judicial authority. The effect of Bucnys had to be that the conclusion reached in Assange that a public authority was a judicial authority remained valid. 

Personal Injury. The Claimant sustained a soft tissue injury to the low back with associated paraesthesia into the left leg. He was awarded damages of £2,750 for pain suffering and loss of amenity. 

Will – testator. The Chancery Division considered the validity of two wills made by an elderly woman who had suffered from dementia and blindness. It held it would pronounce in favour of her first will, made in 2004, but would pronounce against her second will, which had been made in 2007, on the grounds that she had lacked the capacity to understand the changes that it contained. 

Extradition – Extradition hearing. The Administrative Court allowed the appellant's appeal against his extradition to Poland on the ground that, in the circumstances of the case, his return would be a disproportionate interference with the rights of the appellant and his immediate family pursuant to art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.