Latest Cases

Contract – Damages for breach. The claimant claimed to have entered into a collaboration agreement with the defendants which entitled it to an interest in four large oilfields in Iraqi Kurdistan. It claimed specific performance, or alternatively damages of more than $1.6bn on various different contractual and non-contractual grounds. Gulf Keystone, and two of its subsidiaries, which were also defendants, denied that they were parties to the collaboration agreement; and all of the defendants denied any liability to Excalibur. The Commercial Court gave judgment in the dispute in favour of the defendants. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2 and 5(1)(a) and (b) of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 (on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters). The request had been made in proceedings between Corman-Collins SA, established in Belgium, and La Maison du Whisky SA, established in France, concerning a claim for compensation on account of the termination of an agreement for the distribution of goods between those companies. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division made a placement order in respect of a child, ES, aged three, in circumstances where the local authority had previously established its claim of illicit contact between the mother and ES's father. The court held that, in the circumstances, a placement order leading to eventual adoption was the most appropriate solution to meet ES's welfare needs. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant's extradition to Sweden was ordered in response to an accusation European Arrest warrant alleging gross abduction of her children. She appealed, relying principally on the infringement of her children's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the interference with the rights of the children under art 8 of the Convention in the circumstances was exacerbated by the appellant's actions and not her prospective extradition. 

Criminal Evidence – Expert evidence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the defendant's appeal against conviction for one count of manslaughter and two counts of unlawful wounding, held that the challenge to the admissibility of the prosecution expert's evidence had to fail. Further, the fresh evidence tendered was simply not clear or firm enough to afford a ground for allowing the appeal and it would not be received by the court. 

Medical practitioner – Negligence. The claimant's estate brought the proceedings, seeking damages for injury and loss said to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant's medical and midwifery staff. In particular, he contended that the negligence of a doctor, B, had caused the injuries in breach of duty. The Queen's Bench Division held that, on the evidence available to B, B had been entitled to proceed in the way that she had done without recourse to a more senior doctor, and had accordingly not been in breach of duty. 

Town and Country planning – Planning permission. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant companies' application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to grant planning permission to the first interested party developer for a retail park. The authority's decision had not been irrational. 

Negligence – Causation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the part 20 defendant's appeal against the finding that the negligence of the defendant and part 20 claimant had not broken the chain of causation, as the judge had been entitled to conclude that the part 20 defendant's breach had remained an effective cause, in combination with the negligence of the part 20 claimant.