Latest Cases

Building – Defect. The claimant construction company's application for five declarations succeeded only in part, in a dispute concerning the construction of two blocks of student residences in Plymouth. The Technology and Construction Court held that the first to fourth declarations would not be made out, but that the fifth declaration, namely that one or more rooms in the property had been constructed so as to be less than 3% smaller than the size specified, succeeded.

Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The inspector appointed by the defendant Secretary of State had clearly been satisfied that buildings on the site had been 'new buildings' – not new buildings and original buildings – which had not, in whole or in part, been lawful. Therefore, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that, as the judge had concluded, the inspector had not erred in law.

Arbitration – Award. The part of an arbitration award, declaring that the first claimant was the beneficial owner of the shares in a bank purchased with his or the second claimant's US$75m, was affected by serious irregularity, within s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Accordingly, the Commercial Court, in allowing the claimants' application, set aside that part, together with the affected reasoning.

Competition – Merger. The Companies Court allowed in part an application to approve two parts of a merger. The court held that the second part of the merger would be approved. However, the jurisdictional requirement in reg 16(1)(b) of the Companies (Cross-Border Mergers) Regulations 2007 SI 2007/2974 had not been satisfied in respect of the first part of the merger, and the court could not make an order approving its completion.

Medical practitioner – Disciplinary proceedings. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal's decision to proceed with disciplinary proceedings in the respondent's absence had been unimpeachable. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appellant General Medical Council's appeal, held that the judge had failed to apply the relevant principles and, as a result, she had come to demonstrably the wrong conclusion in allowing the respondent's appeal against the tribunal's decision which had resulted in his erasure from the register.

The Lord Ordinary had not erred in holding that a decision, taken by the trustee under the trust deed in accordance with his fiduciary duty, that a distribution of a debtor's estate was final, had to be regarded as definitive. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appellant trustee's appeal that related to whether he was entitled to property that had been discovered after his and the second respondent debtor's discharge.

Guarantee – Construction. The judge had not erred in his decision to dismiss the taxpayer's application to set aside a statutory demand based on a judgment debt obtained by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners (HMRC) in relation to the taxpayer's indebtedness to HMRC under a guarantee. Consequently, the Chancery Division dismissed the taxpayer's appeal against the judge's decision, deciding, among other things, that, on its true construction, the clause at issue did not prevent HMRC from enforcing a judgment obtained for the payment of the relevant part debt.

Scotland – 'Brexit'. The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill, as a whole, would not be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament because it did not relate to reserved matters, within the meaning of s 29(2)(b) of the Scotland Act 1998. The Supreme Court so ruled, among other things, in a reference by the applicant Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland as to whether the Scottish Parliament had the power to legislate for the continuity of laws relating to devolved matters in Scotland which were presently the subject of EU law, but which would cease to have effect after the UK had withdrawn from the EU.

Financial services – Financial Conduct Authority - Regulation. It was well established that when considering an application for a matter to be determined as a preliminary ruling, there were certain key principles to be considered. In the light of those principles, the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)(the tribunal) dismissed the applicant's application for a direction that the determination as to whether the Financial Conduct Authority's (the FCA's) action against him was time-barred should be heard as a preliminary hearing in the course of a reference he had made to the tribunal regarding the Decision Notice (the DN) made against him. The tribunal further dismissed the applicant's applications for a direction that publication by the FCA of the DN should be prohibited.

Order – Amendment. The second to the seventh defendants' application to amend an order requiring them to forward a transcript of a judgment to the Revenue and Customs Commissioners (HMRC), together with an explanation as to the tax treatment of the monies received on behalf of trusts of two properties (para 7), was dismissed. The Chancery Division ruled that the amendment sought, which was to replace the named defendants with the name of the first defendant, was not appropriate where para 7 could have been complied with in its original form and where it was clear that the first defendant had no intention of complying with it. The court also dismissed an application to set aside further orders which essentially required compliance with para 7.