Latest Cases

Criminal procedure – Rape – Standard of interpretation at trial – Judge's charge. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant, whose native tongue was Korean, against his conviction for rape, the court rejected contentions that the appellant had not received a fair trial because the interpreter at the trial had impeded rather than improved his understanding of the proceedings and that the trial judge had materially misdirected the jury in her directions on reasonable belief. 

Commercial contract – Construction – Exclusion clause. Court of Session: In a dispute between the owner and the occupier of a multi-storey car park concerning liability for repairs, in which the owner argued that on the occupier's receipt of collateral warranties and the issue of a defects certificate it had no further liability, but the occupier objected that there had been no final inspection and it had not received the defects certificate, the court construed the agreement entered into before the construction of the car park as meaning that the parties had to comply with the contractual scheme: absent that condition being fulfilled there could be no valid defects certificate and no exclusion of the owner's liability. 

European Union – Directives. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation and validity of a number of provisions of Directive 2014/40/EU concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products. The request had been made in two sets of proceedings brought by: (i) Philip Morris Brands SARL and Philip Morris Ltd; and (ii) British American Tobacco UK Ltd against the Secretary of State for Health in the United Kingdom, concerning the legality of the 'intention and/or obligation' of the UK government to implement Directive 2014/40. 

Town and country planning – Established use. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's decisions to grant a certificate of lawfulness in respect of operational development and to refuse to take enforcement action. Consideration had been given to use, although it had not been required, and the authority's decision not to take enforcement action pending further applications had been a lawful and legitimate exercise of its discretion. 

Sentence – Aggravating features. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, provided guidance as to the proper sentencing approach and practice for considering the aggravating feature of prevalence. In applying that test, it had not been satisfactory to have taken account of prevalence in respect of the defendant's four drug convictions. Accordingly, the defendant's total sentence of four years and ten month's detention in a Young Offenders Institution would be reduced to four years. 

Contract – Formation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against the judge's decision that there had been a binding contract between the parties, formed by the claimant (Reveille) accepting through conduct a written agreement, which had been signed by the defendant (Anotech), but not Reveille. It held that Reveille had waived the provision that there would be no binding contract in the absence of its signature on the agreement, and there had been no prejudice from that to Anotech. There had been acceptance by conduct on Reveille's part of the terms of the agreement, which had led to a binding contract. 

Jury – Verdict. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, provided guidance as to the proper approach where it was contended that the verdicts of the jury had been inconsistent. It was held that the law ought to return to and apply the clear test set out in R v Stone ((13 December 1954, unreported)), as formally adopted in R v Durante ([1972] 3 All ER 1056). Applying that test, the defendants' convictions had not been unsafe. 

Town and country planning – Enforcement notice. The Administrative Court allowed the appellant local authority's appeal by way of case stated against the second respondent magistrates' court's acquittal of the first respondent of two offences of breaching an enforcement notice issued by the appellant local authority against the change of use of a property to two self-contained flats without planning permission. 

Negligence – Causation. The Queen's Bench Division, in a clinical negligence case brought by the claimant by her mother as litigation friend, held that there had been no negligence in the performance of a correctional operation preformed on the claimant which left her with damage to the cauda equina with consequent lower paralysis. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding, among other things, that art 11A(1)(b) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388 should be interpreted as meaning that the value of a right in rem granting its holder a right of use over immovable property and the cost of completing an office building built on the land in question could be included in the taxable amount of a supply, within the meaning of art 5(7)(a) of the Sixth Directive, where the taxable person had already paid VAT on that value and on that cost, but had also deducted the VAT immediately and in full.