Latest Cases

Will – Validity. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant's appeal in probate proceedings, held that, in the circumstances, the judge had been entitled to pronounce in favour of the deceased's will made in 2005. Among other things, it held that the judge had adequately identified the salient criteria for determination of testamentary capacity and the evidence had entitled him to have made the findings that he had. 

Human rights – Right to respect for private and family life. The Administrative Court held that the claimant heterosexual couple's ineligibility to register as civil partners, under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, was not incompatible with their rights under arts 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The state had fulfilled its obligations under the Convention by having made a means of formal recognition of their relationship available and the denial of a further means of formal recognition which was open to same-sex couples did not amount to unlawful state interference with the claimants' rights to family life or private life. 

Solemn procedure – Child witnesses – Right to fair trial – Right to examine witnesses. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who was convicted of sexual offences involving young children and who contended that his right to a fair trial, especially his subsidiary right to examine witnesses, had been breached because he did not have an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge the key witnesses against him, the court held that the appellant's trial could not be classified as unfair as he had had a full opportunity to cross-examine the children and he took that opportunity. 

Income tax – Employment. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the appeal by the taxpayer employee against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) which had rejected the taxpayer's challenge to an amendment to his tax return by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners (the Revenue). The tribunal decided, among other things that the payment made by the employer to the employee to settle his claim for unfair dismissal and age discrimination following the termination of his employment by reason of redundancy fell to be treated as employment income by ss 401 and 403 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 and was therefore chargeable to income tax under s 6 of that Act. 

Personal injury – Exposure to asbestos – Liability. Court of Session: Following a proof on liability in an action in which the pursuer alleged that he had contracted mesothelioma due to negligent exposure to asbestos in the course of his employment with defenders, the court concluded that the evidence was not sufficiently reliable to entitle it to find as a fact that the pursuer was exposed to dangerous quantities of asbestos dust during renovation works between 1976 and 1979, and his action could not, therefore, succeed. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The request had been made in proceedings between several travel agencies and the Competition Council of Lithuania concerning a decision by which the latter had ordered those travel agencies to pay fines for having entered into and participated in anti-competitive practices. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union allowed the appeal in part by the applicant companies operating in the sale and marketing of bitumen against the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 September 2013 in Galp Energía España and Others v Commission: T‑462/07, by which that Court, first, partially annulled Commission Decision C(2007) 4441 final of 3 October 2007 relating to a proceeding under art 81 EC and reduced the amount of the fine imposed on them and, secondly, dismissed the action as to the remainder (the judgment under appeal). The judgment under appeal would be set aside in so far as it had fixed the new amount of the fines imposed on the applicants on the basis of an incorrect finding of the General Court. 

Medical practitioner – Disciplinary proceedings. The Administrative Court held that a doctor had a duty, under para 58 of the General Medical Council's (the GMC) Good Practice Guide (2006), to immediately notify the GMC of an adverse finding by a foreign regulatory body, notwithstanding that that decision was suspended pending appeal. Under r 4(5) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the five years after which an allegation would not proceed absent exceptional circumstances, ran from the date that the professional body actually made its findings and only the GMC registrar had the power to make a r 4(5) determination. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division allowed an appeal to amend the particulars of a case of medical negligence in the case of a 6-year old boy with complex mental and physical disabilities following a home birth. It held that the amendment ought to be allowed even at the risk of the trial date being lost. The consolidation of all claims to be heard at one trial was so much more practical and economic in terms of time, trouble and cost to the parties. 

Contract – Commercial contract. The Commercial Court construed a clause in the terms and conditions of mortgage-backed debentures (the Notes), which the claimant, a special purpose company in the Canary Wharf Group, had issued, pursuant to the securitisation of the Group's real estate portfolio. It held, in favour of the Noteholders and their trustee, that the redemption of Notes, using the proceeds of a pre-payment made by the borrower to obtain the release of security over a mortgaged property, pursuant to an inter company loan agreement, was an optional redemption under to the relevant terms and conditions, with the result that the claimant had to pay a premium.