Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against the Secretary of State's refusal to grant the appellant leave to remain as a Tier 4 (General) Student. At the time he had made his application, he had been an overstayer and fairness had not required that he be provided with an opportunity to find a new sponsor college in circumstances where the college that he had enrolled in had surrendered its sponsor licence before a decision had been made on his application for leave. 

Value added tax – Recovery of tax. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) allowed the taxpayer company's appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)(the FTT) which had upheld the decision by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners to reject the taxpayer's claim for repayment of VAT incorrectly accounted for in respect of unredeemed vouchers purchased for accessing certain features on the taxpayer's genealogical website. The tribunal held that the FTT had erred in its analysis of the relevant issues in the appeal. 

European Union – European Commission. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the appeal brought by DF, an official of the European Commission, asking the Court of the European Union: (i) to set aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 1 October 2014 which only partially upheld his action seeking, inter alia, annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 December 2012 ordering recovery of the expatriation allowance and annual travel expenses received by him during his secondment in Germany; and (ii) in so far as necessary, to annul Commission decision of 24 June 2014, rejecting his complaint. 

Contract – Construction. The Commercial Court dismissed an application by the claimant company, Adamantine, for an order that the defendant company was to transfer its 50% participating interest in a drilling operation in Kenya to it, as per the contract between the parties. On the true construction of the contract, the circumstances where the transfer would occur had not arisen and hence the application could not be allowed. 

Trade mark – Infringement. The Chancery Division made a number of findings regarding the validity of two trade marks of which the claimant company, the London Taxi Corporation Ltd, was the registered proprietor. It held that, among other things, both of the trade marks would be declared invalid in respect of goods in Class 12 on the ground that they consisted exclusively of the shape that gave substantial value to the goods. The defendants had not infringed the trade marks and the claimant's action for passing off failed. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division in a mesothelioma case brought on the deceased's behalf by his wife held that the deceased had not been contributory negligent and made an award of £85,000 in respect of an asbestos related disease in the upper half of the most severe category. 

Legal aid – Entitlement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant Director of Legal Aid Casework's appeal in respect of the interpretation of para 21(4) of Sch 1 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and ruled on the proper interpretation of that provision. 

Negligence – Causation. The Privy Council, in dismissing the appellant hospital board's appeal, held that, as a matter of principle, successive events were capable of each making a material contribution to the subsequent outcome. It was not persuaded by the appellant's argument that Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw ([1956] 1 All ER 615) was distinguishable because, in that case, the inhalation from two sources had been simultaneous, whereas, in the present case, the sepsis attributable to the appellant's negligence had developed after sepsis had already begun to develop. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant, Sports Direct's application to commit the defendants, Rangers International Football Club and its chairman, to prison for breach of an order restricting the disclosure of certain confidential information, following the chairman's interview on Sky Sports, reported in an article. There was no evidence to that Rangers had held the chairman out as having authority to make the statements on its behalf, and an unverified hearsay statement of one or more unidentified reporter(s) was not a sufficient basis for persuading the court to the criminal standard that the chairman had uttered the words said. Further, it was fatal to Sports Direct's application that no order had been served personally on the defendants and the court declined to exercise the discretion, under CPR 81.8, to dispense with service. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 13A(1)(g) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388. The request had been made in proceedings between Les Jardins de Jouvence SCRL and État belge concerning the refusal to allow that company to deduct input VAT in the context of building work which it had carried out for the purpose of operating a serviced residence.