Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. Following the claimant Russian national's divorce from a British citizen, the defendant Secretary of State refused her further leave to remain in the United Kingdom. The claimant sought judicial review, relying on the fact that her former spouse had worked elsewhere in the European Union during their marriage. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), in allowing the application, held that the Secretary of State's decision had been Wednesbury unreasonable in failing to take into account that the claimant had been exercising rights as a family member under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for some of the period she had been in the UK. 

Negligence – Medical negligence. The claimant brought a personal injury claim in negligence against the defendant NHS Trust in respect of three operations for Dupuytren's contracture of the left non dominant hand, palm, little finger and ring finger. Taking into account the evidence, on balance of probabilities, the Queen's Bench Division held that the claimant had proven part of his case but had failed in resepct of another part. The parties had agreed the appropriate level of damages in the light of this finding. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. A football stadium was subject to a planning condition that only three music events could be held there per year, only one of which could fall on a Sunday. The second defendant local authority and the first defendant Secretary of State's planning inspector refused the claimant's application to vary that condition to increase the number of music events held at the stadium. The claimant sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that there had been no error of law in the decision. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant was convicted of an offence against his family in Poland and sentenced to a suspended sentence. He came to reside in the United Kingdom, where he worked and had a fiancée, with whom he had an 18 month old daughter. The respondent judicial authority sought the appellant's return to Poland to serve his sentence and the district judge made an order for his extradition. The appellant appealed. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the hardship which extradition would cause the appellant did not amount to exceptional hardship and that it was not sufficient to outweigh the public interest in extradition. 

Insurance – Broker. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant's claim for breach of contract and/or negligence against the defendant insurance brokers in circumstances where the claimant's business was found to be grossly under-insured following a fire. 

Immigration – Entry clearance – Judicial review – Human rights – Time bar. Court of Session: Refusing a judicial review petition in which a husband, wife and two sons sought declarator that the Home Secretary infringed their rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights by refusing to grant the wife entry clearance to settle in the UK as the spouse of a British citizen in the period between 15 February and 14 May 2012, and also sought damages by way of just satisfaction, the court held that the petition was time-barred and indicated that it would have refused it in any event. 

Costs – Order for costs. The Administrative Court previously gave judgment on the claimant's application for a declaration that the European Commission would be in contempt of court if it had taken certain action that would have the effect of interfering with orders granting interim relief that had been made in the action. The parties sought their costs. The court held that, in all the circumstances, there should be no order for costs as between the claimant and the Commission. However, the claimant should pay 50% of the defendant Food Standards Agency's costs and no order would be made as to the other 50%. 

Damages – Personal injury. The claimant had been a learning support assistant whose duties had included pushing a student in her wheelchair. The claimant sustained a soft tissue injury that caused her chronic pain in her shoulder and back. Her claim for damages for personal injury from the school was dismissed, with the recorder finding that there had been no breach of reg 4 of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992, SI 1992/2793. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that there had been no error in the recorder's approach, reasoning or conclusion and dismissed the appeal. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The claimant, from Pakistan, obtained entry clearance as Tier 4 (General) student until May 2012 to undertake a course, which was subject to the condition, pursuant to s 3(1) of the Immigration Act 1977, prohibiting him from studying at an institution other than the sponsor body. The claimant left the sponsor body and completed his education at another institution. He was subsequently accepted onto a further study course at another institution, to commence July 2012, and applied for further leave to remain. The defendant Secretary of State refused his application and the claimant sought judicial review of the decision. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the condition was valid and the claimant was plainly in breach of it. Further, the Secretary of State had not acted unfairly in refusing the application. 

Solemn procedure – Adjournment of trial diet – Time bar – Twelve-month rule. High Court of Justiciary: Passing bills of advocation by four appellants complaining against a sheriff's decisions ex proprio motu adjourning a trial diet to a future assize and thereafter granting a motion for an extension of time, the court held that the decision ex proprio motu to adjourn the trial diet was flawed and in any event the sheriff ought to have exercised his discretion and refused the extension.