Latest Cases

Feeds

*R (on the application of Panesar and others) v Central Criminal Court

Warrant – Search warrant. Search warrants made and executed, and restraint orders made, concerning the claimants were subsequently quashed. The defendant court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the Revenue and Customs Commissioners' application, under s 59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, for the retention of the seized material and the claimants sought judicial review. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the application, held that the meaning and intent of s 59 of the Act was plain. The Crown Court had jurisdiction to entertain an application by the Revenue under s 59 of the Act. 

* Fonderie 2A v Ministre de l'Économie et des Finances

European Union – Reference to European Court. The Court of Justice of the European Union considered a request for a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of the provisions of the Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388, as amended by Council Directive (EC) 95/7. The request arose during proceedings between the applicant in the main proceedings and the French Minister for Economic Affairs and Finance, concerning the refusal to refund to the applicant the value added tax which it had paid in France for work which had been carried out in France. 

Warner v Kurian

Personal Injury: Quantum Case. Road traffic accident. The claimant was awarded £6,600 in general damages. She suffered fractures to her mid right ribs, soft tissue injuries to her neck, shoulders and jaw. Rib fractures resolved after four months, neck injury resolved after five months, shoulder injury resolved after three months. The swelling to the claimant's jaw resolved after two weeks and the associated pain and tenderness resolved after four months. 

Re Arcadia Group Pension Scheme; Arcadia Group Ltd v Arcadia Group Pension Trust Ltd and another

Pension – Pension scheme. Th Chancery Division held, among other things, that, in respect of the Arcadia Group Pension Scheme and the Arcadia Group Senior Executives Pension Scheme, the definitions of retail price index (RPI), applicable in respect of the schemes, operated to confer powers to select an index other than RPI, and that such power of selection was exercisable by the principal employer under the schemes and the trustee of the relevant scheme jointly. 

*Stoute (a minor by his litigation friend) v LTA Operations Ltd trading as Lawn Tennis Association

Practice – Claim form. The claimant's race discrimination claim was dismissed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the claimant's appeal, held that the service of a claim form by the court, in disregard of a claimant's notification that he wished to effect service himself, could constitute 'an error of procedure' within the meaning of CPR 3.10, which the court could rectify using it's general case management power. 

Re R (Children) (Care proceedings: father's appeal against placement order)

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The court dismissed the father's application to discharge care orders in respect of two children, E and N, and granted a placement order in respect of N. Prior to the hearing, the judge had declined to order an addendum report from the psychologist. The father appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held, inter alia, that the refusal of a further report was well within the discretion of the judge and, further, it had not been demonstrated that the judge's conclusion as to the children's best interests had been wrong on the material available. 

Schroder Exempt Property Unit Trust and another v Birmingham City Council

Rates – Rateable occupation. The tenant of the appellants' property went into liquidation and its liquidator disclaimed all interest in the property. The appellants continued to call on a guarantor to make good the tenant's default and the guarantor paid the sums demanded. The judge held that the appellants were liable for rates charged by the defendant local authority. The appellants appealed by way of case stated. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had been correct to find that the first appellant had been the owner within ss 45(1)(b) and 65(1) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and, therefore, liable for non-occupation rates for the property. 

*Jedwell v Denbigshire County Council

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant issued proceedings, seeking the quashing of the defendant local authority's grant of planning permission for the installation of two wind turbines. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that it would have been driven to conclude that the reasons given in the planning officer's screening opinion had been inadequately expressed, but for the contents of the witness statement. Further, the decision had not been irrational and the planning officer had not misdirected herself as to the expression 'likely to have significant effects'. 

*Unaoil Ltd v Leighton Offshore Offshore PTE Ltd

Contract – Memorandum or note. The parties contracted under a memorandum of understanding to work together in oil production in Iraq. A dispute arose and the claimant commenced proceedings. The Commercial Court held that, among other things, the claimant was entitled to recover debts accrued in a debt claim, but that sums stated to be recoverable in the event of breach in a memorandum of understanding were a penalty and unenforceable. 

*R v Liverpool and another

Sentence – Murder. The defendants appealed against their sentences for conspiracy to rob and murder singer and songwriter, Joss Stone. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division allowed the appeals. It reduced the first defendant's sentence from life imprisonment with a minimum term of ten years and eight months for conspiracy to murder, with a concurrent determinate sentence of ten years' imprisonment for conspiracy to rob to a minimum term of four years and eight months, with a concurrent term of seven years' imprisonment. The second defendant's sentence of a determinate term of 18 years' imprisonment for conspiracy to murder with a concurrent term of eight years for the conspiracy to rob was reduced to ten years' imprisonment, with a concurrent term of five years' imprisonment. 

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results
virtual magazine View virtual issue

Chair’s Column

Feature image

Investment in justice

The Bar Council will press for investment in justice at party conferences, the Chancellor’s Budget and Spending Review

Job of the Week

Sponsored

Most Viewed

Partner Logo

Latest Cases