Latest Cases

Adoption – Application. The judge made care and placement orders concerning two children. The parents sought leave to oppose the making of adoption orders and the transfer of the proceedings to the Slovak Republic. Other organisations applied for the placement of the children in foster care in the Slovak Republic. The Family Court, in dismissing the applications, held that none of the matters relied upon by the parents had amounted to a change in circumstances. With respect to the transfer of proceedings to and placement of the children in the Slovak Republic, it was too late in the proceedings and the judge had already determined those issues. 

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. 

Agriculture – Agricultural land. The Court of Justice of the European Union held that the definition of 'permanent pasture' set out in art 2(c) of Commission Regulation (EC) 1120/2009 had to be interpreted as covering agricultural land which was currently, and had been for five years or more, used to grow grass and other herbaceous forage, even though that land had been ploughed up and seeded with another variety of herbaceous forage other than that which had previously been grown on it during that period. 

Personal Injury: Quantum Case. Road traffic accident. The claimant was awarded £6,500 in general damages. She suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder which resolved 11 months post-accident and a phobia of driving which resolved one year post-accident. The claimant also suffered an injury to her hip which resolved four months post-accident, and a small scar on her eyebrow which was permanent but which was not particularly noticeable. 

Criminal law – Trial. Following changes to the funding of legal aid in criminal cases, the defendants in a complex fraud trial were unable to obtain representation by counsel. The judge in the Crown Court stayed the proceedings. The Financial Conduct Authority, as prosecuting authority appealed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed the appeal. To conclude that the state had violated the process of the court or that what had happened had jeopardised the integrity of the criminal justice system (as opposed to its effective operation) was wrong as a matter of principle. Further, on closer analysis, the judge had been wrong to find that there was no realistic prospect of competent advocates with sufficient time to prepare being available in the foreseeable future. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimant brought proceedings against various defendants, including Siemens Public Ltd Company, alleging infringement a patent concerning a method of operating a pitch-controlled wind turbine. The claimant applied for an order that Siemens provide it with, among other things, information as to its customers within the jurisdiction of the court. The Patents Court held that the balance of justice was in favour of making a Norwich Pharmacal order for disclosure. 

Damages – Assessment. The defendant was the sole proprietor of a silver business at the London Silver Vaults. The claimant purchased, through the defendant, a large quantity of silver for investment. The claimant demanded delivery of the silver by a certain date, but only some of the silver was delivered. The claimant brought an action, seeking damages for conversion. Judgment was entered in default of acknowledgement of service. The Commercial Court held that the claimant was entitled to recover damages of £406,760.33, based on the fall in value of the silver eventually delivered to it. 

Solicitor – Disciplinary proceedings. The appellant in-house solicitor for a newspaper appealed against the finding of the Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal (the SDT) that he was guilty of failing to act with integrity and knowingly allowing the judge to be misled in the conduct of litigation. The Divisional Court, in allowing the appeal in part, held that the judge had been misled. The SDT, having disavowed making any finding of dishonesty, could not properly proceed to make a finding that the appellant had knowingly allowed the judge to be misled. However, it was inevitable that the SDT would have found him guilty on the basis that he had recklessly allowed the judge to be misled. 

Contract – Construction. The parents' children attended the claimant school which was a fee paying school. When the parents failed to pay certain fees, the school brought an action for payment of a term's fees. The parents brought a defence and counterclaim alleging that the school was not entitled to recover the unpaid fees because it had acted in fundamental breach of contract, entitling the parents to rescind and/or repudiate the contract. The parents also made allegations of racial discrimination and bullying. The Queen's Bench Division held that on he facts and evidence, the school had not acted in breach of any of its three contracts. The defence and counterclaim had therefore had to fail. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks & Designs) concerning opposition proceedings between Arisa Assurances SA and Argo Group International Holdings Ltd (Argo) relating to the application by Argo's predecessor for registration of a figurative sign 'ARIS' as a Community trade mark.