Latest Cases

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) dismissed the claimant Indian national's application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision refusing her leave to remain in the United Kingdom. She had not had a 'parental relationship' with her grandchildren, despite the very close familial relationship between them and the Secretary of State had properly considered the grandchildren's best interest. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 6(2) to (4) of Council Directive (EEC) 92/43/. The reference had been made in proceedings between Grüne Liga Sachsen eVand Others, on the one hand, and the Free State of Saxony, on the other, regarding a decision taken by the authorities of the latter approving the construction of a bridge over the Elbe in Dresden (Germany). 

Immigration – European Economic Area nationals. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against a finding of the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (FTT) that the appellant Brazilian national had entered into a marriage of convenience with a Portuguese national in order to re-enter and remain in the United Kingdom. While the legal burden of proof lay on the Secretary of State throughout, the evidential burden could shift. The errors in law made by the FTT had not been material to the outcome. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory statement. The Queen's Bench Division made findings in respect of two preliminary issues, first to determine the actual defamatory meaning of the words complained in emails send by the defendant recruitment agency in respect of the claimant to secondly determine, pursuant to s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, whether the publications of the words complained of had caused or was likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation. 

Town and country planning – Development. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission for the redevelopment of a site within the buffer zone of the Liverpool world heritage site. Paragraph 18a-036 of the National Planning Practice Guidance had not required notification of the application to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee for consultation. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 2(35)(d), 17(1) and 50 of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 669/2008. The request had been made in proceedings between SC Total Waste Recycling SRL and the National Inspectorate of Environment and Nature, concerning an administrative fine imposed by the latter for infringements of the rules on shipments of waste. 

Adoption – Order. The Family Division made an adoption order in respect of a seven-and-a-half year old child. Having taken all the relevant factors into account, it was clear that only an adoption order was consistent with the child's best interests and there was no other order which would do. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, read in conjunction with art 16(1) of that regulation. The request had been made in the course of proceedings between, on the one hand, Mr Hobohm, domiciled in Germany, and, on the other hand, Benedikt Kampik Ltd & Co. KG, Mr Kampik and Mar Mediterraneo Werbe- und Vertriebsgesellschaft für Immobilien SL, established in Spain, concerning the repayment of sums of money made available to Mr Kampik by Mr Hobohm for the purchase of an apartment in Spain on behalf of Mr Hobohm. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by The Cookware Company against a decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Fissler GmbH and TCC concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'VITA+VERDE' as a Community trade mark. 

Costs – Order for costs. The Chancery Division, following an earlier judgment dismissing the appellants' appeal against the decision of a deputy master that he did not have power to make an order for disclosure under CPR 31.16, held that the appellants had to pay the respondents £16,000 in costs. Those costs took account of the appellants' costs in the respondents' unsuccessful application for permission to cross-appeal.