Latest Cases

Inheritance – Loss of prospect of inheritance. The Chancery Division dismissed an application by the claimant, who had been found guilty of the manslaughter of his mother, to inherit his mother's estate, as justice did not require modification of the forfeiture rule. However, the court held that the forfeiture rule had no application to any interest presently or in future created under two trusts relating to his mother's home. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Administrative Court allowed the claimant local planning authority's application to quash the decision of the first defendant Secretary of State, allowing the second defendant's appeal against the refusal of planning permission for 121 dwellings. The inspector's decision letter demonstrated a series of errors in his approach to saved policies. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Chancery Division granted applications by three Cayman companies against an individual, T, who was resident in England, for an order under s 426(4) of the Insolvency Act 1986, to render assistance to the Grand Court of the Cayman and its joint official liquidators, and a freezing order against T. 

European Union – Public procurement. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the application by European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (EDL) and another related company for annulment of the decision of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy to reject EDL's tender and to award a contract for the provision of IT services and other related services to three other tenderers. The General Court decided that: (i) the mere fact that the final decision had been adopted after the relevant validity period had ended could not render that award decision unlawful; and (ii) the applicants had failed to demonstrate that the reasons for the award decision were inadequate. 

Criminal law – Suicide. The Divisional Court dismissed the claimants' challenge to the first defendant Director of Public Prosecutions' amendment to the Policy for Prosecutors in Respect of Cases of Encouraging or Assisting Suicide. It held that the Supreme Court in R (on the application of Nicklinson and another) v Ministry of Justice; R (on the application of AM) v Director of Public Prosecutions ([2014] 3 All ER 843) had not determined the meaning of para 43.14 of the policy, a consultation on the amendment had not been required, nor had further consultation with the second defendant Attorney General been necessary. 

European Union – Trade marks. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the action brought by K-Swiss Inc., against a decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning the international registration, designating the European Community, of a figurative mark representing parallel stripes on a shoe. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Infusion Brands, Inc., (Infusion) against a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning an application by Infusion for registration of a figurative sign 'DUALSAW' as a Community trade mark. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Chancery Division allowed the claimant company's application for the modification and continuation of a freezing order made against the first defendant, F, and the second defendant company, which he controlled. The court held that the order was permitted by the equitable jurisdiction. It was in the interests of justice that information obtained about alleged misconduct by F would be usable in disciplinary proceedings against him. 

Proceeds of crime – Civil recovery of proceeds of unlawful conduct. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the appeal of S against a civil recovery order made in respect of two properties. It held, among other things, that there was no proper basis for concluding that, on the facts, a recovery order in respect of the properties would violate S's rights under art 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. Such an order would not be disproportionate to the legislative aim and would not produce an unfair balance between the general interest of the community and the protection of S's fundamental rights or cast on her an excessive burden. 

Marriage – Forced marriage. The Family Division, in an application by the local authority initially under a Forced Marriage Protection Order under pt 4 A of the Family Law Act 1996, but eventually in the inherent jurisdiction of the court held in respect of RS, that he did not have capacity to consent to marriage or sexual relations and the court had to exercise its discretion to decide whether to declare his marriage in Pakistan invalid.