Latest Cases

Patent – Validity. The Patents Court ruled that the claimant, Saab's, claim for the revocation of patents concerning mine clearance devices succeeded in part on the ground of obviousness. The defendant's counterclaim for infringement succeeded in part in respect of one of its patents. 

Immigration – Detention. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of his application for judicial review of his detention pending removal to Afghanistan, holding, among other things, that the detention of the claimant impugned in the proceedings had been lawful, as the defendant Secretary of State had been entitled to treat him as an adult. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection in an application for reconsideration of the order pursuant to r 89 of the Court of Protection Rules 2007, SI 1744/07 reconfirmed that one of the attorneys, A had breached her fiduciary duty as an attorney by taking advantage of her position and that she had obtained a personal benefit from her position. Accordingly, the court confirmed the order made revoking her appointment as an attorney. 

Burial – Body. The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal by parents of a deceased to set aside a decision by a deputy judge declaring that the claimant NHS Trust had lawful possession of the body of the deceased and was entitled to make arrangements for the funeral and disposal of the same. Among other things, there was no fair and reasonable basis for the conclusion that the post-mortem of the deceased had been misconducted and no extant proceedings, which would require the body either as evidence or to conduct further tests upon. 

Company – Voluntary winding up. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division dismissed the defendant former liquidator's appeal against an order that she contribute £548,074.56 to the assets of a company in creditors' voluntary liquidation by way of compensation for her breaches of duty. The illegality defence could not apply, as there had been no inextricable link between the claim and the fraudulent conduct, and the policy of requiring liquidators properly to collect and distribute the assets of the company that had to prevail. 

Trust and trustee – Discretionary trust. The Chancery Division dismissed the appellant taxpayers' appeal against a determination of a liability for inheritance tax said to have arisen in relation to the ten-year charge applicable to trusts. It held that, on the correct interpretation of the Inheritance Act 1984, the property in question was not 'excluded property' and so the ten year charge applicable to trusts would apply. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. Court of Session: Granting a judicial review petition by an Indian citizen who challenged the refusal of his application for leave to remain in the UK as the spouse of British citizen, the court held that the respondent had failed to attach enough importance to the rights of the petitioner's spouse and had not properly considered the close relationship the spouse had to have with her disabled mother, and that on any reasonable view it could not be said that the case would be bound to fail before an immigration judge. 

Divorce – Financial provision. The Family Division allowed part of the wife's appeal in relation to payment of school fees but declined to overturn the judge's decision on the clean break that had been ordered. It further was prepared to admit a Calderbank offer on appeal having regard to the words of r 28.3(8) of the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2955/10. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory statement. The Queen's Bench Division held that an allegedly defamatory statement made by a police officer in the context of a child protection conference that was later retracted, was an accepted error of communication was not capable of amounting to defamation in law. 

Immigration – Leave to enter. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the application for judicial review made by one of the 'Cuban Five' against the refusal of entry clearance to meet with United Kingdom parliamentarians (the MPs) to discuss his case. The refusal of entry clearance was a disproportionate interference with the MP's rights under art 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which had not been sufficiently justified by the Secretary of State.