Latest Cases

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 17, had played the leading role in a violent murder, for which a tariff of 14 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as the offender's progress had not been exceptional. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve a sentence of one year and two months' imprisonment for fraud offences. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not made the wrong decision in concluding that extradition had been proportionate. In particular, there was no basis for the submission that it was extremely unlikely that the care the appellant's wife needed for herself and daughter would be made available and, therefore, the daughter would be placed in foster care. 

Deed – Construction. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant's application to strike out the defendants' defences and for summary judgment in their favour, in proceedings concerning the purchase of a golf club. Unless the claimants successfully applied to amend their particulars of claim, the proceedings against the seventh defendant would be struck out. 

National Health Service – Medical records. An application for judicial review of the lawfulness of the guidance to the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1556, which permitted the transfer of patient data regarding non-United Kingdom resident patients to, ultimately, the Home Office for the purpose of consideration of immigration sanctions, was dismissed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimants' appeal. The information transferred was generally not private information vis-a-vis the Secretary of State for Health and the Home Office. The transfer was not ultra vires the NHS bodies and the Secretary of State and, finally, any interference with the claimants' rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was in accordance with the law. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, then aged 17 years, had taken part, with two others, in an unprovoked attack on a man, which had resulted in his death, for which a minimum term of 15 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court held that the offender had clearly made exceptional progress in prison which could not have been foreseen when he had been sentenced and had earned the maximum reduction conventionally allowed of two years. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Family Division judge in a divorce/financial remedies case recused himself in a situation in which he was friends with an individual who knew the husband in the case and in a situation in which the court between hearings might be meeting AB. 

Parliament – Member. The present judgment concerned the hearing of preliminary issues relating to the status, meaning and effect of the Wilson Doctrine, to the effect that there was to be no tapping of the telephones of Members of Parliament. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal gave guidance on its application with respect to s 8(1) and (4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and held that the doctrine was not legally enforceable and that the regime for interception complied with the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 14, had been one of a number of gang members who had been involved in an attack on a victim, which had resulted in his death for which a tariff of 12 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as there was not the necessary clear evidence that the offender's progress had been exceptional or unforeseen. 

Criminal law – Evidence of bad character. The defendant appealed against his conviction for possessing a firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence, namely, murder and making a threat to kill, and the sentence of 12 years' imprisonment imposed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the convictions were safe, notwithstanding a misdirection as to bad character and the lack of an effective or qualified direction as to good character. However, it found the sentence was manifestly excessive and substituted a sentence of 10 years' custody. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 16, had been involved in attacks on two men, which had resulted in the death of one and the wounding of the other, and a tariff of 13 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as none of the possible reasons for doing so were met.