Latest Cases

Trust and trustee – Appeals on fact. Following the sale of a Gauguin painting to the Emir of Qatar, an art dealer claimed $10m in commission from the trustees of the trust that had sold the painting. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, upholding the judge's decision that the trustees were liable to pay the commission, held that the art dealer's failure to alert the trustees that an offer higher than the final sale offer had been made earlier in negotiations did not mean that he had been guilty of a breach of fiduciary duty.

Capital gains tax – Tax avoidance scheme. Parliament's intention had been that each security converted into a qualifying corporate bonds (QCBs) should be viewed as a separate conversion, which amounted regarding the conversion in the present case as consisting of two conversions, one of QCBs and one of non-QCBs. Accordingly, the Supreme Court, in dismissing the appellant taxpayers' appeal, rejected their contention that the redemption of loan notes fell outside the charge to capital gains tax by virtue of the exemption in s 115 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 for disposals of QCBs on the basis that there had been a single conversion.

Mental Health – Vulnerable persons. Practitioners, carers and those involved in taking samples from vulnerable persons in such circumstances should be reminded that, where the patient lacked capacity and an application had been made to the Court of Protection for an order authorising the taking of a sample, it would be unlawful for the sample to be taken without the court's permission. Any infringement, in future, would run the risk, not only of attracting severe criticism from the court, but also potentially incurring liability for damages if a breach of human rights were to be established. However, on the particular facts of the present case, the Court of Protection retrospectively authorised the taking of a DNA sample from a vulnerable man (N), who was in the late stages of a degenerative neurological condition, in circumstances where the application, seeking authorisation, had been before the court, where the sample had been taken in the context of an earlier order by another Family Court judge, and where no injustice or harm had been caused to N.

Mental health – Persons who lack capacity. A proposed care plan that would involve an element of deception was compliant with the individual's rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, provided the best interests exercise had been carried out. If the care plan was in a person's best interests for deception or misrepresentation to take place, then the court would be obliged to authorise that. Accordingly, the Court of Protection, in allowing the applicant NHS trust's application for declarations to the extent stated in the judgment, ruled that it was in the best interests of a young autistic woman who suffered from severe abdominal pain to undergo a hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and colonoscopy (with associated surgical procedures), and for the proposed care plan to be implemented in its final amended form.

Immigration – Trafficking. The court had jurisdiction to grant general interim relief in respect of persons other than the individual claimants who were not claimants before it. The Administrative Court further held that there was a serious issue to be tried in the claimants' judicial review proceedings challenging the defendant Secretary of State's policy of ending support 45 days after a conclusive determination that a person was a victim of modern slavery/people trafficking and the balance of convenience came down in favour of granting the general relief sought.

Criminal law – Appeal. The defendant Criminal Cases Review Commission had made no error of law in deciding not to refer the claimant's murder conviction to the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division. Accordingly, the Divisional Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review.

Immigration – Detention. There had been a violation of art 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights by the claimant's immigration detention from 4 March 2011 to 6 July 2011 due to the deficiencies in her detention reviews. The European Court of Human Rights further held that the applicant had to have suffered distress as a result of being unlawfully detained in immigration detention and would be awarded €3,500 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

Landlord and tenant – Tenancy. The appellant's appeal against findings of the master in a dispute concerning guarantee provisions in a licence failed. The Chancery Division held that, on the true construction of the licence, the guarantee provisions to assign certain leased premises were enforceable and were not struck down by the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995.

Prison – Prisoner. The complaint of the applicant prisoners that they had been subject to a blanket ban on voting in elections and had, accordingly, been prevented from voting in elections had disclosed a breach of art 3 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (A3P1). The European Court of Human Rights held that, at the date of the index elections which preceded the package of measures adopted by the respondent government, the statutory ban on prisoners voting in elections had been, by reason of its blanket character, incompatible with A3P1.

Contract – Duress. A lack of reasonable grounds in resisting a claim of payment of commission was insufficient to engage the doctrine of economic duress where the pressure involved the commission or threat of lawful acts. In so holding, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appellant Pakistan International Airlines Corporation's appeal and held that the reasons given by the judge were not capable of sustaining his conclusion that the respondent family run travel agent had been entitled to avoid the New Agreement with the appellant on the grounds of economic duress.