Latest Cases

Confidential information – Anonymity. The relatives of a child (JB) who had been tortured and murdered in 1993 unsuccessfully applied to vary or discharge an injunction (as amended), so as to permit the reporting of the charges and conviction of one of the persons convicted of JB's murder, namely the person formally known as 'Jon Venables'. The Family Division, in dismissing the application, held that the case for varying the injunction had simply not been made out on the facts.

Equity – Fiduciary duty. The first and second defendants did not owe any personal duty to account to the claimants, although a company had owed a limited duty to account in respect of particular projects. The Chancery Division further held that it was a proportionate response to the first defendant's conduct in opening and using an account for the purposes of tax evasion to refuse the relief to which he would otherwise have been entitled on his counterclaim.

Practice – Stay of proceedings. The defendant English company's application for a stay of proceedings succeeded, in a dispute concerning the administration of an Italian fund. The Chancery Division held that the claimant Italian company's claim under CPR Pt 8 did not fall within Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, and that the defendant's argument that the Italian court should have jurisdiction was stronger. An order for a stay would be granted, on condition of the defendant giving an undertaking that, if the claimant requested a winding up order in the Italian courts, it would not dispute the jurisdiction of the Italian courts to determine such a request and would submit to such jurisdiction.

European Union – Corporation tax. The general principle of EU law that EU law could not be relied on for abusive or fraudulent ends should be interpreted as meaning that, where there was a fraudulent or abusive practice, the national authorities and courts were to refuse a taxpayer the exemption from withholding tax on profits distributed by a subsidiary to its parent company, provided for in art 5 of Directive (EEC) 90/435, even if there were no domestic or agreement-based provisions providing for such a refusal. The Court of Justice of the European Union so held in a preliminary ruling in proceedings concerning the obligation imposed on the respondent companies to pay withholding tax by reason of the payment by them of dividends to non-resident companies regarded by the Danish tax authority as not being the beneficial owners of those dividends and, accordingly, as incapable of being entitled to the exemption from withholding tax provided for by that directive.

European Union – Value added tax. Article 13B(b) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388 should be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from VAT on the leasing or letting of immovable property provided for in that provision was applicable to a contract for transfer of the use of land comprising vineyards for agricultural purposes to a company engaged in viticulture, entered into for a period of one year, automatically renewable and under which rent was paid at the end of each year. The Court of Justice of the European Union so held in a preliminary ruling in proceedings relating to VAT assessments concerning a contract for the use of land comprising vineyards for agricultural purposes concluded with a company engaged in viticulture.

European Union – Civil and commercial matters. Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 should be interpreted as meaning that an action for payment of wage supplements in respect of annual leave pay brought by a body governed by public law against an employer, in connection with the posting of workers to a member state where they did not have their habitual place of work, or in the context of the provision of labour in that member state, or against an employer established outside of the territory of that member state in connection with the employment of workers who had their habitual place of work in that member state, fell within the scope of application of that regulation as it related to 'civil and commercial matters'. Further, such payments did not come within the concept of 'social security' and were therefore not excluded from the Regulation. The Court of Justice of the European Union so held in proceedings concerning the issue of the certificate referred to in art 53 of the Regulation for the purposes of enforcing a final judgment delivered in default in Austria against a company established in Slovenia.

Injunction – Interim injunction. The claimant company's application for an interim injunction to prevent the defendant company from using confidential material from a concept summary for its own purposes succeeded. The Commercial Court held that s 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 was not applicable, and that the outcome of the application was not affected by cl 7 of a non-disclosure agreement between the parties.

Criminal evidence and procedure – Mutual corroboration – Moorov doctrine – Unreasonable verdict. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who was convicted of the rape of two complainers and the stalking of one of them, the Crown relying on the application of the Moorov doctrine in respect of both charges of rape, the court rejected contentions that the Moorov doctrine was not applicable as the incidents were so different in nature and circumstances as to render it unavailable, and that one complainer's evidence was so full of contradictions that no reasonable jury properly directed could have convicted.

Insurance – Public liability insurance policy – Construction – Exclusion clause. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in a derivative claim arising out of the death of the pursuer's husband as a result of the actions of a door steward of a bar, in which the pursuer sought to enforce the rights under a public liability insurance policy of the employers of the door steward against their insurers, the court concluded that the Lord Ordinary had not erred in holding that the insurers were bound to indemnify the pursuer in respect of the death of her husband: the exclusion in the policy of liability arising out of 'deliberate acts' by the insured or its employees did not apply to the death.

Kennaway v HM Advocate