Latest Cases

Sentencing – Breach of injunction. The order committing the appellant to prison for breach of an injunction would be quashed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the four breaches in procedure at the appellant's committal proceedings had singularly and cumulatively deprived the appellant of valuable safeguards, the purpose of which was to ensure a fair hearing.

Company – Shares. The Chancery Division made rulings in a dispute concerning a family-owned property company. Among other things, a trust document of 2003 did not demonstrate an intention to create a trust at the time that it had been signed, but only an intention to sign some future document or documents, which appeared to have never been prepared. Further, the affairs of the company had been carried out in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the petitioners.

Public procurement – Public contracts. The claimant medical company's claim against the defendant NHS Commissioning Board failed. The Technology and Construction Court held that the two main tender documents in the defendant's procurement exercise for contracts for the supply of Hepatitis C treatments and related elimination initiatives were not unlawful and/or in breach of the duty of equal treatment.

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The wife's application for a final arbitral award not to be made into an order of the court was dismissed. The Family Court held that the arbitrator had not erred in law or fact and therefore there was no basis for an appeal or re-opening of the findings.

Animal – Dog. Prosecution notice of intention to appeal and agreement that the defendant should be acquitted in the event that leave to appeal was not obtained or the appeal was abandoned could be by email and was not required to be taken orally in court. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, further held that the exemption in s 10(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 had not been established, as the defendant police constable, in exercising his dog, had not been using it.

Compensation – Crime. Section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which confined 'miscarriage of justice', for the purpose of compensation for those wrongfully convicted, to cases where fresh evidence showed clearly that the defendant did not commit the offence of which he had been convicted, was not incompatible with the presumption of innocence as guaranteed by art 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appellants' appeals against the refusal of compensation after they had spent 7 and 17 years in prison before their convictions had been quashed.

Trade mark – Validity. The claimant's UK and EU trade marks for a series of words (FUNTIME, FUN TIME and FUN-TIME) in respect of, among other things, games and toys were valid and had been infringed by the defendant's use of certain signs. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court so ruled in allowing the claimant's claim and in dismissing the defendant's counterclaim, alleging that the trade marks were invalid.

Air traffic – Aircraft. It could not be shown that the benefit of disclosure of air cockpit footage taken during the final flight of the Hawker Hunter T7 G-BXFI on 22 August 2015 to the media outweighed the adverse impacts, namely, damage to the 'just culture' in which pilots were willing to co-operate and which produced a safe system of global air travel, and a diminution in the standing of the Air Accidents Investigation Branch among international air accident investigators. Accordingly, the Queen's Bench Division refused the claimant media organisations' application for disclosure of the footage.

Town and country planning – Certificate of lawful development. A nursery, attended by young children, was not a 'school' within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, SI 2015/596. Accordingly, the Planning Court, in dismissing the claimant's application for review, under s 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, held that the construction adopted by the inspector had been correct.

Practice – Pre-trial or post judgment relief. In an application for permisison to appeal which was dismissed as it was out of time, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, set out a best practice for following CPR 52 for parties wishing to seek permission to appeal from a lower court and the appeal court. The court held that there was value in the court summarising the effect of the authorities and the procedure, which was to be considered good practice though not mandatory.