The Secretary of State’s challenge against a decision to quash his decision to uphold a local authority’s refusal to grant retrospective planning permission to gypsy famailies to use their land as a gypsy caravan site was allowed. It was held that such planning judgments required the Secretary of State to balance the interests of the community at large, as reflected in the planning considerations, against the interests of the families, in particular the childrens’ educational requirements. The ...
|
Clinical Negligence – Duty of Care – Proximity – Fair, Just and Reasonable – Limitation – Date of Knowledge – s. 33 Discretion. The Claimants were based in Jordan. They were carriers of a hereditary blood disease. The disease had not affected either the Claimants or their first child. Their second child did develop the disease. During the next pregnancy, the parents sought tests to determine whether the foetus would develop the disease. Their Jordanian doctor sent a sample of tissue for analysi ...
|
Hospital doctors had not been negligent in their treatment of a baby who had sustained a rare brain condition shortly after his birth.
|
A sufficient relationship of proximity existed to justify the imposition of a duty of care between a family seeking damages for wrongful birth and a third party laboratory that had prepared a sample of tissue for pre-natal DNA analysis on behalf of the defendant NHS trust.
|
An appeal was allowed against the grant of summary judgment for trade mark infringement in respect of goods imported to the UK from Spain. The original trade mark owner had assigned the separate trade mark registrations in Spain and in the UK to separate entities in Spain and the UK. A trial preceded by disclosure was necessary in order to investigate whether there were economic links or the possibility of control between the original owner and the Spanish and UK assignees, which might prevent ...
|
Once a Judge had determined that D (with convictions) should be afforded a good character direction D was entitled at least to a direction to the effect that his credibility was intact and undamaged either by the convictions or otherwise, and that the jury should take that into account in assessing the credibility of his evidence and the explanations he had given. A judge who has decided that D is, for the purposes of the trial, of good character, must confer the benefit on him of a good charact ...
|
The subsequent signature, in the course of the trial, of an amended indictment by the proper officer of the court, is material. It was upon an indictment signed, and properly so-called, that convictions were entered. In the absence of prejudice to D, the proceedings were thereby validated.
|
In extradition proceedings the appropriate route for challenging a decision reached under the Extradition Act 2003 s.7 as to whether a person appearing before court was identifiable as one and the same as the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant was issued was by way of judicial review.
|
The court modified the application of domestic privilege against self-incrimination so as to exclude from its ambit material constituting free-standing evidence that was not created by a respondent to a search order under compulsion. Where a search order obtained in an action for breach of confidence and copyright infringement led to the discovery of obscene images of children, the common law privilege against self-incrimination did not prevent the court from directing that the material be passe ...
|
The judge had taken into account all relevant factors when awarding interest on indemnity costs and had correctly exercised his discretion in the level of interest awarded.
|
| 1 |