Share it

Micula & Ors v Romania was heard on 7 October. This case is considering whether the High Court has the power to stay the enforcement of an award given in accordance with the procedure in the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States.

R (DN (Rwanda)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was heard on 7 and 8 October. This case is considering whether R (Draga) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 842 was correctly decided and whether the Court of Appeal in this case was, in fact, bound for the reasons it gave to follow Draga. Our Case Preview is available here.

Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd was heard on 10 October. This appeal is considering whether a landlord of a block of flats is entitled, without breach of covenant, to grant a licence to a lessee to carry out work which would breach an absolute covenant contained in a lease of her flat, where the leases of other flats on similar terms require the landlord to enforce covenants at the request of a lessee of one of those other flats.

FMX Foods Merchants Import Export Co Ltd v Commissioners for HMRC was heard on 14 October. This case is considering whether customs duty is irrecoverable in circumstances where communication of the customs debt occurred three years after the debt was incurred, in light of the time limit imposed by the “Customs Code”, art 221 (3). This case arose as a result of HMRC imposed customs duty on various importations of garlic into the UK made by FMX.

In the matter of an application by Deborah McGuinness for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) Nos 1 and 2 was heard on 15 October. This case is considering where a life prisoner convicted of inter alia terrorist murders secures early release on licence under the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998 and such licence is revoked due to fundamental breaches occasioned by further terrorist offending while on release and the prisoner is convicted of such further offences, receiving no effective additional sentence, having regard to the provisions of the 1998 Act and the Life Sentences (NI) Order 2001 whether the prisoner’s judicially determined “tariff” to include the period of his release on licence.

Unwired Planet International Ltd & Anor v Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd & Anor was heard from Monday 21 October- Thursday 24 October. This case is considering whether the English court has the power or jurisdiction, or whether it is a proper exercise of any such power or jurisdiction without the parties’ agreement, to grant an injunction restraining infringement of a UK SEP unless the defendant enters into a global licence under a multinational patent portfolio; to determine the rates/terms for such a licence; and to declare that such rates/terms are FRAND.

In the matter of an application by Anthony McIntyre for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) was heard on Thursday 24 October. This case is considering inter alia whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the applicant’s proposed appeal given that the court from which he seeks to appeal declined to certify that a point of law of general public importance was involved in the decision.

Commissioners for HMRC v Parry & Ors was heard on Thursday 31 October. This appeal is principally about whether the pension scheme transfer by the late Mrs Staveley, and her omission to take income benefits which were then payable, constituted, or are to be treated as constituting, for the purposes of the Inheritance Tax 1984 a “disposition” which is a “transfer of value” in favour of her sons, who were to be the beneficiaries of the death benefit.

Aspen Underwriting Ltd & Ors v Credit Europe Bank NV was heard on Monday 4 November. This case is considering whether the High Court has jurisdiction to determine the Insurers’ claims against the Bank

WM Morrisons v Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants was heard on Wednesday 6 November. This case is considering whether the Data Protection Act 1998 excludes the application of vicarious liability to a breach of that Act, or for misuse of private information or breach of confidence. Our Case Preview is available here.

Halliburton Company v Chub Bermuda Insurance Ltd was heard on Tuesday 12 and 13 November. This appeal is considering when an arbitrator should make disclosure of circumstances which may give rise to justifiable doubts as to his impartiality.

R (Jalloh (Liberia)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was heard on Tuesday 12 November. This appeal is considering whether the imposition of a curfew requirement on a person subject to deportation amounts to ‘imprisonment’ for the purpose of establishing the tort of false imprisonment,

ABC (AP) v Principal Reporter & Anor (Scotland) was heard on 13 and 14 November. This appeal is considering inter alia whether a declaration of incompatibility should be made in respect of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011, s 81 (3).

In the Matter of XY (AP) (Scotland) was heard on 13 November. This appeal is concerning whether the provisions of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 violate the ECHR, arts 6, 8 such that they are not law for the purposes of the Scotland Act 1998, s 29 and whether a declaration of incompatibility should be made with respect of these provisions.

R v Adams (Northern Ireland) was heard on Tuesday 19 November. This case is concerning whether a decision to make an interim custody order under the Detention of Terrorists (Northern Ireland) Order 1972, art 4(1) was rendered invalid by the fact that it was made by the Minister of State and had not been considered personally by the Secretary of State.

R (Palestine Solidary Campaign Ltd & Anor) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government was heard on Wednesday 20 November. This case is considering whether parts of the Secretary of State’s guidance on the investment of Local Government Pensions Schemes relating to UK foreign and defence policy were for an unauthorised purpose.

MS (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was heard on Thursday 21 November. This case is considering where the Competent Authority for the purposes of the European Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings has determined that a person is not a victim of trafficking, what effect this has on the jurisdiction of a tribunal hearing an appeal against a decision to remove that person to decide whether a person is a victim of trafficking. It is also considering where a tribunal decides that a person is the victim of trafficking, the appeal is considering its impact on the lawfulness of the decision to remove the person by reference to EHCR, art 4 and applicable policy.

Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants was heard on Thursday 28 November 2019. This case is considering whether the defendant employer should be liable for sexual assaults committed by a medical practitioner in the course of medical examinations carried out at the employer’s request either before or during the claimant’s employment.

R v Hilton (Northern Ireland) was heard on Monday 2 December. This case is considering inter alia where property is held by the defendant and another person, in what circumstances the court is making a confiscation order required by the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, s 160A, in determining the available amount, to give that other person a reasonable opportunity to make representations to it at the time the order is made.

R (Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) & Ors) v North Yorkshire County Council was hard on Tuesday 3 December. This appeal is considering whether the Appellant council misapplied paragraph 90 of the National Planning Policy Framework when considering mineral extraction in the Green Belt.

AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was heard on Wednesday 4 December. This case is considering whether to return AM to Zimbabwe would violate his right under ECHR, art 3  not to be subjected to inhuman treatment by reason of his medical condition, in light of the decision in Paposhvili v Belgium [2017] Imm AR 867.

The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine Nos 2 and 3 was heard from Monday 9 December- Thursday 12 December. This case is concerning whether there is any “domestic foothold” for the allegations of duress made by Ukraine or whether the foreign act of state doctrine is relevant to or engaged by the allegations such that they are non-justiciable before the English Court; and whether the claim (or any of its aspects) ought to be stayed.

XX v Whittington Hospital NHS Trust was heard on Monday 16 December. This case is considering whether the Respondent can recover damages for expenses of surrogacy arrangements which she intended to make in the UK or elsewhere and whether it is correct to differentiate between “own egg” and “donor egg” surrogacies in awarding damages for such surrogacy expenses. Our Case Preview is available here.