Rupasinghe (suing on her own behalf and as administratrix of the estate of Rupasinghe deceased) v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust
Fatal accident Damages. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claimant's claim for her own past and future loss of earnings, and pension losses, were not recoverable at law because she had already advanced a comprehensive services dependency claim arising out of her husband's death. As such, the loss of earnings and pension claims were independent claims for her loss of earnings and, therefore, fell outside the scope of s3 of the .
European Union Freedom of movement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division dismissed the appeal of a public house owner against a decision granting the claimant Football Association an injunction to prevent Al from broadcasting football matches in his public house using a domestic decoding card. The court held that his defences under art 101 and-or art 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union were not made out on the basis of insufficient connection between enforcement of a legal right and the alleged anti-competitive activity.
Pittville Ltd (as assignee of the rights of MasterCigars Direct Ltd) v Hunters & Frankau Ltd and another
Practice Civil litigation. The Chancery Division allowed the defendants' appeal against a deputy master's decision granting relief from the sanctions that had been imposed on original claimant in the proceedings for failure to comply with an unless order requiring the provision of security for costs.
Practice Summary judgment. The Commercial Court dismissed the sixth defendant's application for summary judgment on its counterclaim for sums allegedly due from the claimants under a consultancy agreement. The sixth defendant had alleged that the claimants' acceptance of a CPR Pt36 offer of settlement in respect of the claimants' common design claim, alleging that the defendant former employees had set up a competing business, meant that the claimants had no reasonable prospect of successfully defending the counterclaim. The court held that on the true construction of offer letter, the defence put forward to the counterclaim had not been affected by the settlement of the common design claim.
Costs Order for costs. The Commercial Court ruled that CPR 36 had been engaged such that costs consequences applied in circumstances where the claimant in a breach of contract claim had been awarded a sum that was in excess of the sum it had offered to accept from the defendant in a Pt36 offer. The court considered the relevant principles in determining whether Pt36 consequences were unjust and held that it would be unjust for the full Pt 36 consequences to follow in the present case. Accordingly, the defendant was ordered to pay the claimant's costs from the day after the Pt 36 offer had expired, but without the other Pt 36 consequences.
Contempt of court Committal. The Queen's Bench Division allowed two applications for permission to apply for committal of two defendants in respect of conflicting medical reports in a road traffic accident proceedings in which one had to have been falsified.
Counsel Negligence. The Privy Council, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that a judge and the Court of Appeal of Grenada had been entitled to rule that the first defendant barrister had been immune from suit in respect of a claim for professional negligence brought by the claimant, applying the principles in Rondel v Worsley[ and Ali (Saif) v Sydney Mitchell & Co (a firm), which applied in Grenada.
Adjudicator Award. The Technology and Construction Court granted the defendant summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator's award in its favour in a construction dispute concerning the relevant adjustment for inflation purposes of sums paid for works to highways in Hertfordshire. The claimant had argued that the adjudicator in the second adjudicator had not followed or applied a decision in an earlier adjudication, and, accordingly had acted without jurisdiction. The court held that the second decision was consistent with the earlier decision and that the second adjudicator had not attempted to re-decide that which had been decided by the first adjudicator.
Practice Summary judgment. The Queen's Bench Division, on the claimant's professional liability claim against the defendant firm of solicitors, held that the claimant's application to amend would be refused, as it was misconceived and had been brought too late. The defendant's application for summary judgment and-or strike out in respect of five parts of the claim would be granted, as three of the five grounds had no real prospect of success and there was no reasonable ground for the claimant to have brought the other two parts.
Costs Offers to settle. The Queen's Bench Division awarded the claimant three-quarters of its costs of the action, on a standard basis, where the case had been stayed before the issues had been determined at trial following the claimant's application for interim relief. Among other things, that application had followed the defendant's disclosure of highly confidential documents belonging to the claimant, which the defendant had obtained from the Office of the Information Commissioner (ICO).