Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Compagnie Gervais Danone (Danone) against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office, relating to opposition proceedings between San Miguel, Fabricas de Cerveza y Malta, SA and Danone concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'B'lue' as a European Union trade mark. 

European Union – Public procurement. The General Court of the European Union ruled on an application by European Dynamics Luxembourg SA and other companies for annulment of the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office to reject their tender for supply to EUIPO of IT services and all other related decisions. The General Court held that in the light of instances of unlawful conduct of substance and form found to have occurred in the context of the first, second and third pleas in law, the decision to reject the tender would be annulled in its entirety. 

Child – Negligence. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claimants' case against the local authority and the former foster parents on the basis that all allegations of physical and emotional abuse and negligence had not on the facts been made out. 

Town and country planning – Development. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of its claim for judicial review of the grant of planning permission by the respondent local planning authority for development proposed by the interested party. It held, among other things, that the authority had not, in any respect, misinterpreted relevant national and local policy or applied it unlawfully. 

Libel and slander – Identity. The Queen's Bench Division, in determining preliminary issues in a libel claim, held that the second claimant company had only satisfied the objective test of reference to a limited and unimportant extent. However, that limited reference could not satisfy its case on defamatory meaning, as the publication complained of had not conveyed any imputation defamatory of it. 

Limitation of action – Accrual of cause of action. In the course of the Kenyan emergency group litigation, the Queen's Bench Division held that issues relating to the pre-1954 time bar, and ss 11, 14 and 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 were to be tried preliminarily. However, the application for the s 33 of the Act preliminary issue to be tried as a preliminary issue would be refused. 

Human rights – Freedom of expression. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant professors' application for judicial review of the defendant university's decision to withdraw permission to hold a conference entitled 'International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism' on its campus on proposed dates. Given the risks of holding the conference, the decision had been a proportionate interference with the claimants' rights. 

Landlord and Tenant – Business premises. The Chancery Division ruled that notices served by a tenant of leasehold office premises, notifying the claimants (together the landlord) of its intention to exercise a contractual break clause in the leases, had been valid. The notices had been validly served at the landlord's stated address in accordance with the leases. That address was an 'abode or place of business' because the landlord had, on the true construction of the leases, nominated it as such, and not because the landlord actually abided there or carried on any business there. The court rejected the tenant's contention that s 23(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 was of general application to any sort of notice to be served by a tenant and applied to any claim that a tenant might serve. Section 23 was not intended to relate to matters outside that Act. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellants' appeals against the judge's decision, sending their cases to the Secretary of State, who ordered the appellants' extradition to Peru to face trial for drug trafficking. The assurances provided by Peru applied to the second appellant Italian national as to the first appellant British national, and the appellants' rights under arts 3 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights would not be breached. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Administrative Court partially allowed the claim for judicial review by the claimant victims of trafficking. It held that part of the first defendant Secretary of State's guidance 'Victims of Modern Slavery: Competent Authority Guidance (July 2015)' was unlawful, as it did not allow victims of trafficking or their legal representatives to request discretionary leave to remain on the grounds of agreeing to assist the police with their enquiries.