Latest Cases

Environment – Protection-Broads. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant Broads Authority's decision that the brand 'Broads National Park' should be adopted for marketing-related purposes, although it was not a statutorily designated National Park. The Authority's decision had not been unlawful as outside the Authority's statutory powers and duties, irrational or procedurally unfair, and the Authority had not had regard to an immaterial consideration. 

Criminal law – Trial. In an appeal against an order imposed under s 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, the case, for the first time, raised the question of how critical fair trial protections could be extended to prevent or control communications on social media. In the circumstances, the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, revoked the s 4(2) order and ordered the various media organisations not to place any report of the criminal trial on their Facebook page(s), and, to disable the ability for users to post comments on their respective news websites on any published reports of the criminal trial. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division made a declaration of parentage in favour of a father in circumstances where he and his partner had undergone IVF treatment using donor sperm and where they had signed the relevant consent forms. It had later transpired that they had signed consent forms under the 'old' scheme, but had commenced treatment after the 'new' scheme introduced by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 had come into effect. The court held that the signed forms were sufficient to comply with the requirements of the 2008 Act and operated a valid and effective consent notwithstanding the change in the statutory regime. 

Contract – Damages for breach. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal against the judge's decision that the defendant was entitled to recover spread costs for a period of delay caused by the claimant's breach of contract. The language of the exclusion clause in the contract in LOGIC form was clear and was apt to exclude liability for wasted costs in the form of the spread costs which the defendant sought to recover. 

Compensation – Crime. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimants' appeals against the dismissal of their claims for judicial review, seeking a declaration of incompatibility between s 133(1ZA) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and art 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (art 6(2)). The Divisional Court had been right to have held that the ratio of the decision in R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice ([2011] 3 All ER 261) (Adams) on the art 6(2) issue was that art 6(2) was not applicable to the operation of s 133 of the Act, whatever definition of 'miscarriage of justice' was adopted. Adams was binding precedent on that point and that remained the position regardless of any subsequent observations of the European Court of Human Rights in Allen v United Kingdom ((2013) 36 BHRC 1) and later cases. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Auyantepui Corp., SA, (Auyantepui) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office relating to opposition proceedings between Magda Rose GmbH & Co. KG and Auyantepui regarding the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'Mr Jones' as a Community trade mark. 

Trade mark – Opposition. The Chancery Division allowed Gap's appeal against a decision dismissing its opposition, under s 5(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, to an application by British American Group Ltd (BAGL) to register 'The GapTravelGuide' as a trade mark in respect of the services of magazine publishing in Class 41. The hearing officer had erred in concluding that the average customer would generally be a business and there had been inconsistency in his reasoning in certain paragraphs of his decision. There was a risk of likelihood of confusion between the 'GAP' trade mark and the mark which BAGL sought to register. 

Rates – Valuation list. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant listing officer's appeal against the decision of the Valuation Tribunal for England (the VTE), ordering her to alter the valuation list for the entry in respect of a property to show one entry for the property instead of two. The VTE had not misdirected itself in law and, on the evidence, its conclusion had been a reasonable one. 

Land registration – Title. The Chancery Division held that the claimant and the first defendant, who was his wife, were entitled to an order setting aside a transfer and a settlement and transfer of property on the grounds of mistake, where they had believed that the steps they had taken would not result in an immediate charge to tax nor a ten-year anniversary charge. The equitable rules applied to the situation. In the circumstances, it was appropriate to set aside all of the relevant transactions. 

Negligence – Vehicles. The Queen's Bench Division allowed a claim for damages for personal injury and consequential loss following a vehicular collision which, through the events that followed, had resulted in the claimant's leg being amputated. The defendant was liable for the entirety of the incident which had flowed directly from his negligent act in reversing into the claimant without having kept a proper look out. The damages would be reduced by 60% to reflect the claimant's contributory negligence in having left his car's ignition on and the car in neutral, when he had gone to stand behind the car to inspect the damage.