Latest Cases

European Union – Immigration. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council on the development of the Association set up by the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey. The request had been made in proceedings between Mr Genc and the Danish Ministry of Integration concerning the rejection by the latter of his application for a residence permit in Denmark for the purposes of family reunification. 

Contract – Construction of contract. The Financial List considered issues concerning the rights attaching to the Class X note in a commercial mortgage-backed securitisation structure called 'Windermere VII', which had been arranged by Lehman Brothers International (Europe) in 2006. It rejected the claimant note holder's contention that the terms of an intercreditor agreement disclosed a mistake, which could be corrected by construction or by implication of words. It held, among other things, that there had not been an underpayment of the Class X interest amount for the January 2015 or October 2015 payment dates for loans made under the CMBS structure and no event of default had occurred as a consequence. 

Profit à prendre – Prescription. The Supreme Court allowed in part an appeal regarding the geographical extent of a prescriptive right of a several fishery. If a right over land, the identity of which shifted, could be the subject of an express grant, then it followed that there was no reason why that should not apply equally to a right over land obtained by prescription. The seaward boundary of the area subject to the right was the lowest astronomical tide mark from time to time. The area did not include sandbanks that had become attached to the foreshore within living memory either because the right applied to the foreshore as constituted from time to time or through the doctrine of accretion. 

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. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court held that owing to the father's reported behaviour it was in the three boys' best interests not to have any face to face contact with him until he made changes to his behaviour. Face to face contact included Face Time and Skype. Contact was to be limited to telephone contact for one hour and further an order was made under s 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 regarding further applications by the father. 

Costs – Order for costs. The Chancery Division held that, in the course of proceedings concerning three Sikh temples, the correct interpretation of an order made by the Supreme Court was that the claimants were entitled to immediate detailed assessment of all of the relevant costs. The master had dismissed the application of the first to fourth defendants for an order setting aside a notice of commencement of detailed assessment which had been served by the claimants. He had been amply entitled to exercise his discretion as he had done, and there were no grounds on which the court could or ought to interfere. 

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. 

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. 

Equity – Breach of confidence. The Queen's Bench Division, in dismissing a claim for misuse of private information and/or breach of confidence, held that the claimant had not had a reasonable expectation of privacy in any of the information in issue and a source within the defendant Ministry of Defence (the MOD) had not owed him (as opposed to the MOD) a duty of confidence. 

Sentence – Variation of sentence. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that, pursuant to s 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, the sentencing judge had erred in concluding that, on review, the discount of one-third, which had been given for the defendant's guilty pleas for three counts of rape and one count of aiding and abetting rape, would be reduced to 25%. Accordingly, the sentences of 18 years' imprisonment for those offences would be quashed and reimposed with terms of 16 years' imprisonment.