Latest Cases

Criminal evidence – Hearsay. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the judge had not erred in having exercised her discretion, pursuant to s 126 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, to exclude the hearsay confession of a deceased man. In the circumstances, the case for exclusion had been overwhelming. The defendant's convictions for two counts of rape, two counts of robbery and one count of indecent assault, were, accordingly, safe. 

Patent – Infringement. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal against the quantification of an account of profits following an earlier finding that the defendant had infringed the claimants' patent for a snap-in insert that attached to shop display panels. The judge had erred in his approach to apportionment of the overall profit made by the defendant and had further erred in his assessment of the deduction of general overheads. 

Value added tax – Supply of goods and services. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) allowed the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to the effect that Vodafone Group Services Ltd could amend a previous claim for repayment of overpaid output tax, in respect of which an appeal was pending, so that it encompassed subsequent claims on different grounds, limited to the same amount as the previous claim. The tribunal held that, in the present case, the later claims had not been subsumed within the previous claim, as claimed by Vodafone. 

Housing – Local authority. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant severely autistic children's application for judicial review of the defendant local authority's failure to afford them a transfer to other accommodation was unlawful, alleging that their present accommodation was unsafe for them. There was no doubt that the system in operation to deal with accommodation to meet needs complied with the indirect application of s 27 of the Children Act 1989 and its application to each claimant was lawful. 

Variation of trusts – Power of appointment. The Chancery Division gave its reasons for allowing an application to vary three trusts. The object of the variation was to eliminate the need for the involvement of non-parties to the proceedings in discussions about the future of the trust. The court held that, in the circumstances, it was perfectly proper for the trustees to effect the partial releases. No fraud on a power was involved. 

Arbitration – Award. The Mercantile Court held that a New York Convention arbitration award should be enforced in the courts of England and Wales in its entirety. The important public policy against enforcement of penalty clauses was not sufficient to permit refusal of enforcement. The decision of the court chosen by the parties, applying the law chosen by the parties, would be respected. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that the Combined Nomenclature (CN) set out in Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) no 1214/2007 had to be interpreted as meaning that a product such as the 'video multiplexer' at issue in the main proceedings should, subject to the referring court's assessment of all the facts before it, be classified in CN heading 8521 of that nomenclature. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimants' challenge to the decision of the inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, dismissing the first claimant's appeal against the second defendant local planning authority's refusal to grant fresh planning permission with new conditions so as to regularise the on-going use of the site by the claimants' families as a gypsy caravan site. In particular, the inspector had not failed to distinguish between availability and suitability of alternative sites. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The Commercial Court dismissed applications by the first and second defendants and by the third defendant businessman, Robert Tchenguiz, for summary judgment on claims brought against them. The claim against the first two defendants was for specific performance of obligations under an alleged oral agreement (for the purchase of their interests in groups of companies) and the claim against Tchenguiz was for damages and an injunction restraining him from procuring the first two defendants' breach of the alleged agreement. It ruled that the first two defendants had not demonstrated that the alleged agreement could not in law have amounted to a binding and enforceable contract and the claimants' claim had a realistic prospect of success. Further, the claimants were granted permission to amend their particulars of claim, the benefit of which meant that they would have a realistic prospect of showing that an alleged threat by Tchenguiz could amount to the tort of abuse of process. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought the Coca-Cola Company (Coca-Cola) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning proceedings by Coca-Cola for the registration as a Community trade mark of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a contour bottle without fluting.