Latest Cases

European Union – Consumer protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding, among other things, that art 16(b) of Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 should be interpreted as meaning that, in order to assess whether there was an 'evocation' within the meaning of that provision, the national court was required to refer to the perception of the average consumer who was reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, that concept being understood as covering European consumers and not only consumers of the member state in which the product giving rise to the evocation of the protected geographical indication was manufactured. 

Public procurement – Public contracts. The Technology and Construction Court ruled on the first application, under reg 96 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, SI 2015/102, to lift an automatic suspension on a contract granted following the defendant local authority's procurement tendering process for the provision of substance misuse treatment and harm reduction services for substance users in Sunderland. In dismissing the authority's application, the court held that the effect of reg 96 of the Regulations was that the court would determine an application to lift a suspension according to the same American Cyanamid principles that applied in determining applications for interim relief. There was a serious issue to be tried in the present case brought by an unsuccessful bidder and the balance of convenience laid in favour of maintaining the suspension. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division held in answering preliminary issues in a libel action, that the publication of the part of the article on the open website in the United Kingdom had not caused serious harm to the claimant's reputation, and the pursuit of proceedings in respect of that publication would be an abuse of process. 

Privilege – Legal professional privilege. The Divisional Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the legality of the procedure set out in the Operational Handbook of the Serious Fraud Office for dealing with material potentially subject to legal professional privilege embedded in electronic devices. The procedure was lawful and, in particular, the preliminary sift of paper or electronic material did not have to, as a matter of law, be conducted by third parties. 

Medical practitioner – Negligence. The Queen's Bench Division ruled on a list of six disputed facts in connection with a clinical negligence claim arising out of the allegedly negligent manner in which the defendant had obtained the claimant's consent to surgery. 

Prison – Life sentence. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant serving prisoner's application for judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decisions, refusing to re-categorise him from category A to category B and refusing him an oral hearing. His denial of the offence had not been treated as a bar to re-categorisation and an oral hearing would not have affected the decisions. Further, the claimant had been given an opportunity, reasonable in all the circumstances, to rehabilitate himself. 

European Union – Customs and excise. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that, art 143(1)(h) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, as amended, should be interpreted as meaning that a buyer, who was a natural person, and a seller, which was a legal person, within which a kin of that buyer actually had the power to influence the sales price of goods for the benefit of that buyer, had to be regarded as being related persons within the meaning of art 29(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against the refusal of indefinite leave to remain, which had been upheld by the Immigration and Asylum tribunals. At no point in the chronology of his case could the appellant have made an application for leave to remain which met the requirements of the Immigration Rules that had been in force at the time the application was made or at the time at which such application was decided. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The Administrative Court dismissed the appellant consultant physician's appeal against the decision of the Fitness to Practise Panel (the panel) of the respondent General Medical Council, finding contravention of his employment contract by absence on 91 days and imposing the sanction of erasure. The panel had not erred in its factual findings and the sanction of erasure had been inevitable. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court, followings allegations of sexual abuse by a child B against her father, made findings of fact following an application by the local authority. Despite poor contemporaneous recording of B's evidence, the court concluded that B had been abused as she had alleged as she had spoken of things she could not know about at her age unless either it had happened to her or she had seen it or someone had told her about it.