Latest Cases

Copyright – Infringement. In the course of proceedings concerning alleged breach of copyright regarding the cartoon character Betty Boop, the parties made a number of applications. The Intellectual Property and Community Trade Mark Court dismissed the defendants' application to have the court decline jurisdiction and for the proceedings to be stayed, and allowed the claimants' application for summary judgment. 

Insurance – Repudiation of claim. The appellant company issued proceedings, seeking payment under its insurance policy with the respondent company. The judge found that the appellant had not made a fraudulent claim, but the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago overturned that decision and the appellant appealed. The Privy Council, in allowing the appeal, held that the Court of Appeal had had no proper basis for concluding that the trial judge had gone plainly wrong in his assessment of the evidence. Accordingly, it had erred in substituting its views on the critical question. 

European Union – Reference to European Court. The Court of Justice of the European Union held, on a preliminary ruling, that Council Directive (EEC) 91/477 (on the control of the acquisition and possession of weapons), as amended by Council and European Parliament Directive (EC) 2008/51, should be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that which was at issue in the main proceedings, which authorised the issue of a European firearms pass only to holders of weapons used for hunting and target shooting purposes. 

Minor – Removal outside jurisdiction. S, aged 15, left her mother in Mexico for London with the practical and financial assistance of her father. The mother applied for a summary return of S to Mexico, but S objected on the basis that she was not receiving a reasonable education in Mexico. The Family Division, in allowing the application, held that there had been a wrongful removal or retention. While taking account of S's views, the relevant considerations pointed clearly to S returning to Mexico. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The defendant in a personal injury claim was refused permission by the district judge to amend his defence late in the proceedings in order to plead formally a case in contributory negligence. The defendant sought permission to appeal and an appeal if granted. The Queen's Bench Division in granting permission and allowing the appeal held that Justice and fairness required that the amendment should have been allowed so that 'the real dispute' between the parties could be adjudicated upon. 

Education – School. The claimant governing body of a school sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision that it should become an academy sponsored by an academy trust. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the evidence had justified the Secretary of State's view that sponsored academies were more likely to deliver attainment and improve progress in schools in need of intervention than maintained schools. Further, he had had regard to the possible disruption caused by the conversion and his decision had not been premature or irrational in the light of the schools improvement. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in judicial review proceedings in which the petitioner, who was granted discretionary leave to remain in the UK for three years only challenged that decision and sought declarator that he was entitled to indefinite leave to remain, the court rejected the petitioner's central claim that he had a legitimate expectation, based on Parliamentary and other statements, that his application to remain in the UK would be decided by July 2011 as part of the 'legacy' programme and would be dealt with in accordance with the law and practice then in force. 

Immigration – Asylum. Court of Session: Refusing a judicial review petition in which the petitioner, who accepted that he had not stated additional grounds until served with a refusal of his wife's claim, sought reduction of a decision to certify his asylum claim so as to deny a right of appeal, the court held that at the earliest possible stage the petitioner knew he had to disclose the whole truth and plainly did not do so; the respondent had correctly exercised her discretion and had given reasons for her decision, having fully explored all the proper issues; she was not bound to take account of Country of Origin information and did not err in the way the wife's case was considered. 

Bank – Documentary credit. The judge continued and made interlocutory an interim injunction restraining the second respondent bank from making a payment to the appellant under a letter of credit, as the fraud exception had been established. The Court of Appeal in the Supreme Court in Mauritius affirmed the decision and the appellant appealed. The Privy Council articulated the fraud exception test applicable to letters of credit at the interlocutory stage, but held that the fraud exception had not been satisfied. Further, the judge had erred in his approach to the balance of convenience, given the insuperable difficulty recognised by the authorities. 

European Union – Action for annulment. The General Court of the European Union granted: (i) the application by Spraylat GmbH (Spraylat) for annulment of an invoice issued by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) setting the amount of the administrative charge imposed on Spraylat; and (ii) a precautionary application by Spraylat to annul Decision SME (2012) 1445 of the ECHA which stated that Spraylat did not fulfil the conditions to receive a reduction of the fee for small enterprises and had imposed an administrative charge on it.