Latest Cases

Trade mark – Opposition to registration. The General Court of the European Union considered the applicant company's appeal against a decision that a contested design for 'cookies' was invalid. The General Court held that, on the evidence, the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) had not erred in refusing to consider the internal appearance of the contested design, and accordingly the application would be dismissed. 

Employment – Discrimination against a woman. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), in dismissing the employee's appeal against the rejection by the employment tribunal of her claims for maternity discrimination, indirect sex discrimination and constructive dismissal, found that although the tribunal had erred factually in its approach to constructive dismissal, its conclusion on the facts had been plainly and obviously right. The EAT also made some observations about the procedure to be adopted where the parties found it difficult to agree bundles for use at the EAT. 

Divorce – Arrangements for care and upbringing of children. Following the breakdown of their marriage and subsequent divorce, the parties participated in a financial dispute resolution on 7 November 2013. The parties were able to agree final capital apportionment between them, including the making of a pension sharing order. Two areas upon which they could not agree were whether or not there should be some 'step down' in the relatively near future in the level of periodical payments payable to the wife; and whether or not those periodical payments payable to the wife should be the subject of some ultimate term or cut off. Giving consideration to s 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the Family Division stated that it would be totally speculative to consider a 'step down' in the relatively near future in the level of periodical payments payable to the wife or to say that they would be subject to a cut off. 

Patent – Infringement. The defendant company, LEO, owned two pharmaceutical patents. The claimant company, TEVA, opposed both of the patents on the grounds that they were, among other things, obvious. The Chancery Division, Patents Court, held that, given a prior United States patent, the two patents were obvious. 

Reparation – Negligence – Duty of care. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuers sought damages in respect of loss caused by fire in a farmhouse and outbuildings they owned, averring that the fire damage was caused as a result of fault and negligence of the defenders, firefighters having concluded that they had extinguished a fire at the farm but the fire having re-ignited after their departure, the court concluded that the pursuers had pled a relevant case which entitled them to proof before answer. 

Costs – Employment tribunal. The employment tribunal struck out the employee's claim, due to non-compliance with an unless order, and awarded costs against the employee. The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the appeal against the costs order on the ground that it had been unclear as to whether the tribunal had exercised any independent scrutiny of the sums claimed by the employer. If it had done so, the judgment had not adequately disclosed its reasoning in that regard. Accordingly, the matter would be remitted to the same tribunal for rehearing on the question of the amount of the award of costs only. 

Design – Design right. The claimant brought proceedings against his brother, the first defendant, and the second defendant for infringement of a United Kingdom registered design and of UK unregistered design rights in respect of a contact lens cleaning device. A judge had found that the unregistered design rights relied on by the claimant had been infringed by sales by the second defendant of two products and he ordered an account in relation to the sales of one product. The Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court, having considered the relevant profit made by the first claimant from the sale of the product, held that he was liable to pay the claimant the sum of £15,800. 

Criminal law – Manslaughter. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that an 11 year extended sentence, comprising a custodial term of 6 years and a licence period of 5 years, for a conviction of manslaughter, had been unduly lenient. The sentence would be quashed and substituted for an extended sentence of 17 years, comprising a custodial term of 12 years and a licence period of 5 years. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Rod Leichtmetallrader GmbH (Rod) against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to invalidity proceedings between Rodi TR, SL, and Rod concerning the successful registration by the latter of a figurative mark in black and white depicting the word 'ROD' as a Community trade mark. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union granted the application made by BR IP Holder LLC (BR) for annulment of a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between BR and Greyleg Investments Ltd, regarding the application by the latter company for registration of the word sign 'HOKEY POKEY' as a Community trade mark.