Latest Cases

Feeds

DHL Express (Italy) Srl and another company v Autorita Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that that European Union law, in particular art 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, should be interpreted as meaning that the instruments adopted in the context of the European Competition Network (ECN), in particular the ECN Model Leniency Programme, were not binding on national competition authorities. 

R (on the application of Stubbs) v Parole Board for England and Wales

Prison – Prison conditions. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant Parole Board's decision not to recommend his move to an open prison. Despite the fact that facilities necessary for enabling the claimant to carry out the required additional work had not been provided, there had not been any irrationality or other error of law in the Parole Board's decision. 

Gama Healthcare Ltd v PAL International Ltd

Passing off – Get-up of goods. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant's claim for passing off in respect its clinical wet wipes for use in the healthcare industry where, applying settled law to the facts, the claimant had failed to establish its case. There was no risk of deception amongst a sufficiently substantial number of the claimant's customers or potential customers for there to be a real effect on its goodwill. Further, the defendant's products did not amount to instruments of deception. 

North Yorkshire County Council and another v MAG and another

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection allowed an appeal by a local authority against a decision by a trial judge refusing to authorise a patient's deprivation of liberty in his home pursuant to s 16 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The Court found that the judge had, in her zeal to have the patient accommodated more suitably, failed to apply the best interests test by which all substantive decisions of the court were governed. Had she applied that test she could have granted the authorisation. 

Morby v Gate Gourmet Luxembourg IV Sarl and another

Bankruptcy – Petition. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal against the grant of a bankruptcy order, held, among other things, that the registrar had been entitled for find that the claimant had been personally served with the petition of bankruptcy, as required by r 6.14 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 and as articulated in authority, notwithstanding that the process server had, in the presence of the claimant, handed it to a third party who had accompanied the claimant and who had thrown it in the bin. The claimant had been aware that the document was a petition seeking a bankruptcy order against him and the registrar had not made erroneous or unjustified findings of fact. 

F v Cumbria County Council and another (Fact-Finding No. 2)

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division dismissed a father's application to discharge the care orders that had been made following a fact-finding hearing into the causes of injuries to one of his children (P) before her death in his care. The judge reviewed the medical/pathology evidence in light of testimony from new expert witnesses and maintained his earlier conclusion that the father had perpetrated a penetrative anal assault on P, either using his penis or some other unidentified object. 

BR IP Holder LLC v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

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. 

Garnat Trading & Shipping (Singapore) v Thomas Cooper (A firm)

Solicitor – Retainer. The Chancery Division considered the enforceability of a contract between the claimant company, Garnat, and its solicitors, TC. The court held that the retainer between the parties, as amended by an agreement made whilst representing Garnat in an appeal, was partly unenforceable. The unenforceable provisions could be severed. It followed that TC was entitled to charge Garnat for any work falling within the scope of the retainer, excluding the appeal. 

Rod Leichtmetallrader GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

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. 

*R (on the applications of P and another) v Secretary of State forJustice and another

Police – Disclosure of information. The Divisional Court allowed the claimants' judicial review proceedings, seeking declarations that the statutory scheme for disclosure of convictions was inconsistent with art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The present statutory scheme could give rise to some very startling consequences and such results were properly to be described as 'arbitrary'. 

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results
virtual magazine View virtual issue

Chair’s Column

Feature image

Tipping points

The age of criminal responsibility, extreme weather and conflict resolution – plus, new protocol for reporting bullying at the Bar

Sponsored

Most Viewed

Partner Logo

Latest Cases