Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division carried out a fact finding hearing to determine, among other things, the causes and circumstances of the sudden and unexplained death of a 13 month old child (P) while in the care of her parents. The judge found as a fact that the father had perpetrated a penetrative anal assault on P, either using his penis or some other unidentified object and that P had died during or shortly after the assault upon her, but that the cause of death was unascertained. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. The Court of Protection, in a decision in relation to the capacity of a young adult Z, on the autistic spectrum with a diagnosis of Aspergers Syndrome, found that the evidence before the court by a margin was that Z was able to 'use or weigh' information as required by s 3(1)(c) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 about risk to herself, and her ability to keep herself safe in independent living, and in her social contacts. 

Town and country planning – Planning authority. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's applications for judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's decisions to hold a referendum on a draft neighbourhood plan. It had been appropriate for the plan to be made without allocating any further housing land and adequate reasons had been given. The relevant matters had been considered and the scoring system used to select sites for allocation in the plan had not been legally flawed. 

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. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division considered the defendant solicitors' firm's applications for disclosure of certain documents in the context of a claim brought against it by the claimant for professional negligence and made rulings to the extent of disclosure to be allowed. 

Criminal evidence – Evidence of bad character. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the judge's refusal to adduce evidence of the complainant's previous convictions, pursuant to s 100 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, had not rendered unsafe the defendant's conviction for wounding with intent, contrary to s 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The previous convictions did not have substantial probative value in relation to the real issue in the case.