Latest Cases

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. 

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. 

Bankruptcy – Trustee in bankruptcy. The Bankruptcy High Court dismissed an application for directions made by the applicant trustee, P, as to whether to admit a proof of debt filed by the respondent liquidators and whether a meeting of creditors should be convened at the liquidators' request. P's role was to make hard decisions such as the one in the present case. Such applications were to be discouraged. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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'. 

Practice – Extension of time. The Queen's Bench division refused the respondent's application for an extension of time to file a respondent's notice. Among other things, it was clear that, having been granted permission to appeal, the appellant had repeatedly sought to engage with the respondent, and the respondent had repeatedly failed to do so until it had been too late. Equally, whilst there was no question of the respondent seeking to challenge the judge's findings of fact in any way, the consequences of granting the application would not be minimal. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed an application by the claimants to admit expert evidence estimation of their potential career earnings in the construction industry. Having considered CPR PD 35 and its guidance on instructing experts the court accepted the defendants' submissions that the methodology proposed was merely research and further that it could not be said that what was proposed would assist the court in determining the matters which were in issue. 

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.