Latest Cases

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. The Queen's Bench Division made a decision in relation to which law applied to an accident that had occurred in France involving and uninsured French Driver and two British Nationals. In making that decision in two actions in which the Motor Insurance Bureau was a defendant, he court considered Regulation 864/2007 and Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance)(Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 SI, 37/2003. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing appeals against planning enforcement notices, held that, the enactment of the planning enforcement order provisions in the Localism Act 2011 had not removed the effect of the Supreme Court's decision in Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] 4 All ER 851 in relation to the time limits for enforcement action, pursuant to s 171B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in cases of deliberate concealment. 

Practice – Appeal. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed an appeal of the defendant to a money judgment in favour of the claimant debt collection company as there had been no basis for the case being before the High Court. Although the defendant had made a number of without merit applications the court would not made a Civil Restrain Order against the defendant as the case was at an end. 

Pension – Appeal. The Chancery Division allowed the defendant company's appeal against the deputy ombudsman's decision that its refusal to grant a former employee an unreduced pension was perverse and amounted to maladministration. The deputy ombudsman had erred in finding that the defendant had decided that the claimant should leave its employment in its own interest and on the grounds of business efficiency, entitling him to an early payment of an unreduced pension under reg 19 of the Local Government Pension Scheme (Benefits, Membership and Contributions) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/1166) (reg 19). On the evidence, the primary ground for the claimant's dismissal could not sensibly be said to have been business efficiency. The court also construed reg 19. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 13B(d)(6) of Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388, as amended by Council Directive (EEC) 91/680. The request had been made in proceedings between the Netherlands State Secretary for Finance and Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs, concerning a notice of additional assessment to VAT issued to Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs in respect of 1996. 

Building contract – Construction. The Technology and Construction Court considered preliminary issues relating to liability for negligence in the defendants' alleged failure to discover asbestos contamination on a development site. The court made rulings as to the correct interpretation of the relevant agreements. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH (Continental) against 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 Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin and Continental concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'XKING' as a Community trade mark. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory words. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the defendant newspaper's application for a ruling that the article was not capable of bearing the meaning pleaded by the claimant and that the articles did not bear any meaning defamatory of the claimant band member. The statement was capable of having the meaning attributed to it by the claimant and the statement was capable of being defamatory of the claimant. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimants' challenge to the decision of the inspector appointed by the defendant Secretary of State to grant planning permission to the interested party. On the proper interpretation of 'person aggrieved' in s 288(1)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the claimant's had no standing, as they had not made objections or representations during the appeal procedure. 

Trade mark – Community trade mark. The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal against the decision of a hearing officer dismissing the claimant company's application, under s 47 of the Trade Marks Act 1994, for a declaration of invalidity of a trade mark registration for a sign 'Gutterclearuk' in the defendant's name. The hearing officer had not erred in principle and her decision that there was no likelihood of either direct or indirect confusion and that the defendant company had not acted in bad faith in filing its trade mark application had been open to her.