Latest Cases

Solicitor – Negligence. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal against the dismissal of her claim for professional negligence against the defendant solicitor. On the judge's findings of fact, the defendant had been working under a limited retainer and she had not been under a duty to give the broader advice or warnings for which the claimant contended. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action brought by CEDC International sp. z o.o., (CEDC) against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks ad Designs), relating to invalidity proceedings between the predecessor to CEDC, Przedsiębiorstwo Polmos Białystok and Fabryka Wodek Polmos Łańcut SA, concerning the registration by the former of a figurative sign consisting of the representation of a bovine animal, depicting the word 'WISENT'. 

Solicitor – Negligence. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that, with respect to remoteness, where contractual and tortious duties to take care in carrying out instructions existed side by side, the test for recoverability of damage for economic loss should be the same and should be the contractual one. Although the judge had applied the tortious test for remoteness, the same damages were recoverable applying the test for remoteness in contract. 

Patent – Infringement. The Patents Court considered the claimant company's challenge to a patent that disclosed a second medical use of the drug atomoxetine, also known as tomoxetine, for use in treating ADHD. It held that, among other things, the patent was not obvious and nor insufficient, and hence the claim for revocation would be dismissed. 

Limitation of actions – Prescription. Court of Session: Granting decree of absolvitor in an action in which a company in liquidation sued a firm of solicitors for damages for loss caused by facilitation of fraud, averring that it had instructed the defenders to act in relation to proposed loans to four Gibraltar companies and that £7.3m had been paid out of the defenders' client account to third parties and not to the four companies, the court rejected the defenders' contention that the pursuer had failed relevantly to aver circumstances in which it had sustained any loss as a consequence of anything they had done, but held that the pursuer had failed to aver and prove circumstances entitling it to protection from prescription under s 6(4) or s 11(3) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973. 

Income tax – Emoluments – Tax avoidance scheme. Court of Session: Allowing an appeal by the Advocate General, representing HM Revenue and Customs, the court held that a scheme the respondent companies had entered into, involving payments to various trusts and application of the monies so paid, which was designed to avoid payment of income tax and National Insurance contributions in respect of their employees, amounted to a mere redirection of earnings which did not remove the liability of employees to income tax. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division in a balancing exercise between arts 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights granted the local authority the reporting restriction orders in order to protect the privacy of the child. 

Sentence – Imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that, while a judge had been entitled to depart from the mandatory five year minimum sentence for a firearm offence, a suspended sentence of two years' imprisonment, following the offender's guilty plea to an offence of possession of a prohibited firearm, contrary to s 5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968, had been unduly lenient. However, the sentence was not altered because the fact that the offender was entitled to credit for time spent on a previous qualifying curfew would make it wrong to interfere. 

Prison – Prisoner. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant's judicial review proceedings, alleging that his continued detention, despite a Parole Board direction for his conditional release, was a result of a breach by the defendants of statutory and other public law duties. The delay was not in breach of the defendants' statutory duties or discriminatory. 

Costs – Interim costs. The Queen's Bench Division made an interim costs order for the claimant following the settling of a personal injury action and in so doing took into account an After the Event insurance premium.