Latest Cases

Costs – Order for costs. The Technology and Construction Court made no order for costs on applications by both the claimant company and the defendant company to amend their respective pleadings, which had been allowed in earlier proceedings. Each party was ordered to bear their own cost in circumstances where each party had opposed the other's application to amend their pleadings. 

Company – Winding up. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appellant property developer's appeal against the dismissal of its application for an injunction to restrain the respondent building contractor from presenting a winding-up petition against it. Given that the respondent had, in fact, gone into voluntary liquidation after the hearing, the discretion would be re-exercised by granting a permanent injunction restraining presentation of a petition against the appellant based on interim certificates. 

Bankruptcy – Sequestration – Grant of standard security over and disposition of heritable property. Court of Session: In an action which concerned the proper construction of s 44(4)(c) of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1924, in which the trustee on a debtor's sequestrated estate challenged a standard security the debtor purported to grant in favour of the defender over four heritable properties and dispositions of three other properties he owned in favour of defender, the court held that the standard security and dispositions which the pursuer challenged were voidable, and fell to be reduced. 

Sentencing – Sexual Offences Act 2003 – Notification requirements. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal by an appellant who pled guilty to an offence of threatening or abusive behaviour involving obtaining clandestine access to an intimate photograph on the complainer's mobile showing her naked private parts and transmitting it electronically to a third party, the court held that the sheriff was entitled to find that there was a 'significant sexual aspect' to the offence, which meant that the appellant became subject to the notification requirements in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. 

Patent – Infringement. The Chancery Division considered the validity of two claims in a patent dispute concerning a technique to prevent the corrosion of rebars used in reinforced concrete. The court held that claim 1 of the patent, which described a method, was valid but not infringed. However, claim 12 of the patent, which described a product suitable for use in the technique, was invalid. 

Carriage by air – Jurisdiction – Breach of contract – Denied boarding. Sheriff Court: In an action in which the pursuers averred that on the return trip from a holiday in Sicily they were denied boarding to their pre-booked return flight by the defender, their carrier, and had required to pay for alternative carrier to return them to UK, the court concluded that it was seized of jurisdiction, that the pursuers had failed to prove that it was the defender that caused the damage claimed by breach of contract, but that they were entitled to compensation and reimbursement in terms of Regulation (EC) 261/2004 for having been 'denied boarding' against their will by the defender. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the defendants' appeal, held that the judge had erred in concluding that the cost of all of the claimant's care and physiotherapy needs should be met by the defendants as their negligence had made the claimant's position materially and significantly worse. The same applied to his decision in relation to accommodation, equipment, transport and holidays. The case was remitted to the judge for him to assess damages in respect of the claimant's heads of loss in the light of the court's judgment. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by H&M Hennes & Mauritz BV & Co. KG (H&M) against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) concerning invalidity proceedings between H&M and Yves Saint Laurent SAS regarding the application by the latter for registration of a Community design intended to apply to 'handbags'. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, that art 2(1)(c) of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 had to be interpreted as meaning that transactions which consisted of the exchange of traditional currency for units of the 'bitcoin' virtual currency and vice versa, in return for payment of a sum equal to the difference between, on the one hand, the price paid by the operator to purchase the currency and, on the other hand, the price at which he sold that currency to his clients, constituted the supply of services for consideration within the meaning of that article. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the action brought by AC-Treuhand AG against the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Case T‑27/10 (EU:T:2014:59), by which that court had dismissed its action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 8682 final of 11 November 2009 relating to a proceeding under art 81 EC and art 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (COMP/38589 — Heat Stabilisers) or, in the alternative, a reduction of the fines imposed on it by that decision.