Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Wolverine International LP (Wolverine)against a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning invalidity proceedings between BH Store and Wolverine regarding the receipt by the latter of the international registration designating the European Community of a figurative sign as a Community trade mark. 

Town and country planning – Building of special architectural or historic interest. The claimant brought three related claims, challenging the decision to construct a proposed elevated chord railway, which would link three main stations in Manchester and improve rail capacity. The Planning Court, in dismissing the applications, held that the decisions of the Secretaries of State for Transport and Communities and Local Government, and the inspector they had appointed, had disclosed no error of law. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The Supreme Court considered the appellant's appeal against a decision by the defendant Secretary of State, by which his application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom had been dismissed, on the ground that the applicant had only provided bank statements covering 22 of the required 28 days. The court held that the refusal of the appellant's application had been unlawful because, properly interpreted, the process instruction by which such applications were covered had obliged the UK Border Agency first to repair the deficit in his evidence before rejecting it. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve a sentence of one year and two months' imprisonment for fraud offences. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not made the wrong decision in concluding that extradition had been proportionate. In particular, there was no basis for the submission that it was extremely unlikely that the care the appellant's wife needed for herself and daughter would be made available and, therefore, the daughter would be placed in foster care. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, then aged 17 years, had taken part, with two others, in an unprovoked attack on a man, which had resulted in his death, for which a minimum term of 15 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court held that the offender had clearly made exceptional progress in prison which could not have been foreseen when he had been sentenced and had earned the maximum reduction conventionally allowed of two years. 

Practice – Civil litigation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the defendants' appeal against an order granting the claimants relief from sanctions, pursuant to CPR 3.9(1), in respect of the claimants' failure to service notice on the defendants of the existence of a conditional fee agreement and an after the evident insurance policy within the period specified by CPR 44.15(1) and para 9.3(3) of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. There was no justification for any interference with the exercise of the judge's discretion. 

Crown – Prerogative. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision rejecting her application for a British passport as a citizen by descent. The Administrative Court, in declaring the claimant a citizen of the United Kingdom and colonies by descent, held that the claimant was the daughter of a British citizen, she had been born after he was registered as a citizen and her parents had been married. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 16, had been involved in attacks on two men, which had resulted in the death of one and the wounding of the other, and a tariff of 13 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as none of the possible reasons for doing so were met. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 17, had played the leading role in a violent murder, for which a tariff of 14 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as the offender's progress had not been exceptional. 

Sentence – Mandatory life sentence. The offender, when aged 14, had been one of a number of gang members who had been involved in an attack on a victim, which had resulted in his death for which a tariff of 12 years had been imposed. The present proceedings concerned the review of the minimum term. The Administrative Court, refused to recommend a reduction of the tariff, as there was not the necessary clear evidence that the offender's progress had been exceptional or unforeseen.