Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Grundig Multimedia AG (Grundig) against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), relating to an application by Grundig for registration of the word mark 'DetergentOptimiser' as a Community mark. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. A local authority had applied for care and placement orders in respect of three of six children. It sought care orders in respect of the others. The judge refused the application, relying heavily on the impact of adoption on the relationship between the siblings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the authority's appeal as the judge had had the correct factors in mind and because the court had to consider the relevant child's relationships with all of his relatives and the wishes and feelings of those relatives, which included siblings. 

Negligence – Causation. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claimant's claim on behalf of the estate of her deceased husband against the defendant General Practitioner who had examined the husband and discovered that he had blood pressure in the high range. The court held that, on the evidence, it was satisfied that the defendant had told the husband that his blood pressure was raised and that he should visit his regular GP to get it checked out. 

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. 

National Health Service – Medical records. An application for judicial review of the lawfulness of the guidance to the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1556, which permitted the transfer of patient data regarding non-United Kingdom resident patients to, ultimately, the Home Office for the purpose of consideration of immigration sanctions, was dismissed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimants' appeal. The information transferred was generally not private information vis-a-vis the Secretary of State for Health and the Home Office. The transfer was not ultra vires the NHS bodies and the Secretary of State and, finally, any interference with the claimants' rights under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was in accordance with the law. 

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. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Family Division judge in a divorce/financial remedies case recused himself in a situation in which he was friends with an individual who knew the husband in the case and in a situation in which the court between hearings might be meeting AB. 

Gaming – Card games. The claimant English Bridge Union sought judicial review of the defendant English Sports Council's adoption of a definition of 'sport', which incorporated physical activity. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the defendant's adoption of the definition of 'sport' had been in line with both a proper interpretation of s 3 of the Physical Training and Recreation Act 1937, and a proper construction of the objects and powers contained within its Royal Charter. 

Criminal law – Evidence of bad character. The defendant appealed against his conviction for possessing a firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence, namely, murder and making a threat to kill, and the sentence of 12 years' imprisonment imposed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that the convictions were safe, notwithstanding a misdirection as to bad character and the lack of an effective or qualified direction as to good character. However, it found the sentence was manifestly excessive and substituted a sentence of 10 years' custody. 

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.