Latest Cases

European Union – Data protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that, on the proper construction of art 25(6) of Council Directive (EC) 95/46, Commission Decision (EC) 2000/520, which found that the United States ensured an adequate level of data protection, was invalid. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed the appeal by Total Marketing Services SA (Total) by which Total sought to set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Total Raffinage Marketing v Commission: T‑566/08, by which that court had dismissed Total's application, primarily, for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2008) 5476 final of 1 October 2008, relating to a proceeding under art 81 EC and art 53 of the European Economic Area Agreement, and, in the alternative, for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on Total. 

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The applicant Sri Lankan national sought permission to challenge the lawfulness of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to refuse his claim under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and to certify it under s 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), in refusing permission, held that the Secretary of State's decision to certify his claim was unarguably lawful, in particular, absent any specific evidence of serious irreversible harm to the claimant's child during the period of his absence whilst he pursued an appeal from abroad. 

European Union – EU Institutions. In proceedings concerning the applicant's removal from the electoral roll following his conviction, the Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling that member states were not precluded from excluding from those entitled to vote in elections to the European Parliament persons who had been convicted of a serious crime and whose convictions had become final before 1 March 1994. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Monster Energy Company (Monster) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Monster and Mr Luis Yus Balaguer, concerning the application by the latter to register a figurative sign depicting the words 'icexpresso+ energy coffee' as a Community trade mark. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court considered the placement of Ro, who was 14 years old and displayed extremely difficult and demanding behaviour. It held that the local authority's care plan, which involved Ro remaining at the residential unit where she currently stayed, was the only plan that could meet her welfare interests and, therefore, would be approved. 

Adoption – Order. An application for the adoption of an 18 year old Pakistani national had been refused. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the prospective adopter's appeal as the judge had erred in his interpretation of s 1(2) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and in his assumption that, under s 1(5) of the British Nationality Act 1981, the adoptee would automatically assume British citizenship. 

Patent – Infringement. The Patents Court dismissed an application for defendants' summary judgment in respect of a claim for, among other things, declaratory relief that rival products had infringed a patent concerning an electronic cigarette. Further, having weighed the competing considerations, it also dismissed an alternative application for a stay of that claim. 

Immigration – Detention. The claimant issued judicial review proceedings, contending that the defendant Secretary of State's decision to detain him under immigration powers had been unlawful. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the preponderant evidence did not come close to establishing that the claimant had a serious mental health condition that could not be managed satisfactorily in detention or that his food and fluid refusal had been, or might have been, influenced by a serious health condition. 

Police – Unlawful conduct. The claimants sought damages against the defendant Metropolitan Police Commissioner for assault, false imprisonment, racial abuse and breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Queen's Bench Division awarded the first claimant damages of £2,500 for false imprisonment, including aggravated damages for his humiliation and distress. The second claimant was awarded £11,950 for false imprisonment and assault, including aggravated damages for serious racial abuse, humiliation and physical indignities.