Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action brought by TVR Automotive Ltd (TVR) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning opposition proceedings between TVR's predecessor, Muadib Beteiligung GmbH, and TVR Italia Srl relating to the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign depicting the words 'TVR ITALIA' as a Community trade mark. 

Extradition – Discharge of fugitive. After the claimant's extradition had been ordered, he applied for discharge on the basis that no reasonable cause for the delay in removing him had been shown. The judge refused the application, as a clerical error had been a reasonable cause and the claimant sought judicial review. The Divisional Court, in allowing the application, held that the judge had not adopted the requisite rigorous approach. As it was not obvious that there had only been one decision open to the judge, the matter was remitted for reconsideration by a different judge. 

Arbitration – Award. The Commercial Court held that, in a dispute over an arbitrator's findings in a shipping case, although the arbitrator had been wrong not to recognise his jurisdiction over the dispute, he would in any case have rejected the claimant's contention about it, and so the claimant's application to set the award aside would be dismissed. 

Negligence – Causation. Where defendant solicitors acting for the claimant purchasers of a premises were sued for negligence, the Queen's Bench Division held that, although they had been negligent in failing to draw the absence of any covenant in restraint of trade to the claimant's attention such a failure had not caused the claimants loss. 

Income tax – Assessment. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) upheld the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to reject the taxpayer's argument that his tax liability had, as a matter of law, been concluded by a confiscation order made against him following his conviction for the sale of counterfeit/contraband cigarettes. The tribunal dismissed the taxpayer's appeal against the FTT's decision on the basis that there had been no decision binding the Revenue and Customs Commissioners which had precluded performance of the statutory duty under s 29 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 to assess the taxpayer for non-payment of income tax. 

Housing – Local authority houses. The parties had entered into a joint tenancy of a local authority flat prior to the breakdown of their relationship. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appellant's appeal against an order transferring the tenancy into the sole name of the respondent, held that the judge had had to make a difficult decision on the balance of hardship and there had been no error of law in the way that he had struck the balance. 

Practice – Hearing. The claimants appealed against the judge's decision that their proceedings were proceedings in which a closed material application might be made to the court, under s 6 of the Justice and Security Act 2013. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had correctly decided to make a s 6 declaration before having considered the claimants' application, under CPR 3.1(2)(m), for an order requiring the Secretary of State to plead a full defence, rather than a limited defence, which stated that the government would neither confirm nor deny the facts pleaded in their claim. 

European Union – Freedom of movement. The claimant trade association whose members were primarily Gibraltar-based gambling operators who provided remote gambling services to United Kingdom customers issued judicial review proceedings, arguing that the new tax regime relating to remote gambling was incompatible with art 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The Administrative Court decided to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union. It further rejected the defendants' contention that the application should not be entertained because there was an alternative remedy and the claimant could not seek to override the UK legislation because it had no directly effective EU law rights. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. In a case where the local authority sought care orders in respect of a family of three children who had relocated from Poland to the United Kingdom, the Family Court decided having regard to, Brussels II Regulation (EC) 2201/2003, decided various issues around jurisdiction and transferred the matter back to the regional family court. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant parish council applied to quash the decision of the inspector appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State to grant planning permission for an affordable housing development on a green field site within its boundary. The Planning Court, in allowing the application, held that the inspector had misinterpreted and misapplied the rural exception site policy, and had failed to give adequate reasons for her decision, including by failing to expressly address the claimant's submissions on the proper interpretation and application of the policy.