Latest Cases

Trade mark – Infringement. The proceedings concerned alleged infringement and passing off of the claimant's Community trade marks. The claimant sought permission to carry out a survey and adduce the results as evidence of passing off. The Chancery Division dismissed the application, holding that, among other things, there was nothing in the present case such as would tend to suggest that the trial judge was likely to need, or derive assistance from the admission of, the results of the survey. 

Patent – Infringement. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court held that claims 1 and 7 of European Patent (UK) No 2,099,626 B1 (the patent), which claimed an invention entitled 'System for indicating the state of loading of a vehicle', were invalid for lack of inventive step over an item of prior art, namely US Patent No 6,591,677. 

Contract – Construction. The claimant had undertaken work on a project, pursuant to a contract with the defendant for the provision of environmental training. The judge dismissed the claimant's claim for unpaid invoices, holding, inter alia, that it was a contractual requirement that sufficient evidence be provided of the actual content of the workshop and that evidence had not been provided, in particular, no presentation slides had been produced. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the claimant's appeal, held that the material provided had complied with the workshop requirements. Further, if the judge had been intending to say that there had been a contractual obligation to provide slides, the present court disagreed. 

Injunction – Interim injunction. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant company's application to continue an interim injunction, which had been granted to restrain the enforcement of orders made against it in foreign proceedings brought by the defendant, where the claimant had delayed in bringing arbitration proceedings in England and where it was not arguable that the subject matter of one set of the foreign proceedings fell within the arbitration agreement. 

Contract – Construction. In a claim by the claimant bakery against the defendants cupcake manufacturers regarding the defendants right to manufacture products. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed an appeal against the grant of summary judgment in favour of the defendants. It did so on the basis that the claimant's case that there was a temporal limitation on the defendants' right to manufacture was hopeless. 

Trust and trustee – Removal of trustee. The Chancery Division considered an application to remove the trustees administering the testator's will, where tension had arisen between the testator's family and workers in a company that he had established. The court held that it was appropriate to remove the trustees, who were perceived as having close links with the company, and to appoint the testator's daughters in their place. 

Medical practitioner – Appeal against determination of disciplinary committee. The appellant appealed against the decision of the respondent Nursing and Midwifery Council's Conduct and Competence Committee (the Panel) that his fitness to practise was impaired and that a striking-off order should be made. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that it was without merit. The Panel's findings were unassailable and the appellant come nowhere near establishing, still less with reasonable certainty, that the Panel's findings were wrong. In particular, there was absolutely nothing in the allegations that the Panel had been biased and dishonest, and the suggestion of racial discrimination was unsupported by any evidence. 

Copyright – Infringement of copyright. The claimants were the owner and licensee, respectively, of the worldwide copyrights in eight songs performed by the Beatles at their first concert in the Unitest States of America in 1964 (the copyright works). The Chancery Division, in allowing their claims against the defendants for infringement of copyright, held that the inclusion of the copyright works in a documentary made by the second defendant did not amount to fair use; that there had been no binding contract obligating the claimants to issue a licence to the second defendant; and that the defendants could not rely on proprietary estoppel where the representations relied on had been expressly stipulated to be subject to contract. 

Practice – Stay of proceedings. The fourth and fifth defendants (Kaupthing and JJ respectively) sought the dismissal or stay of the proceedings. The Commercial Court held that the proceedings against Kaupthing had been brought in breach of a prohibition on legal action against it contained in art 116 of the Icelandic Bankruptcy Act 1991, which had effect in the United Kingdom by reason of reg 5 of the Credit Institutions (Reorganisation and Winding Up) Regulations 2004, SI 2004/1045. However, the claims against both Kaupthing and JJ were not excluded by art 1(2)(b) the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters. 

Solemn procedure – Defective representation – Misdirection – Sentencing. High Court of Justiciary: Refusing an appeal against conviction by an appellant who was found guilty of abducting his 11 year old son, the court rejected contentions that a miscarriage of justice had occurred as a result of defective representation, that the defence of necessity should have been argued at the trial, and that the sheriff had a duty to direct the jury on the question of lawful authority despite counsel conceding that that defence was not being advanced, however it upheld a submission that the 2-year custodial sentence imposed on the appellant excessive and substituted one of 9 months.