Latest Cases

Practice – Summary judgment. The Chancery Division dismissed the defendant's application for summary judgment on the claimant's claim that the defendant had been party to a contract for the sale and purchase of property, which it had signed on behalf of an unregistered company, and had been in repudiatory breach of it, pursuant to s 36C(1) of the Companies Act 1985 (s 36C). Nothing in the contract allowed the defendant to argue that there had been a contrary agreement, pursuant to s 36C of the Act. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's grant of planning permission for the development of 39 private sheltered apartments for the elderly with associated communal facilities. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the authority had failed to comply with its statutory duty to notify English Heritage of the application and to send it a copy of each of the required notices. However, there was no doubt that the decision would have been the same had English Heritage responded on the application as a result of notification and the discretion not to quash the decision would be exercised. 

European Union – Trade marks. The claimant issued proceedings against the defendants alleging breach of a community trade mark, passing off and copyright infringement. The defendants asserted a defence of use in accordance with honest practices and challenged the validity of the registration of the mark. The Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court held that the mark had been invalidly registered as it was not distinctive, nor had it acquired distinctiveness. Had that not been the case, the mark would have been infringed and the pleaded defence would have failed. While the claim of copyright infringement in two dramatic works failed, the claim of passing off succeeded. 

European Union – Value added tax. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that neither art 13(A)(1)(b) of the Sixth Council Directive (EEC) 77/388 nor art 13(A)(1)(c) thereof could be interpreted as applying to the transportation, for clinics and laboratories, of human organs and samples of human origin for the purposes of medical analysis or medical or therapeutic care, by a third party who was self-employed and whose services were covered by the reimbursement made by the social security system. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 4(1)(a)(i) to (iii) of Directive (EC) 2000/60 (establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy). The request had been made in proceedings between the German federation for the environment and the conservation of nature and Germany, concerning a scheme to deepen various parts of the river Weser in the north of Germany, intended to enable larger container vessels to call at certain German ports. 

Income tax – Double taxation relief. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) dismissed the appeal by the Peninsula & Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P & O) against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to uphold the decision of the Revenue and Customs Commissioners to substantially reduce P & O's claim for double taxation relief. The tribunal decided that the natural, and correct, construction of s 799(1) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 was that where there was no foreign tax (or UK tax which was treated as if it was foreign tax) there was also no tax which could be taken into account for the purposes of that sub-section. 

Sentence – Imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum term of 18 years had not been unduly lenient, in circumstances where the offender had beaten a homeless man to death. 

Building contract – Adjudication. The claimant contractor sought summary judgment on its application to enforce an award against the defendant employer, under a construction contract, granted in the second of two adjudications. The Technology and Construction Court held that documents sent by a claimant to the defendant did not amount to a valid application for an interim payment, or a valid payee's notice and as such, the adjudicator in the second adjudication had been wrong to conclude to the contrary. The claimant was not entitled to summary judgment in respect of the second adjudication as no sums were due to it as a consequence of it. 

Injunction – Freezing injunction. In earlier proceedings, the court had set aside a freezing injunction against the first defendant on the ground that it had been misled by the claimant's former solicitors and that the claimants had not come to the court with clean hands. The claimants sought permission to seek a freezing injunction in Singapore. The Commercial Court, in dismissing the application, held that, where it had already held that the conduct which had led to the setting aside of the freezing injunction had been particularly disgraceful conduct, it would not sanction the obtaining by the claimants of freezing relief either in the United Kingdom or anywhere else. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory statement. The Queen's Bench Division, in deciding a defamation claim brought by the mother of a four year old girl in regard to the alerting of certain 'child safeguarding' services, held that although the words complained of bore the meanings alleged, which were later found to be unfounded, the staff at the defendant hospital had merely been responding in an appropriate manner to the mother's behaviour.