Latest Cases

Criminal evidence – Perjury – Relevancy of indictment. High Court of Justiciary: In a case in which the accused challenged the relevancy of the indictment containing a charge of perjury, it being alleged that he had perjured himself when giving evidence as a defence witness at a trial for perjury (the original trial), the court held that the false evidence alleged in the indictment was not relevant evidence at the original trial and the charge of perjury in the indictment was irrelevant. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Infocit — Prestação de Serviços, Comércio Geral e Indústria, Lda (Infocit) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) concerning opposition proceedings between DIN — Deutsches Institut für Normung eV and Infocit regarding the application by the latter company for registration of the word sign 'DINKOOL' as a Community trade mark. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The proceedings arose out of the acquisition by the claimant from the defendant of one of its business divisions. The claimant claimed damages for loss it said resulted from fraudulent misrepresentations made by the defendant in respect of the forecasts on which the claimant relied, and damages for breach of contract. The defendant applied to strike out the particulars of claim or, alternatively, for summary judgment. The Commercial Court held that, in the circumstances, the defendant was entitled to the relief sought in one regard. 

Trust and Trustee – Settlement. The Chancery Division approved an arrangement for the variation of the trusts of a settlement, where the trust fund was subject to inheritance tax, to incorporate a power to accumulate income to meet future periodic inheritance tax changes, and to extend the trust period. The proposed arrangement did not give rise to a resettlement of the fund and was to the beneficiaries of the trust. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The applicants applied for a parental order in relation to a child, A, who had been born in South Africa following a surrogacy arrangement. The Family Division, in making a parental order, held that the criteria in s 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 had been met. Further, it was clearly in A's lifelong interests that there was consistency as to her legal status in relation to those who cared for her across the relevant jurisdictions where she was likely to live, and that could only be achieved in the present jurisdiction by the court making the order sought. 

Company – Voluntary winding up. The respondent company had successfully appealed against a judge's order that property in the liquidation of another company should be sold to the two appellants. The Privy Council allowed the appellants' appeal, holding that the judge's order had not been flawed to such an extent that it should be set aside. In particular, the parties had been aware that the judge intended to sanction the sale to the highest bid received by a specified date and time and the fact that the terms of sale had been provided shortly before that deadline had not, on the facts, been unfair. 

Customs and excise – Forfeiture. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) allowed the appeal by Ms Projosujadi against a decision by the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) to reject her appeal against the decision by a reviewing officer of the respondent Border Revenue not to restore to her an alligator-skin handbag bought for her in the United States by a friend which had been confiscated by the Border Force because it did not have the relevant certificates. The tribunal decided that in arriving at its decision the FTT had failed to deal with the issue of proportionality, thereby erring in law. The matter was remitted for further review by a different officer. 

Insolvency – Administration order. A company in special administration was a regulated investment bank holding client money under rules imposing a statutory trust. The joint special administrators of the company in the present proceedings applied to the court for directions which would in effect, create a procedure to enable them to finally distribute client money. The Companies Court held that, insofar as the application raised matters arising within the scope of the administrators' appointment under the Investment Bank Special Administration Regulations 2011, SI 2011/245, the court had jurisdiction under para 63 of Sch 1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 to give directions and, taking account of the facts, the order sought was granted. 

European Union – Taxation. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 6(3) TEU, arts 34, 36, 52(1), 56 and 61 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and arts 1, 8 and 9 of Directive (EC) 98/34. The request had been made in proceedings brought by Berlington Hungary Tanácsadó és Szolgáltató kft and other companies against Hungary concerning an action seeking compensation brought by those companies for the damage that they had allegedly suffered as a result of the application of national legislation concerning the operation of slot machines contrary to European Union law. 

Negligence – Fire. The claimant's house was significantly damaged by fire and she brought proceedings against the defendant. The judge, in dismissing the claim, found that the fire had been caused by an escape from a fire at the defendant's property, but that he had not been negligent. The claimant appealed and the defendant cross-appealed on causation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal and allowing the cross-appeal, held that the process of reasoning which had led the judge to conclude that the claimant had succeeded on causation was fatally flawed.