Latest Cases

Practice – Stay of proceedings. The applicants sought a variation of a recognition order insofar as it stayed the commencement of actions or proceedings against the first respondent company to permit them to pursue contractual claims against the company in arbitration proceedings. The Companies Court, in allowing the application, held that extant proceedings in the Republic of Korea did not prevent determination of the application and the claims had merit. In the context of substantive claims involving contracts governed by English law and agreeing to disputes being heard in arbitration in London, the order would be modified by lifting the stay preventing that arbitration. 

Landlord and tenant – Lease. The respondent lessor contended that the service charge provisions in the appellant lessees' leases of chalets had the effect of providing for a fixed annual charge of £90 for the first year of the term, increasing each subsequent year by 10% on a compound basis. The county court determined the issue in favour of the appellants. That decision was reversed on appeal to the High Court, a decision which was upheld by the Court of Appeal, Civil Division. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the appellants' appeal, held, inter alia, that despite the unattractive and alarming consequences of the annual sum of £90 being increased annually by 10% on a compound basis, it was not a convincing argument from departing from the natural meaning of the clause and involved inserting words which were not there. 

Value added tax – Tax avoidance scheme. The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, which had decided that the scheme at issue in the present proceedings used by the taxpayer Pendragon group, designed to exploit exceptions to the normal incidence of VAT, was not an abuse of law as defined in Halifax plc v Customs and Excise Comrs: C-255/02 [2006] STC 919 (Halifax). The Court decided that the two requirements laid down in Halifax had been satisfied with the result that the scheme had been an abuse of law. 

Gift – Donatio mortis causa. The claimant commenced proceedings seeking a declaration that his aunt had left him her house following a donatio mortis causa. Two of the charities which had been named beneficiaries in her will, unsuccessfully defended that claim and appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, clarified the requirements of a donatio mortis causa and warned against any extension of the doctrine towards other situations. The charities' appeal was allowed as two of the three requirements for a donatio mortis causa had not been met. The judge's hypothetical award for reasonable financial provision for the claimant under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 was upheld as there had been no error of law and the figure arrived at had not been outside the permissible bracket. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign proceedings. The Commercial Court dismissed a claimant's application for an anti-suit injunction in respect of proceedings in Denmark. The court held, among other things, that the claimant had not shown a sufficient case that a jurisdiction agreement between the parties applied to that action and that it should be granted an injunction on the grounds that in bringing and pursuing the action the defendant was acting in breach of it. Consideration was given to the agreement which was made in the ISDA 2002 Master Agreement form. 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. The claimants brought a claim against the defendants for sums due under a facility agreement and related agreements. The agreements contained non-exclusive English jurisdiction clauses with forum non conveniens (FNC) waivers, whereby the parties waived any objection they might have to the venue of any proceedings. The defendants applied for a stay of the proceedings on the ground that England was not the most appropriate forum. The issue was whether an FNC waiver in the agreements precluded an application for a stay on forum non conveniens grounds. The Commercial Court, in dismissing the applications, held that, a court could grant a stay, even where there was an forum non conveniens waiver with a non-exclusive jurisdiction clause, if very strong or exceptional grounds for granting a stay were demonstrated, provided that those grounds had been unforeseeable at the time the agreement had been made. However, there were no exceptional reasons for granting a stay on FNC grounds in the present case and there had been no abuse of process. 

Bank – Bank loan. The claimant bank issued the proceedings for repayment of a loan partner capital subscription loan made to the defendant, together with interest. The Commercial Court, in allowing the application, dismissed the defendant's defences that: (i) he had undertaken no obligation to repay the loan; (ii) the loan agreement was unenforceable as a sham; (iii) he had never received the loan proceeds; (iv) the bank had made a misrepresentation; and (v) the loan agreement had given rise to an unfair debtor-creditor relationship. It further rejected his counterclaim that the bank had been negligent and found that the firm had made no repayments on his behalf. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by AgriCapital Corporation (AgriCapital) 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 AgriCapital Corp. and agri.capital GmbH, concerning the application by the latter company for registration of the word sign 'AGRI.CAPITAL' as a Community trade mark. 

Family proceedings – Evidence. The justices had, in the course of private family law proceedings, ordered that an expert be instructed to conduct a psychological assessment of the father. The mother's application for such a report had been made orally during submissions before the court. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, set that order aside. The justices had failed to comply with the statutory and procedural scheme provided by FPR Pt 25 and PD 25 and s 13 of the Children and Families Act 2014 in respect of the instruction of experts. Further, it had been unlawful to make a mandatory direction that the father undergo what was a form of medical procedure. Finally, the justices had erred in the manner in which they had approached payment of the cost of the report. Guidance was given on the fair process to be afforded to litigants in person whose language was not English. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Pensa Pharma, SA, against the decisions of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to invalidity proceedings between Ferring BV and Farmaceutisk Laboratorium Ferring A/S and Penso Pharma concerning the successful registrations by the latter company of a figurative mark 'pensa' and a word mark 'PENSA PHARMA' as Community trade marks.