Latest Cases

Power of attorney – Challenge. The claimant had challenged a power of attorney made in favour of the first and second defendants. In those proceedings, he sought summary judgment and a worldwide injunction restraining the first defendant from acting on the power of attorney. The Chancery Division dismissed both applications. It was arguable that the claimant had not had standing to bring the claim nor had he joined all relevant parties to the proceedings. Consequently, the first defendant had a realistic prospect of success on the claim and the court accepted her undertaking not to use the power of attorney in the United Kingdom pending judgment or further order. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Evyap Sabun Yað Gliserin Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Þ. (Evyap) against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning opposition proceedings between Evyap and Megusta Trading GmbH, regarding the application by Evyap for registration of a figurative sign depicting the word 'nuru' as a Community trade mark. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Mo Industries LLC (Mo) against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning an application by Mo for registration of a figurative sign 'Splendid' as a Community trade mark. 

Personal injury – Negligence – Duty of care – Damages. Court of Session: In an action by a self-employed production manager, who sustained a wrist injury while at work after falling from a trailer owned by the defenders, the court held that the defenders had failed to provide a ramp as a safe means of accessing and egressing the trailer, the pursuer had proved that they owed a duty of care to him and that they were in breach of that duty, that it was not appropriate to make an award of contributory negligence, and that an appropriate award for solatium was £8,000. 

European Union – Directives. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 11(4) of Directive (EC) 2006/126 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on driving licences). The request had been made in criminal proceedings brought against Mr Wittmann for having driven a motor vehicle in Germany without being in possession of the driving licence required for that purpose. 

Contempt of court – Contempt of court for making false statement in document verified by statement of truth without honest belief in its truth. The parties entered into a contract whereby the claimant company provided services to the defendant company. The claimant commenced proceedings for lack of payment. The defendant counterclaimed, contending that it had been induced to overpay the claimant. It sought to bring proceedings for contempt against S, a representative of the claimant, regarding documents that he had allegedly forged and supported by a statement of truth. The Technology and Construction Court granted permission, on the basis that the proceedings would be heard either at the trial or after the trial, at the discretion of the trial judge, and not before the trial. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Urb Rulmenti Suceava SA (Urb) against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning invalidity proceedings between Urb and Mr Harun Adiguzel, regarding the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign depicting the word 'URB'. 

Immigration – Workers. The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to revoke its Tier 2 sponsor licence. The Secretary of State conceded that she had erred in not having been satisfied that the claimant had conducted the resident labour market test. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that the Secretary of State had wrongly applied the guidance relating to employment agencies and businesses, when the claimant had not fallen into either category and it had been irrational to have treated it as if it had. Accordingly, the Secretary of State's decision would be quashed. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The General Court of the European Union granted the actions brought by Senz Technologies BV (Senz) for annulment of two decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), in relation to invalidity proceedings between Impliva BV and Senz regarding the applications by the latter company for registration of a Community design representing umbrellas. 

Civil procedure – Pleadings – Plea of competent and omitted – Relevancy and specification of averments. Court of Session: Dismissing an action in which the pursuer sought reduction of a court decree, missives and a settlement agreement, and damages for alleged breach of missives, the court held that the defender's plea of competent and omitted was well founded, and in any event the pursuer's averments were not sufficiently relevant and specific to support the claims made on record, and taking his averments pro veritate his case must necessarily fail.