Latest Cases

Value Added Tax – Supply of goods or services. The claimant erroneously paid approximately £4m VAT to the interested party (QCL), which it paid to the defendant Revenue and Customs Commissioners (the Revenue). The claimant contended that the Revenue should refuse to repay QCL, which subsequently went into administration, unless it undertook to reimburse it in full, but the Revenue refused and the claimant sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in allowing the application, held that Reemtsma Cigarettenfabriken GmbH v Finance Minister (Case C-35/05) ([2007] All ER (D) 266 (Mar)) applied, such that the claimant was entitled to recover the mistakenly paid VAT directly from the Revenue. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The mother appealed against an order providing for R to have supervised contact with her father. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held, inter alia, that it was clear that the judge had given full and proper consideration to each of the relevant factors necessary for the risk assessment required by s 1 of the Children Act 1989 and the Family Procedure Rules 2010, Practice Direction 12J. His conclusion that face-to-face contact was in R's best interests, in a supervised setting, was justified on the basis of that risk assessment and was a conclusion that had been well within the range of justifiable welfare determinations. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the General Union granted the annulment sought by Wine in Black GmbH in respect of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), concerning opposition proceedings between Quinta do Noval-Vinhos, SA and Wine in Black GmbH, regarding the application for registration by the latter company of a word sign 'Wine in Black' as a Community trade mark. 

Mistake – Rectification. Two properties were placed in trust for the benefit of the claimant. Her father loaned her money to purchase one of the properties. The claimant made a settlement by which she would pay the loan back to her father. The solicitor failed to inform her of the negative effects of doing so. On learning of the negative effects, she sought to have the settlement set aside, on the grounds of equitable mistake. Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs Commissioners resisted the application. The Chancery Division held that, applying settled law, it was appropriate for the settlement to be set aside. 

Arbitration – Adjudication. The claimant applied for summary judgment to enforce the adjudicator's decision that there had been a complete failure of consideration by the defendant and his order for the defendant to pay the sum of the claimant's advanced payment. The Technology and Construction Court, in allowing the application, held that the adjudicator had had jurisdiction to decide whether there had been a total failure of consideration and whether the claimant was entitled to repayment. Further, he had been entitled to order restitution, as that had been an available remedy for the breach of contract. 

Negligence – Duty to take care. The claimant Royal Marine injured himself whilst away on basic training during some free time given. The claimant brought a claim in damages against the defendant Ministry of Defence. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claim on the basis that there had been no breach of duty on the part of the corporal in charge of the claimant and his collegues. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The claimant father brought proceedings in the Scottish court concerning a residence order that the defendant mother sought in relation to two children. He maintained that the mother's proceedings were a wrongful retention within the meaning of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980. The Lord Ordinary granted the father's application, but the Extra Division dismissed it on appeal. The Supreme Court held that the Extra Division had not erred, and that the children had been resident in Scotland as contended by the mother. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Formula One Licensing BV (Formula One) 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 Formula One and Idea Marketing SA regarding the acquisition by the latter company of an international registration designating the European Community in respect of the word mark 'F1H2O'. 

Civil procedure – Third party contribution – Relevancy and specification of averments. Court of Session: Allowing a reclaiming motion in an action in which solicitors, having admitted liability for an error in a rent review clause in a lease and paid a substantial sum to settle the pursuer's claim, sought a contribution from the third party (surveyors), the court held that the defender had pled sufficient relevant and specific averments against the third party that a proof before answer should be allowed and recalled the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor dismissing the action. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Germany to face trial for six offences of fraud, allegedly committed in 2007. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the evidence had not led to a conclusion that the judicial authority's delay had been culpable and the judge had been entitled to conclude that extradition would not be oppressive. Further, there was no discernible error of law in the judge's finding that the appellant's extradition would not constitute a disproportionate interference with his and his family's right to family life, in particular, as a European Supervision Order was not available.