Latest Cases

Sale of land – Condition. The Chancery Division considered the interpretation of a contract for the purchase of a property. The defendant sought to rescind the contract between the parties, on the ground that an event of default had occurred, as defined by the contract. The claimant submitted that, since a term in the contract was to be taken as meaning that time was of the essence, it was not possible for the rescission to occur. The court held that, on the true construction of the contract, time had been of the essence, and so the claimant was entitled to succeed. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Iglotex SA against a 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 Iglo Foods Group Ltd, established in the United Kingdom, and Iglotex SA, concerning the application by Iglotex SA for registration of a figurative sign depicting the word 'IGLOTEX' as a Community trade mark. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union (the Court) dismissed the appeal brought by LG Display Co. Ltd and LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd, requesting that the Court set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union whereby the General Court had: (i) varied Commission Decision C(2010) 8761 final relating to a proceeding under art 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and art 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (the contested decision), by setting at €210,00,000 the fine imposed jointly and severally on them; and (ii) dismissed, as to the remainder, their action for the partial annulment of that decision, in so far as it concerned them, and for a reduction in the amount of that fine. 

Insurance – Reinsurance. The Commercial Court considered preliminary issues in a dispute between the claimant insurer and the defendant reinsurer. The court held that a loss suffered by a company ensured by the claimant, BVC, had been suffered each time money paid into an escrow account by BVC was drawn down by a third party. As a result, the issue would be determined in favour of the claimant and the other preliminary issues would fall away. 

Negligence – Defence. The claimant, DM, brought a claim in respect of injuries suffered in an accident, in which the stolen or unlawfully taken trials bike, ridden far too fast by the first defendant and upon which DM was riding as a pillion passenger, collied with a minibus driven by the third defendant, DB. The judge rejected the defence of ex turpi causa and found DB had driven negligently, although damages were reduced by 45% to reflect DM's contributory negligence. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held, inter alia, that the relationship between DM's turpitude, namely, his participation in the joint enterprise to ride the bike dangerously, and his claim in negligence against DB, was not such as to debar the claim. The causal contribution of the dangerous riding of the bike could and should be taken into account in the assessment of contributory negligence. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The appellant appealed against orders for his extradition to Poland to serve sentences for stealing and intentionally dealing in stolen property, pursuant to three European arrest warrants (EAWs). The Administrative Court, in allowing the appeal in part, held that the judge's decision that the appellant would be entitled to a retrial or appeal could not stand and he had to be discharged from extradition pursuant to EAW 3. However, his appeal was dismissed in relation to EAW 1 and EAW 2, as he could not rely on the delay, and his extradition was proportionate and necessary. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory words. The first claimant had been selected, with others, to manage two mosques. A dispute arose after some members of the mosques campaigned for a democratic election to such position. The second claimant, a member of the Welsh Assembly, had acted as a mediator at a meeting held to resolve the dispute. The claimants alleged that the first to fourth defendants had defamed them in a number of documents as part of a campaign for democratic elections to be held to fill the management positions. The Queen's Bench Division held that there was no evidence to establish a claim in defamation against the first to third defendants. However, it granted the claimants judgment against the fourth defendant in the sum of £45,000 and an injunction where there was evidence establishing a claim in defamation. 

European Union – Immigration. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that Directive (EC) 2008/115 (on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals) in particular, arts 6(1) and 8(1), read in conjunction with art 4(2) and (3), should be interpreted as precluding legislation of a member state such as that at issue in the main proceedings which provided, in the event of third-country nationals illegally staying in the territory of that state, depending on the circumstances, for either a fine or removal, since the two measures were mutually exclusive. 

Criminal law – Trial. The appellant was convicted of murder of the deceased, who had been shot dead in St Christopher and Nevis (SCN). His appeal against conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in SCN. The Privy Council, dismissing his appeal, held that the conviction was safe on the evidence, the trial judge's summing up had been adequate, and the Court of Appeal's conclusion that there was no lurking doubt and that the conviction was safe had been justified. 

European Union – Regulations. Th General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by 121 applicants for annulment of various decisions made and regulations adopted by the European Council concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe in so far as those acts had concerned the applicants.