Latest Cases

European Union – Consumer protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning art 7(1) of Council Directive (EEC) 93/13 (on unfair terms in consumer contracts). The request had been made in proceedings between Ms Baczo and another and the Raiffeisen Bank Zrt concerning an application for a declaration of invalidity of a mortgage loan contract and of the arbitration clause contained in that contract. 

Immigration – Rules. In dismissing appeals against refusal of leave to remain in the United Kingdom, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the changes made to the Immigration Rules by HC 194 had not been applicable to applications for leave to remain made or pending at the time that the changes had been implemented, but had applied to such applications after the implementation of the subsequent statement of changes HC 565. The court considered the conflicting decisions in Edgehill v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2014] All ER (D) 14 (Apr) and Haleemudeen v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2014] All ER (D) 50 (May) and preferred the former. 

Dentist – Professional misconduct. The defendant General Dental Council's Professional Conduct Committee (the PCC) found allegations of dishonesty made out against the claimant dentist and erased him from the register. The appellant appealed on the basis that the PCC had erred in its application of the burden of proof. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the burden of proof had no weight in the context of a contested issue as a piece of evidence in itself. Accordingly, the appellant's criticism of the PCC's approach was conceptually flawed and had to fail. 

European Union – Trade marks. The Chancery Division considered a dispute relating to trade marks used in respect of pet food. The claimant company alleged that the defendant company had, among other things, infringed its trade marks. The court held that, on the evidence, a number of the marks had been invalidly registered. However, the defendant had not infringed the marks, and no passing off had occurred. 

Practice – Summary judgment. The claimant company owned the patent for a drug. In earlier proceeding, its application for an interim injunction was dismissed on the basis that its infringement claim did not raise a serious issue to be tried. The defendants applied for the claim to be struck out or for summary judgment dismissing the claim. The Patents Court held that the proper course was to establish the facts at a trial before attempting definitively to determine the law in respect of subjective intention in respect of the patent in question. Accordingly, summary judgment dismissing the claim was not appropriate. 

European Union – Patents. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union was founded. The request had been made in proceedings between Merck Canada Inc. and Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd and Sigma Pharmaceuticals plc, concerning the importation into the United Kingdom of a pharmaceutical product called 'Singulair' from Poland. 

Damages – Personal injury. The claimant bank employee brought a claim for damages against the defendant bank for personal injuries in respect of a lifting injury sustained during the course of her employment. The Queen's Bench Division found that in the light of the evidence the court was satisfied that the tasks required of the claimant by the bank had not involved heavy lifting or indeed any lifting which involved a risk of injury. The claimant had failed to establish either breach of duty or causation by reason of the findings of fact. 

European Union – Customs and excise. By a question referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling, the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) of the United Kingdom sought to ascertain whether Commission Regulation (EU) No 314/2011 (concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature) was valid in so far as it classified infrared thermal cameras under CN code 9025 19 20. The Court ruled that examination of that question had not revealed any factor capable of affecting the validity of that regulation. 

Criminal law – Committal. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendants in respect of his having been in remanded in custody in respect of offences under the Identity Cards Act 2006. His claims for a declaration and damages for breach of art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the tort of false imprisonment were struck out. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal in respect of the art 5 claims. It held, inter alia, that it was implicit in art 5(1)(c), as well as art 5(3) of the Convention, that the investigating/prosecuting authorities were required to bring the relevant facts to the attention of the court as soon as possible. The claimant's appeal in respect of false imprisonment was dismissed. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union granted the application by Red Bull GmbH (Red Bull), established in Austria, for annulment of a decision of the Second Board Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Red Bull and Sun Mark Ltd concerning the application by Sun Mark for registration of the word sign 'BULLDOG' as a Community trade mark.