Latest Cases

Criminal law – Proceeds of crime. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed an appeal by the defendant investment banker against his conviction for money laundering in respect of funds obtained by a corrupt Nigerian politician. The court held, among other things, that the judge had not erred in his treatment of the defendant's previous acquittal. 

Costs – Order for costs. The defendants had been found liable for passing off and were ordered to pay the claimants' costs of the action. The defendants' main appeal in the proceedings was dismissed. They then appealed as to costs, contending that, even if it had been open to the judge to have found them liable for passing off, there had been no proper basis for having made an order that they should pay the claimants' costs. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not fallen into error in the manner for which the defendants had contended and his order was well within the bounds of a reasonable exercise of the wide discretion which he had had. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed Kenzo Tsujimoto's appeal against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market relating to his application for registration of the word sign 'KENZO' as a Community trade mark. In dismissing the appeal, the General Court ruled that there was a risk that the mark applied for would take unfair advantage of the reputation of an earlier KENZO mark. 

Property – Transfer of property. The claimants were the personal representatives of the estate of the deceased, who died intestate. They brought a claim, seeking a declaration in respect of property, which had been purchased by the deceased, in the name of two of his children. The Chancery Division granted a declaration that the property was held on trust for the deceased's estate absolutely. Any arrangement that the deceased had made with the relative were ineffectual to transfer beneficial interest to her, absent writing. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by El Corte Ingles, SA (El Corte) for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to reject its opposition to the registration by Apro Tech Co. Ltd of a figurative sign as a Community trade mark. The General Court ruled that the Board had been right to rule out the existence of a likelihood of confusion between the mark applied for and the other rights relied on by El Corte. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. Following a series of catalogue of errors, omissions, delays and serial breaches of court orders in respect of a very young child, DS, who had been placed in foster care the authority agreed to pay damages: (i) to DS in the sum of £12,000; (ii) to the mother in the sum of £4,000; and (iii) to pay a sum of £1000 to the maternal grandparents to assist them in their care of DS. The basis of the award was arts 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

Immigration – Leave to enter. The applicants had been excluded from the United Kingdom as being conducive to the public good under the unacceptable behaviours list. They were refused permission to apply for judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, refused the applicants' appeal, holding that an application for judicial review had no prospect of success. It further found that the Secretary of State's unacceptable behaviours policy was not unlawful. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The claimant local planning authority applied to quash the decision of the inspector appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State, holding that administrative fees it had claimed for monitoring obligations agreed under s 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 did not comply with reg 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948. The Planning Court, in dismissing the application, held that the inspector had been entitled to conclude that a contribution to the administration and monitoring costs had not been 'necessary' to make the development acceptable in planning terms. Further, the inspector had given adequate reasons. 

Costs – Order for costs. The claimant brought a claim for the alleged infringement by the defendants of the copyright in a film. The claimant applied to amend the particulars of claim, which was criticised by the defendants as being inadequate. A judge, dismissing the application, held that the claimant had behaved unreasonably in that the particulars of claim was wholly inadequate. The defendants sought their costs, which exceeded the £3,000 cap for applications in the Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court. The Chancery Division held that costs awarded against an unreasonable party, pursuant to CPR 63.26(2) were not free of the stage caps on costs set out in Tables A and B of Practice Direction 45. A single stage cap of £3,000 applied to all the defendants in relation to the costs of the application. 

Constitutional law – Foreign sovereign state. The appeals concerned whether a member of the service staff of a foreign diplomatic mission to the United Kingdom could bring proceedings in the UK against the employer state to assert employment rights or whether such a claim was barred by state immunity. In particular, whether provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978 (the SIA) were compatible with art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and art 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the EU Charter). The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held, inter alia, that, on the application to the claimants' claims: (i) s 16(1)(a) of the SIA infringed art 6 of the Convention; (ii) s 4(2)(b) of the SIA infringed arts 6 and 14 of the Convention; and (iii) ss 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of the SIA, in their application to those parts of the claims which fell within the scope of EU law, infringed art 47 of the EU Charter.