Latest Cases

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that Directive (EC) 96/9 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the legal protection of databases) should be interpreted as meaning that it was not applicable to a database which was not protected either by copyright or by the sui generis right under that directive, so that arts 6(1), 8 and 15 of that directive did not preclude the author of such a database from laying down contractual limitations on its use by third parties, without prejudice to the applicable national law. 

Criminal law – Fitness to plead. Two separate appeals were heard together because they raised similar issues concerning defendants who had been found unfit to plead. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that, where a defendant's disability impacted on his ability to take part in a trial, but he was not otherwise affected by a psychiatric condition such as rendered what was said in interview unreliable, there was no reason why the jury should not hear it, albeit with an appropriate warning. The finding in each case was safe and the appeals were dismissed. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Aic SA (Aic) against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), relating to invalidity proceedings between ACV Manufacturing and Aic concerning a Community design owned and registered by Aic intended to be applied to 'Heat exchangers'. 

European Union – Public procurement. The General Court of the European Union allowed the application by Veloss International SA (Veloss) and another company, first, for the annulment of the decision of the European Parliament to select, in second place, the tender submitted by them in response to the call for tenders, and all related decisions taken by the Parliament, and secondly, for damages for the loss allegedly suffered. 

Contract – Breach. The claimant agreed to grant a lease of a hotel to the first defendant, Travelodge, on the understanding that Travelodge would carry out refurbishment work at the hotel. The Travelodge Group later entered into a company voluntary agreement (CVA), under which the rent for the hotel was reduced. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendants claiming, inter alia, that the work had not been fully or properly carried out and seeking damages for loss of rent following the making of the CVA. The first defendant sought summary judgment against the claimant. The Technology and Construction Court dismissed Travelodge's application for summary judgment on the whole claim, but held that claims which were excluded by the terms of the CVA would be struck out. 

Court of Appeal – Time for appeal. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, considered the circumstances in which it was appropriate for the court to grant significant extensions of time when the responsibility for the delay lay with the court and the legal representatives and not with the applicant personally. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employees were fee-paid members of tribunals. They were not given access to a pension scheme in respect of their service, whereas salaried regional medical members were. They brought a claim before the employment tribunal against the Ministry of Justice. On a preliminary issue, the tribunal determined that the work done by fee-paid medical members and regional medical members was not broadly similar, for the purposes of reg 2(4) of the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1551. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employees' appeal, held that the employment judge had correctly approached the task of deciding whether the work of the two groups was the same or broadly similar. 

Firearms – Possession. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the defendant's appeal against conviction for possession of a prohibited firearm, contrary to s 5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968, held, among other things, that the judge had been plainly right to find that there was a case to answer. 

Criminal law – Child sex offences. The first offender, B, was convicted of child cruelty and other sexual offences, including rape, in respect of his step-daughter. His partner, H, the girl's mother, was found to have been involved in all of the B's offending by allowing, encouraging and turning a blind eye to B's activities. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed applications by the Attorney General pursuant to s 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and held that sentences of 12 years and five and-a-half years' imprisonment, respectively, had been unduly lenient and substituted sentences of 24 years and eight years' imprisonment. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. Following an appeal by three former servicemen who had been injured in service, the Queen's Bench Division, having regard to the Employers Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969, held that the fixed success fee regime in (pre 1 April 2013) CPR 45, s IV did not apply to claims brought by members of the armed forces in respect of injuries suffered at work.