Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. A mother appealed against a shared residence order and subsequent residence order in favour of the father that had been made in respect of a child. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed her appeal as, on the evidence, the mother's complaints of undue process during the proceedings were not proved. 

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. 

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'. 

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. 

Copyright – Infringement. The claimant brought proceedings alleging copying of its training manual used by those who taught techniques for physical restraint. It alleged that the first defendant had infringed certain copyright works by reason of the creation of its own manual. The alleged copyright works included photographs, literary and dramatic works. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court held, inter alia, that, on the evidence, the first defendant had not at any stage been granted a licence to copy any of the photographs and, whenever it had done so, it had infringed the claimant's copyright. However, the claimant's case regarding literary and dramatic works failed. 

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 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. 

European Union – Social security. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the provisions of Decision No 3/80 of the Association Council (on the application of the social security schemes of the Member States of the European Communities to Turkish workers and members of their families), viewed also in the light of art 59 of the Additional Protocol, should be interpreted as meaning that nationals of a member state who had been duly registered as belonging to the labour force of that member state as Turkish workers could not, on the ground that they had retained Turkish nationality, rely on art 6 of Decision 3/80 to object to a residence requirement provided for by the legislation of that member state in order to receive a special non-contributory benefit within the meaning of art 4(2) of Regulation 1408/71, as amended. 

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. 

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.