Latest Cases

European Union – Agricultural products and foodstuffs. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Commission Regulation (EC) 2073/2005 (on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs), as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) 1086/2011 (Regulation 2073/2005), read together with Annex I, Chapter I, Row 1.28 of the latter regulation. The request had been made in proceedings between Ms Reindl and the Innsbruck District Administration (Austria) concerning a fine imposed on Ms Reindl for failing to comply with the limit value for Salmonella Typhimurium set out in Annex I, Chapter I, Row l.28 of Regulation 2073/2005. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The parents of the child abducted her to Spain. Proceedings were commenced to secure the child's return to the jurisdiction, which involved contempt hearings, at which the maternal grandparents and the paternal grandmother were present. The child was returned to the United Kingdom where she was placed in foster care. The local authority sought findings of satisfaction of the threshold criteria of s 31(2) of the Children Act 1989, they also sough additional findings against the parents and the grandparents. The Family Division made certain findings of fact but declined to make a final care or placement order. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The local authority care plan in respect of a child had included an option for adoption and, if not achieved within six months, a dual track approach of pursuing adoption and long term fostering arrangements. The judge granted a placement order and the mother appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that it was not necessary for an authority to have a contingency in a care plan, although it was desirable and that an authority was not precluded from adopting a dual planning approach in an appropriate case. They also clarified that the phrase 'nothing else will do' was the conclusion of a proportionality evaluation after a process of deductive reasoning and not a new presumption or standard of proof. 

European Union – Access to information. The General Court of the European Union granted the application by the applicant Mr Ionnis Ntouvas for annulment of the decision of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) refusing the applicant access to the final audit reports carried out on the ECDC by the Internal Audit Service of the European Commission. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that arts 2(2), 4(1) and 6(1)(c) of Council Directive (EC) 2000/78 (establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation) should be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which set the maximum age for recruitment of local police officers at 30 years. 

Costs – Indemnity. The claimant had issued proceedings, to which the third defendant (GT) had issued a counterclaim by way of set off. The claimant discontinued its proceedings and it fell to the court to determine the matters on the counterclaim. The Chancery Division held that, on the true construction of the contractual documents that the parties had entered into, GT was entitled to an indemnity for its costs in defending the proceedings and bringing its counterclaim, provided that such costs were reasonable costs reasonably incurred. 

European Union – Access to information. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 54 of Directive (EC) 2004/39 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on markets in financial instruments), as amending certain directives and repealing one other. The request had been made in proceedings between Mr and Mrs Altmann and others and the Federal Office for the Supervision of Financial Services, concerning the latter's decision to refuse access to certain documents and information regarding Phoenix Kapitaldienst GmbH Gesellschaft für die Durchführung und Vermittlung von Vermögensanlagen. 

Family proceedings – Jurisdiction. The proceedings concerned an infant, J, who was born in the United Kingdom to Hungarian parents. During care proceedings, an issue arose as to jurisdiction. The Family Court ordered that a request under art 15 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 be made, requesting the Hungarian courts to accept jurisdiction. In so ordering, it held that J had a particular connection to Hungary, that the Hungarian courts were better placed to decide the issues for J and that it would be in J's best interests for the Hungarian courts to decide the issues as to her long-term future. 

Court of Appeal – Practice. Five renewed applications for permission to appeal were considered by the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division. The court held that each of the applications was unmeritorious, and made a loss of time order in each case. The court gave guidance on the circumstances in which a loss of time order should be made. 

Minor – Abduction. The present proceedings concerned an application by a father for the summary return of his son to Australia following the parents' separation. The Family Division, in allowing the application, held amongst other things that it was not possible to conclude that there was a strength, conviction and rationality that could be said to amount to an objection sufficient to satisfy the exception in art 13B of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980.