Latest Cases

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Volvo Trademark Holding AB against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), concerning opposition proceedings between Volvo Trademark Holding AB and Hebei Aulion Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.,(Hebei) regarding the application by Hebei for registration of a figurative sign 'LOVOL' in black letters as a Community trade mark. 

Land registration – Caution. The defendant children of the deceased had been excluded from his will and brought, or sought to bring, claims alleging interest in the deceased's estate. They applied to the land registry for a caution against first registration of property forming part of the estate. The application was granted in respect of a farm and another property. The executor of the deceased's estate applied for an order that the chief registrar to the land registry be directed to cancel the caution. The Chancery Division, in granting the application, held that, whilst the defendants' claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 could not be dismissed as not seriously arguable, they would be unable to compensate the estate for any loss which it might suffer as a result of the caution remaining in place. 

Company – Scheme of arrangement. An application was made to the Companies Court for the approval of an insurance business transfer scheme under which the long-term insurance business of Prudential Annuities Ltd was to transferred to the Prudential Assurance Company Ltd. The court held that, on the evidence, the scheme would be sanctioned. 

Gaming – Lawful and unlawful gaming. The claimant, a professional gambler won a significant sum gambling in the defendant casino. When the defendant refused to pay out the claimant sued for the sums owed. The defendant resisted the claim and contended that there was an implied term that the claimant would not cheat and that term had been broken The Queen's Bench Division found that the claimant's actions constituted cheating for the purpose of civil law and his claim would be dismissed. 

Immigration – Leave to remain. The proceedings concerned individuals who had unsuccessfully claimed asylum in the United Kingdom and whose cases had been referred to the 'legacy' programme. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that there was no obligation, in the form of a commitment, on the part of the Secretary of State to 'conclude' cases that fell within the legacy programme that related to asylum cases, either by the grant of leave to remain or by effecting removal of the applicant from the UK. The various applications and appeal in respect of judicial review were all refused. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union allowed the action brought by Natura Selection, SL, (Natura) against a decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), relating to opposition proceedings between Natura and Afoi Anezoulaki AE (Afoi) concerning the application by Afoi to register the word sign 'natur' as a Community trade mark. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court considered the circumstances in which a decision of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) entitled a person subject to an extradition order to challenge that decision again after challenges had been rejected by the Divisional Court and the ECtHR. It held that permission to make the application was needed and then there would be consideration of whether the tests for re-opening had been fulfilled. If those tests were satisfied, the merits of whether or not the final decision had been wrong in the light of the changed circumstances should be considered. 

Architect – Registration. The appellant architect appealed against the respondent Architects Registration Board's Professional Conduct Committee's (the PCC) decision that he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and the issue of a reprimand. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the PCC had had jurisdiction as the appellant had been registered and that an architect acting under the Party Wall etc Act 1996 had the same obligations as in other matters. Further, the PCC had been entitled to find the appellant's breach had constituted unacceptable professional conduct and to impose the reprimand. 

Insurance – Claim. A fire occurred at the claimant company's premises. The defendant insurer avoided the policy, on the ground that R, the director of the claimant, or someone working on his behalf, had started the fire. The London Mercantile Court held that, on the evidence, the defendant had clearly shown to the appropriate standard that R, or someone acting on his behalf, had deliberately caused the fire. 

Immigration – Rules. The claimant Nigerian national sought judicial review of the defendant Secretary of State's decision, refusing her application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom as a Tier 4 (General) student. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the effect of the transitional arrangement as contained in the Immigration Rules had been clear and that they had not resulted in unfairness to the claimant. Further, there had been no unfairness in the Secretary of State's decision not to exercise her discretion outside the Immigration Rules so as to grant a Tier 4 visa in the circumstances of the case.