Latest Cases

Company – Shares. The Privy Council dismissed an appeal arising out of a dispute between the respondent and his six brothers over the ownership of shares in British Virgin Islands registered company. 

Criminal law – Trial. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the defendant dentist's appeal against conviction for the sexual assault of a patient, held that, in nearly every respect no complaint could be made about the summing up and overall it had been entirely fair. 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. The Commercial Court granted the claimant, Toyota Tsusho Sugar Trading Ltd, a declaration that an English arbitration tribunal had substantive jurisdiction over any dispute between Toyota and the defendant, arising out of or in connection with a contract for the sale of sugar by Toyota to the defendant. 

Human rights – Infringement of human rights. Over 600 cases were currently pending in the High Court in which Iraqi civilians were claiming damages from the Ministry of Defence (MOD) for their allegedly unlawful detention and alleged ill treatment by British armed forces on various dates during the period when British forces were present in Iraq. Certain preliminary issues came to be tried. The issues concerned whether the MOD's duty under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 overrod any obligations under art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the availability of aggravated damages and which law governed its availability. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Urb Rulmenti Suceava SA (Urb) against a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) concerning invalidity proceedings between Urb and Harun Adiguzel (Harun) regarding the registration by Harun of the word sign 'URB' as a Community trade mark. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. In the course of proceedings relating to the care of two twin boys, the Family Court made a number of rulings that, among other things, restricted but did not remove the father's parental rights, and required the parents to obtain the permission of the court before being allowed to make any further applications under the Children Act 1989 in the next five years. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Council Directive (EEC) 80/987 (relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer), as amended. The request had been made in proceedings between the applicant and the Netherlands Management Board of the Employee Insurance Schemes Implementing Body concerning the latter's refusal to pay the applicant an insolvency benefit on the ground that he was a third-country national who was not legally resident in the Netherlands. 

European Union – Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that cl 4.2 of the Framework Agreement on part-time work, annexed to Council Directive (EC) 97/81 (concerning the framework agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Council Directive (EC) 98/23), should be interpreted as meaning that the principle pro rata temporis applied to the calculation of the amount of a dependent child allowance paid by an employer to a part-time worker pursuant to a collective agreement such as that applicable to the employees of Austrian banks and bankers. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed an action brought by Kaatsu Japan Co. Ltd (Kaatsu) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), relating to an application by Kaatsu for registration of the word sign 'KAATSU' as a Community trade mark. 

Will – Family provision. The claimant brought a claim in respect of her deceased mother's estate, after she was excluded from her mother's will. The issue was whether she had a claim on the basis of proprietary estoppel or under the under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that, on the facts, any mention of inheritance had not been intended to be taken seriously or been such that might reasonably have been expected to have been relied on by the claimant. Further, taking into account all the factors under s 3 of the Act, the value judgment was that the claimant's conduct outweighed all of the factors in her favour and her claim under the act had to fail.