Latest Cases

Race relations – Discrimination. The Queen's Bench Division found, inter alia, that the claimant's claim of racial discrimination was proved in respect of some aspects of her treatment on the evening of her arrest. Her claim under art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights was not made out. 

Bank – Bank loan. The appellants were found liable for two loans, which had been secured against property. The Privy Council, in dismissing their appeal, held that there was no basis for criticising the judgment of the relevant Court of Appeal. 

Unfair dismissal – Redundancy. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), in dismissing the employee's appeal against the employment tribunal's finding that the employee had been unfairly dismissed, ruled that it had been wrong for the employment tribunal to substitute its own view for that of the employer in relation to the redundancy pool issue. However, it found that the tribunal had gone on to made further findings as to the selection process, which had supported its conclusions that: (1) the dismissal had been unfair; and (2) for the purpose of the complaints of race discrimination, the burden of proof had shifted and the employer had not discharged that burden. Accordingly, the EAT affirmed the tribunal's findings notwithstanding its conclusion on the redundancy pool issue. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employment tribunal, having found that the employer was liable for sex discrimination and harassment of the employee, ordered that it pay the employee an award for injury to feelings, which would be subject to a 25% uplift for failure to follow the ACAS Code on Discipline and Grievance at Work 2009. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employer's appeal, held that the award was manifestly too high and that there was no basis for the uplift. Accordingly, the award would be substituted for a smaller amount and the judgment on the uplift would be quashed. 

Company – Restoration to register – Effect. Sheriff Court: Allowing an appeal in a case in which the Crown had disclaimed the title to a lease following the tenant company's dissolution, thereby terminating it, the landlords had commenced proceedings to repossess the premises, and a director of the tenant company had then had it restored to the register, the court concluded that the sheriff was wrong to agree with the defenders' contention that, in terms of s 1032(1) of the Companies Act 2006, all things had reverted to the status quo as it prevailed pre-dissolution and that landlords' action was irrelevant. 

Patent – Infringement. The Chancery Division, Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, determined an account of profits following a judgment in which it was found that the claimants' patent was valid and had been infringed by the defendants. 

Employment – Discrimination. The employee, in her claim for disability discrimination, had put forward to the employment tribunal a number of conditions which she claimed had caused her to be disabled, some of which went beyond her pleaded case. The tribunal found that she was disabled. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employer's appeal, held that the tribunal's reasons had: (i) not adequately identified what conditions she had which had caused her to be disabled and whether they were the pleaded or some other conditions; and (ii) not made clear which symptoms or conditions had supported its conclusion as to long-term effect. Accordingly, the matter would be remitted to a fresh tribunal. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 5(3)(k) of Directive (EC) 2001/29 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society). The request had been made in proceedings between Mr Deckmyn and the Vrijheidsfonds VZW, a non-profit association, and various heirs of Mr Vandersteen, author of the Suske en Wiske comic books, and the holders of the rights associated with those works as well, about the handing-out by Mr Deckmyn of a calendar that contained a reproduction of a drawing which resembled a drawing appearing on the cover of one of the books in the Suske en Wiske series. 

Injunction – Anti-suit injunction. The proceedings concerned the validity of wills made by the deceased in England and the Netherlands. The claimants, who were brothers of the deceased, issued an application seeking, among other things, an order restraining the second defendant and a foundation from pursuing proceedings in the Netherlands concerning the same subject matter as in the English proceedings. The Chancery Division held that, on the evidence, it would not be appropriate to grant an anti-suit injunction against either of the parties against whom it was sought. 

Employment – Remuneration. The employment tribunal had found that the employee had suffered unauthorised deductions from wages in relation to his London weighting allowance (LWA). The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employer's appeal, held that the tribunal had erred in relation to the question of what had been properly payable by the employer to the employee, in terms of entitlement to LWA, and so far as the identification of the rate of LWA. Accordingly, the matter would be remitted to a fresh tribunal.