Latest Cases

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. A young child, A, suffered brain trauma as a result of being shaken. The three respondents, A's mother, father and child-minder, disagreed as to the circumstances of A's injury. The applicant local authority brought care proceedings in respect of A and a fact-finding hearing was held to determine the identity of the perpetrator of A's injury. The Family Court held that A's child-minder had caused her injury. 

Trusts and trustees – Amendment of trust deed – Validity of amending deeds. Court of Session: Granting decree in an action for payment by trustees of a pension fund in which the defenders denied liability, questioning whether the formal amendment procedure set out in the original trust documents was followed, the court held that the amending documents were valid and accordingly the trustees were entitled to decree. 

Patent – Infringement. Applying established law, the Queen's Bench Division held that, the defendant, Victoria's Secret use in the Euroepan Union of PINK both on its goods and as the name of its stores was an infringement of the claimant's registered trade mark rights, Thomas Pink Ltd. Amongst other things, the use of PINK emblazoned on the defendant's items of clothing gave rise to a likelihood of confusion on the part of the average consumer. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. EU was formally diagnosed as having dementia when he was hospitalised in August 2012. EU's sons had objected to an application by Suffolk County Council (the authority) to be appointed as his deputy for property and financial affairs. Having regard to all the circumstances, the Court of Protection was satisfied that it was in EU's best interests to appoint the authority to be his deputy for property and affairs and to dismiss his sons' objections. The factor of magnetic importance was EU's own wishes and preference that he would like the authority to manage his property and financial affairs. 

Conflict of laws – Stay of proceedings. Following a dispute arising from an International Swaps and Derivatives Association Master Agreement, the defendants submitted requests for conciliation to the conciliation authority in Zurich and the claimant issued proceedings in England. The defendants sought a stay of the English proceedings. However, their Swiss proceedings were subsequently dismissed. The Chancery Division held that the initiating of conciliation proceedings by the lodging of a written request for conciliation fell within art 30 of the Lugano Convention. Were it not for the fact that the Swiss proceedings had been dismissed, a stay of the English proceedings would have been granted. 

Civil procedure – Lawburrows. Sheriff Court: Dismissing as irrelevant an application for lawburrows against a chief constable based on allegations of defamation, the court held that while there was no objection in principle to applying the remedy of lawburrows to cases of defamation the pursuer had failed to aver a relevant case for lawburrows based on defamation. 

Company – Voluntary winding up. The claimant companies sought relief, under s 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986, for the first defendant's misapplication of a company's funds while acting as its liquidator. The Chancery Division, in allowing the claim, held that the first defendant had acted in breach of the duty implicit in s 107 of the 1986 Act and had acted negligently in paying out the funds. Further, the first defendant's defences, including under s 1157 of the Companies Act 2006 and the illegality of the company's conduct were rejected, as her conduct had not been reasonable and the illegality defence did not arise in the circumstances. 

Mental health – Court of Protection. UF, a lady of 84 years of age; she has been diagnosed as suffering from vascular dementia and resided at a care home known as 'The Elms'. Following an application by UF's youngest daughter, in August 2013 as a challenge under s 21A Mental Capacity Act 2005 to the standard authorisation of deprivation of liberty, the Court of Protection held that it was in UF's interests that she remained resident at the care home. 

Limitation of actions – Triennium. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuer sought damages in respect of a scalding injury he sustained when one year old and while in a residential care home for children operated by the defenders, the court held that the action was time-barred and that it was appropriate to order a preliminary proof on time bar before the court was called on to decide whether, in exercise of its discretion, to allow the case to proceed to proof on its merits. 

Adoption – Practice. The applicants sought a declaration that an adoption order made in Brazil in the applicants' favour in respect of their niece and nephew, D and E, be recognised under the law of England and Wales. The Family Division, in allowing the application, held that the adoptions of D and E should be properly recognised in accordance with the common law of England and Wales and that a declaration to that effect would be granted, pursuant to s 57 of the Family Law Act 1986.