Latest Cases

Contract – Formation. D acted, through the claimant company, as an advisor for the defendant companies. He brought proceedings, contending that he had agreed with W, the managing director of the first defendant company, that he would be paid a success fee for his services. The Commercial Court held that, on the evidence, the agreement had been made and W was entitled to the fee. 

European Union – Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 6 and 85(2) of Council Regulation (EC) 6/2002 (on Community designs). The request had been made in proceedings between Karen Millen Fashions Ltd (KMF), incorporated in England and Wales, and Dunnes Stores and another, concerning an application by KMF to restrain the use of its designs by Dunnes. 

Police – Disclosure of information. The Supreme Court held that provisions of Pt V of the Police Act 1997 were incompatible with art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, insofar as they required the disclosure of all convictions and cautions, for failure to meet the tests of legality and necessity. Further, the interference of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1975, SI 1975/1023, with the right under art 8 of the Convention had not been necessary, although that Order had not been ultra vires. 

Copyright – Licence. The claimant traded in textile products, such as pillows and blankets, which it sold to airlines for use by their passengers. The defendant advertising agency produced for the claimant, under contract, photographs of products the latter offered to the airlines. The defendant retained the copyright in the photographs and granted the claimant a licence in respect of them. The claimant brought a claim for breach of contract and passing off in respect of the use on the website of a Hong Kong company of some of the photographs. The Intellectual, Property and Enterprise Court, in dismissing claims, held that, the defendant had not breached any licence which might be implied into the contract. On the facts, the claimant had failed to establish its claim of passing off. 

Legal aid – Entitlement. Six claims were heard together in which each claimant challenged the defendant Director of Legal Aid Casework's decisions refusing to grant legal aid in respect of their immigration proceedings. The Administrative Court, in allowing the applications, held, among other things, that the overarching question posed in the Lord Chancellor's guidance, namely, whether the withholding of legal aid would make the assertion of a claim practically impossible or lead to an obvious unfairness in proceedings, set too high a threshold. 

Civil procedure – Dismissal for delay. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in an action by a pursuer who was involved in a helicopter accident in 1988, who averred that the incident had caused him to suffer post traumatic stress disorder, and who raised an action in 1990 suing the operators of the helicopter for 'bodily injury suffered' under the Warsaw Convention, the court held that the Lord Ordinary had not erred in dismissing the action in May 2013 on account of inordinate and inexcusable delay resulting in unfairness under Rule of Court 21A.1. 

Negligence – Damage. The claimant was a father seeking access to his son within the family court system. He brought a claim against the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) contending that their negligent behaviour amounted to misfeasance in public office and also disproportionately breached his right to private and family life under art 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights and under the Human Rights Act 1998. He sought damages against CAFCASS. The Queen's Bench Division held that the instant was not a case in which it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care on CAFCASS towards the claimant. 

Bankruptcy – Sequestration – Recovery of council tax. Court of Session: Dismissing an action in which the pursuer sought reduction of five summary warrants, a charge for payment of money and decree of sequestration, the action having arisen out of a dispute about her non-payment of council tax, the court held that reduction was only available where there were exceptional circumstances, eg fraud on the court, and there must be specific averments in support of such a plea, however there were no such averments in the pleadings. 

Child – Care. Following the murder of the children's mother by the father, X, the police had blood samples belonging to the father from the crime scene. X although in prison, was seeking a role in the children's lives. The Children's Guardian (the guardian) and the local authority wished to conduct a paternity test. The father however was against that idea. The guardian and the authority sought an order that the blood samples be used for the purposes of reaching a conclusion as to whether any of the DNA profiles belonged to the father. The Family Division held that the order would be made subject to limitations and safeguards. 

European Union – Community foreign and security policy. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 3(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 765/2006 (concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus), as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 84/2011 3 and Council Regulation (EU) 588/2011. The request had been made in proceedings between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Lithuania) and another and Mr V Peftiev and others, concerning restrictive measures against the latter.