Latest Cases

Elections – Electoral registration. The claimant Dutch citizen and serving prisoner issued proceedings for wrongful deprivation of his right to vote in local and European Union Parliament elections. His tariff had been completed and he was deported two days later. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the application, found that the claimant had suffered no deprivation and that there had been no discrimination. It further refused to refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union. 

European Union – Rules on competition. The Court of Justice of the European Union allowed in part appeals by the European Commission, Siemens Transmission and Distribution Ltd, Siemens Transmission and Distribution SA and Nuova Magrinin Galileo SpA (the applicant companies), in which they sought to set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union annulling in part and varying a Commisison decision relating to a proceedings under art 81 EC and art 53 of the European Economic Area Agreement regarding gas insulted switchgear. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The claimant doctor brought a claim in libel against the defendant newspaper. The defendant applied to strike out the claim on the basis that the claimant had failed to sufficiently identify the publication of which he complained. The Queen's Bench Division considered the appropriate law and held that the claim would be struck out as the precise words had not been identified and the defendant needed to know exactly what words were complained of in a long article, so that it could frame its defence appropriately. 

Negligence – Contributory negligence. The claimant, a 14 year old girl, was knocked down by the defendant who was driving a motor vehicle. The claimant sustained serious head injuries and brought a personal injury claim in negligence against the defendant. In a trial to determine primary liability and contributory negligence, the Queen's Bench Division held that the defendant had been primarily negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout and that claimant had been contributory negligent to the extent of 50%. 

Parent and child – International child abduction. Court of Session: Refusing the prayer of a petition in which a mother sought an order for her 14-year-old daughter's return to Norway after the child went to her father's home in Scotland on a contact visit and did not return, the court concluded that it should exercise its discretion by refusing to order the child's return where she objected to being returned to Norway. 

European Union – Data protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 2(b) and (d), art 4(1)(a) and (c), art 12(b) and sub-paragraph (a) of the first paragraph of art 14 of Directive (EC) 95/46 of the European Parliament and of the and of art 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The request had been made in proceedings between, on the one hand, Google Spain SL and Google Inc. and the Spanish Data Protection Agency (the AEPD); and Mr Costeja González concerning a decision by the AEPD upholding the complaint lodged by Mr Costeja González against those two companies and ordering Google Inc. to adopt the measures necessary to withdraw personal data relating to Mr Costeja González from its index and to prevent access to the data in the future. 

Company – Sale of shares – Misrepresentation. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in an action concerning a premium the defender received for his shares after negotiating the sale of a company, in which the Lord Ordinary held that the pursuers, who claimed they agreed to the premium on basis of the defender's false representation that it was remuneration for his agreeing to act as a consultant to the company post-acquisition, were entitled to damages for loss caused by reliance on his negligent misrepresentation, the court rejected an argument that the pursuers were not entitled to damages because they should be treated as having discovered the true state of affairs prior to conclusion of the contract, the information having been in the hands of their agents. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory words. The claimant had maintained a blog site on which she wrote about the local council and its activities. The defendant was chief executive of that council. The claimant issued proceedings against the defendant alleging libel by him. The defendant counterclaimed that the claimant had written defamatory comments about him in her blog over a period of months. Those comments concerned what the claimant had described as a 'slush fund', pursuant to powers delegated by the council to, among others, the defendant, to initiate and fund libel proceedings by council members. The claim was dismissed and the counterclaim was allowed in part. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the claimant's appeal as the judge had given the blog posts their natural and ordinary meaning, which had been an implication of corruption, and that meaning had not been altered by the context of other posts on the blog. 

European Union – Social security. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of arts 1(u)(i), 4(1)(h) and 76 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, as amended, and of art 10(1)(b)(i) of Council Regulation (EEC) 574/72. The request had been made in proceedings between the Luxembourg National Agency for Family Benefits) (the CNPF) and Mr and Mrs Wiering, German residents working, respectively, in Luxembourg and Germany, concerning the CNPF's refusal to pay them a supplementary family allowance for their children. 

Adoption – practice. N, who was born in 2008, suffered from severe disabilities. She had lived all her life, once outside hospital, with the applicants. The applicants applied for an adoption order. N's father applied for a contact order. The Family Court held that, in the circumstances, an adoption order would be made and the father's application would be dismissed.