Recruitment & Announcements

Summary judgment – Strike out. The claimant, who alleged that a member of the British army (TS) had raped and sexually assaulted her while she had been serving in the Royal Navy in Gibraltar, succeeded on her appeal against a master's decision: (i) granting the defendant Ministry of Defence (MOD) summary judgment on the claimant's personal injury claim, on the basis that she had no real prospect of successfully establishing that the MOD was vicariously liable to her for TS's offences; and (ii) striking out part of her amended particulars of claim, on the basis that they did not disclose any reasonable grounds for bringing a claim of misfeasance in public office. The Queen's Bench Division held that, in circumstances where the MOD had accepted that the relationship between it and TS was capable of giving rise to vicarious liability, the master had erred in failing to give appropriate weight to the combination of all the matters the claimant had relied on, which, in the court's judgment, did give rise to a real prospect of establishing vicarious liability. Further, the court ruled that the master had erred in striking out part of the claimant's amended particulars of claim where there had been no argument before him about whether, in committing the alleged offences, TS had committed the tort of misfeasance in public office.

European Union – Trade marks. The Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office had correctly concluded that there was no likelihood of confusion between the figurative sign 'AC MILAN' for which the intervener company, Associazione Calcio Milan SpA (AC Milan), had obtained international registration and the earlier EU marks 'AC', 'AC HOTELS MARRIOTT' and 'AC HOTELS BY MARRIOTT' which had been registered by the applicant, Marriott Worldwide Corp. Accordingly, the General Court of the European Union dismissed the applicant's application for annulment of the Board's decision.

European Union – Environment. Article 3(u) of Directive (EC) 2003/87, as amended, should be interpreted as meaning that an installation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which produced, within the framework of its activity of 'combustion of fuels in installations with a total rated thermal input exceeding 20 [megawatts (MW)]', referred to in Annex I to that directive, electricity intended essentially to be used for its own needs, had be regarded as an 'electricity generator', within the meaning of that provision. The Court of Justice of the European Union so held in a preliminary ruling in proceedings concerning the application by the applicant company for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances free of charge to a natural gas processing installation.

European Union – Trade marks. The Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office had correctly decided that the applicant company (adidas AG) had failed to establish that the figurative mark that it had successfully registered consisting of three parallel equidistant stripes of identical width (applied on a product in any direction) had acquired distinctive character through use throughout the EU. It followed that the Board had been right to decide that the contested mark had been registered in breach of art 7(1)(b) of the Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 and that it should therefore be declared invalid. Consequently, the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action by adidas AG for annulment of the Board's decision.

European Union – Trade marks. The Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office had correctly decided that the three-dimensional sign in the shape of a faucet for which registration as an EU trade mark was sought by the applicant company (Brita GmbH) was devoid of any distinctive character within the meaning of art 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, as amended, in respect of all the relevant goods and services referred to by the examiner. Consequently, the General Court of the European Union dismissed Brita's action for annulment of the Board's decision.