Latest Cases

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the condition imposed by the defendant local planning authority on granting planning permission to the interested party for a new retail-led development. The condition required a legally binding commitment, it was enforceable and not too vague, it would achieve its purpose and material considerations had not been ignored. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH (LR) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Robert McBride Ltd and LR concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative mark 'LR nova pure' as a Community trade mark. 

Contempt of court – Committal. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant, Sports Direct's application to commit the defendants, Rangers International Football Club and its chairman, to prison for breach of an order restricting the disclosure of certain confidential information, following the chairman's interview on Sky Sports, reported in an article. There was no evidence to that Rangers had held the chairman out as having authority to make the statements on its behalf, and an unverified hearsay statement of one or more unidentified reporter(s) was not a sufficient basis for persuading the court to the criminal standard that the chairman had uttered the words said. Further, it was fatal to Sports Direct's application that no order had been served personally on the defendants and the court declined to exercise the discretion, under CPR 81.8, to dispense with service. 

Negligence – Causation. The Privy Council, in dismissing the appellant hospital board's appeal, held that, as a matter of principle, successive events were capable of each making a material contribution to the subsequent outcome. It was not persuaded by the appellant's argument that Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw ([1956] 1 All ER 615) was distinguishable because, in that case, the inhalation from two sources had been simultaneous, whereas, in the present case, the sepsis attributable to the appellant's negligence had developed after sepsis had already begun to develop. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign judgment. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a father's appeal against the mother's successful appeal against recognition and enforcement of an order obtained in Romania regarding their child, who was habitually resident in England. It was both a welfare and fundamental principle whether a child was to be heard and the question to be determined by the court, by reference to the child's age and understanding, was 'whether and if so how was the child to be heard'. As the child in the present case had not been given an opportunity to be heard in the Romanian proceedings, the judge had been correct to refuse recognition and enforcement of its order pursuant to art 23(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003. 

Damages – Personal injury. The Queen's Bench Division in a mesothelioma case brought on the deceased's behalf by his wife held that the deceased had not been contributory negligent and made an award of £85,000 in respect of an asbestos related disease in the upper half of the most severe category. 

Extradition – Extradition order. The Divisional Court gave guidance on the correct approach to European arrest warrants containing particulars of offences for which return was sought which stated that the sentences for other offences had been 'merged' in a variety of ways into the offences for which return was sought. In particular, it considered the warrants' validity with respect to the sufficiency of the particulars and specialty. 

Negligence – Medical negligence. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the claimant's case for clinical negligence against the defendant NHS Trust following an operation on the claimant preformed by a surgeon employed by the Trust. The court held that the claimant had failed to prove that the defendant's servants or agents had acted in breach of their duty to her. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that art 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 should be interpreted to the effect that its scope included an action brought by a third party, in accordance with national law, against the defendant in the original proceedings, and closely linked to those original proceedings, seeking reimbursement of compensation paid by that third party to the applicant in those original proceedings, provided that the action had not been instituted solely with the object of removing that defendant from the jurisdiction of the court which would be competent in the case. 

Medical practitioner – Negligence. The Queen's Bench Division ruled on a list of six disputed facts in connection with a clinical negligence claim arising out of the allegedly negligent manner in which the defendant had obtained the claimant's consent to surgery.