Latest Cases

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. The Queen's Bench Division made a decision in relation to which law applied to an accident that had occurred in France involving and uninsured French Driver and two British Nationals. In making that decision in two actions in which the Motor Insurance Bureau was a defendant, he court considered Regulation 864/2007 and Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance)(Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 SI, 37/2003. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimants' challenge to the decision of the inspector appointed by the defendant Secretary of State to grant planning permission to the interested party. On the proper interpretation of 'person aggrieved' in s 288(1)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the claimant's had no standing, as they had not made objections or representations during the appeal procedure. 

Claim form – Service. The Queen's Bench Division allowed the defendant's application to set aside judgment in default entered against him. There was nothing to indicate that the claim form had been posted to him. The claimant's contention that the application should not be allowed, because he had been unable to apply for summary judgment because of the failure of E to acknowledge service, would be rejected. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH (Continental) against a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) relating to opposition proceedings between Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin and Continental concerning the application by the latter for registration of a figurative sign 'XKING' as a Community trade mark. 

Libel and slander – Defamatory words. The Queen's Bench Division dismissed the defendant newspaper's application for a ruling that the article was not capable of bearing the meaning pleaded by the claimant and that the articles did not bear any meaning defamatory of the claimant band member. The statement was capable of having the meaning attributed to it by the claimant and the statement was capable of being defamatory of the claimant. 

Immigration – Deportation. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the Secretary of State's appeal regarding deportation of the respondent, who was an EEA national with a permanent right of residence in the United Kingdom. The court held that, on the true construction of the legislative scheme and case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union, a permanent right of residence would not be lost merely by reason of criminality or a resulting sentence of imprisonment. 

Contract – Shipping contract. The Commercial Court, in allowing the claimant's appeal, held that, where a buyer of free on board (FOB) goods nominated a substitute vessel pursuant to its right under the GAFTA FOB period of delivery clause, he was required to comply with the terms of the contract of sale as to nomination and pre-advice in respect of the nomination of the substitute vessel. On the facts and on the true construction of the contract between the parties, the defendant buyer's nomination of a substitute vessel to take delivery of a cargo of maize had been invalid, it was in default and its claim to have validly nominated a substitute vessel so that the claimant had not been entitled to terminate the contract for sale failed. 

Highway – Maintenance. The Queen's Bench Division allowed the local authority's appeal against a decision that it was liable to the respondent for breach of its duty under s 41 of the Highways Act 1980 for failing to remove moss on which the respondent had slipped from the surface of the highway. It could not be said that the scope of a highway authority's absolute duty under s 41 of the Act extended to the removal of 'moss'. 

Sentence – Appeal. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, allowed the defendants' appeals against their sentences for conspiracy to blackmail. The judge's starting point with respect to the first and second defendants had been too high, and the sentence for the third defendant had been too long given his limited involvement. 

Contract – Parties. The Commercial Court dismissed the claimant aviation company's claim regarding the leasing of aircraft from the first defendant company. It held that the claimant had not been party to the agreement under which the proceedings had been brought and, accordingly, was not entitled to sue on it.