Latest Cases

Immigration – Asylum seeker. The applicant Sri Lankan national sought permission to challenge the lawfulness of the defendant Secretary of State's decision to refuse his claim under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and to certify it under s 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), in refusing permission, held that the Secretary of State's decision to certify his claim was unarguably lawful, in particular, absent any specific evidence of serious irreversible harm to the claimant's child during the period of his absence whilst he pursued an appeal from abroad. 

Minor – Medical treatment. The Family Division granted the claimant NHS Trust's application for a declaration that it would not be unlawful to withdraw medical support devices which were keeping an 11-year-old boy alive where, on the evidence, he was dying and there was no hope of any intervention which could save his life. 

Adoption – Order. An application for the adoption of an 18 year old Pakistani national had been refused. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the prospective adopter's appeal as the judge had erred in his interpretation of s 1(2) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and in his assumption that, under s 1(5) of the British Nationality Act 1981, the adoptee would automatically assume British citizenship. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The Queen's Bench Division held that the court would set aside the order of a master made pursuant to CPR r 6.15(2) that service of a petition and associated documents by first class post at the association address was good service and that there were deemed to have been served by the nominated date. 

European Union – Trade marks. The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Monster Energy Company (Monster) 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 Monster and Mr Luis Yus Balaguer, concerning the application by the latter to register a figurative sign depicting the words 'icexpresso+ energy coffee' as a Community trade mark. 

European Union – Data protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding that, on the proper construction of art 25(6) of Council Directive (EC) 95/46, Commission Decision (EC) 2000/520, which found that the United States ensured an adequate level of data protection, was invalid. 

European Union – Environment. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of Annex IIB to Council Directive (EC) 1999/13 (Directive 1999/13). The request was made in proceedings between Nannoka Vulcanus Industries BV (Nannoka) and the Executive Board of the Provincial Committee for the Region of Gelderland; (the Board), concerning the Board's order requiring Nannoka to discontinue and rectify, on pain of imposition of periodic penalties, its infringement of the Netherlands legislation transposing Directive 1999/13. 

Negligence – Information or advice. The Technology and Construction Court made findings concerning the liability of the parties following the failure of a project to develop a church. The court held that, although the defendant consulting company had acted negligently, the claimant bank's own negligence was such that it would bear one third of the losses that it had sustained. 

Immigration – Leave to remain – Fresh claim. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion in a judicial review petition challenging the refusal of the petitioner's application for leave to remain in the UK as the spouse of a British citizen, the Lord Ordinary having refused the petition, the court concluded that none of the petitioner's criticisms of the respondent's decision letter undermined the lawfulness of her decision. 

Patent – Infringement. The Patents Court dismissed an application for defendants' summary judgment in respect of a claim for, among other things, declaratory relief that rival products had infringed a patent concerning an electronic cigarette. Further, having weighed the competing considerations, it also dismissed an alternative application for a stay of that claim.