Results: 147

• Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd (No 1)

  31 Mar 2010 [2010] EWHC 660 (Pat); [2010] Bus LR 1244, Ch D (Floyd J)

  29 Mar 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 303; [2011] Bus LR 1510; [2011] WLR (D) 115, CA

  13 Mar 2013 [2013] UKSC 16; [2013] Bus LR 565; [2013] 2 All ER 177; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive. Subsequent citations: 10.
  PATENT — Infringement — Making product
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PATENT — Infringement — Making product — Invention claimed as combination — Whether person who replaces element “makes” patented product — Whether whole inventive concept remaining once element removed — Correct test to be applied — Patents Act 1977, s 60(1)(a)

  5 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered
• In re Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd (Neumans LLP v Andronikou)

  02 Nov 2012 [2012] EWHC 3088 (Ch); [2013] Bus LR 374; [2013] 1 All ER 975; [2012] WLR (D) 310, Ch D (Morgan J)

  24 Jul 2013 [2013] EWCA Civ 916; [2013] Bus LR 1152; [2014] 1 All ER 12; [2013] WLR (D) 301, CA

  10 Mar 2014 (appn dis) [2014] Bus LR 354, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 5.
  INSOLVENCY — Winding up — Expenses of liquidation

  INSOLVENCY — Administration — Expenses of administration
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  INSOLVENCY — Winding up — Expenses of liquidation — Company instructing solicitors in connection with successful application to strike out winding up petition — Solicitors applying for company’s costs to be expense of liquidation — Whether company “person” appearing on petition — Proper approach to awarding company’s costs — Whether costs expense of liquidation — Insolvency Rules 1986, r 4.218(3)(h)

  INSOLVENCY — Administration — Expenses of administration — Solicitors acting for company in connection with winding up petition — Petition suspended on appointment of out of court administrators — Solicitors seeking payment of fees as expense of administration — Whether jurisdiction to order that company pay its own costs of administration out of its assets — Whether order creating necessary disbursement — Whether fees to be treated as administration costs and expenses — Whether court to exercise inherent jurisdiction to order payment of fees — Senior Courts Act 1981, s 51 (as substituted by Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s 4(1) and amended by Access to Justice Act 1999, s 31) — Insolvency Rules 1986, r 2.67(1)(f)

  14 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered
• Football Association Premier League Ltd v QC Leisure (Football Association Premier League Ltd v AV Station plc, Football Association Premier League Ltd v Madden)

  24 Jun 2008 [2008] EWHC 1411 (Ch); [2008] FSR 32, Ch D (Kitchin J )

  13 Nov 2008 [2008] EWHC 2897 (Ch); [2009] 1 WLR 1603, Ch D (Kitchin J)

  04 Oct 2011 (Joined cases C-403/08 and C-429/08); EU:C:2011:631; [2012] Bus LR 1321; [2012] All ER (EC) 629; [2011] WLR (D) 286, ECJ

  03 Feb 2012 (No 2) [2012] EWHC 108 (Ch); [2012] FSR 366, Ch D (Kitchin J)

  20 Dec 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 1708; [2013] Bus LR 866; [2012] WLR (D) 392, CA

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 4 neutral. Subsequent citations: 56.
  PRACTICE — Parties — Joinder

  EUROPEAN UNION — Free competition — Restriction or distortion of competition
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PRACTICE — Parties — Joinder — Court referring questions to Court of Justice of the European Communities — Non-parties applying to be joined as claimants to national court proceedings in order to take part in preliminary reference procedure — Whether court having jurisdiction to join parties as claimants to national court proceedings for that purpose — Whether discretion to be exercised — CPR r 19.2(2)(a)

  EUROPEAN UNION — Free competition — Restriction or distortion of competition — Broadcasting — Claimant operating system of licences for broadcast of football matches — Each licensee granted exclusive right to broadcast matches in single member state — Each subscriber requiring decoder card to decrypt licensee’s satellite signal — Licensees prohibited under licence agreement from supplying decoder cards to persons outside member state for which licence granted — Businesses in United Kingdom using decoder cards obtained by subterfuge from foreign licensee — Whether cards “illicit device” — Whether national legislation prohibiting import, sale or use of foreign decoder cards contrary to freedom to provide services — Whether objective of protecting intellectual property rights justifying prohibition — Whether contractual prohibition on supplying decoder cards contrary to EU competition law — Whether transient fragments of protected works on television screen “acts of reproduction” — Whether acts exempt — Whether transmission of works “communication to the public” for which authorisation required — Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, ss 297, 298 — FEU Treaty, arts 56FEU, 101FEU — Council Directive 98/84/EC, arts 2, 3 — Council Directive 2001/29/EC, arts 2, 3, 5

  9 Case(s) considered

• In re New Cap Reinsurance Corpn Ltd (New Cap Reinsurance Corpn Ltd v Grant)

  15 Mar 2011 [2011] EWHC 677 (Ch), Ch D (Lewison J)

  09 Aug 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 971; [2012] Ch 538; [2012] 2 WLR 1095; [2012] Bus LR 772; [2012] 1 All ER 755; [2012] 1 All ER (Comm) 1207; [2011] BCC 937; [2011] BPIR 1428; [2011] WLR (D) 274, CA (Mummery, Lloyd, McFarlane LJJ)

  24 Oct 2012 [2012] UKSC 46; [2013] 1 AC 236; [2012] 3 WLR 1019; [2013] Bus LR 1; [2013] 1 All ER 521; [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 513; [2012] 2 Lloyd's Rep 615; [2012] BPIR 1204; The Times, 9 November 2012; Case details, SC(E) (Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony, Lord Sumption JJSC, Lord Collins of Mapesbury)

  Subsequent citations: 59.
  INSOLVENCY — Liquidation — Foreign company
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  INSOLVENCY — Liquidation — Foreign company — Liquidators of foreign companies seeking to enforce in England judgments of United States and Australian courts to recover moneys transferred to defendants before liquidation — Defendants claiming not to have been present in or submitted to jurisdiction of foreign courts — Whether judgments in personam — Whether ordinary rules for enforcing judgments in personam inapplicable to bankruptcy proceedings — Whether judgments enforceable at common law — Whether alternative method of enforcement through international assistance provisions of Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency — Statutory provisions allowing English court to “assist” Australian court in insolvency matter and for registration and enforcement of Australian judgment in “civil or commercial” matter — Whether either provision allowing English court to enforce Australian judgment against defendants — Foreign Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933, ss 4, 6 — Insolvency Act 1986, s 426 — Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments (Australia) Order 1994, art 4(a) — Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006, Sch 1, arts 2, 21

  4 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  2 Statutes considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered
• Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction plc

  23 May 2013 [2013] EWHC 1322 (TCC); [2013] Bus LR 1199; [2013] BLR 417; [2013] WLR (D) 211, QBD (Akenhead J)

  27 Nov 2013 [2013] EWCA Civ 1541; [2014] 1 WLR 1220; [2014] Bus LR 367; [2014] 1 EGLR 5; 151 ConLR 72; [2014] BLR 79; [2013] WLR (D) 463, CA

  15 May 2014 (appn all) [2014] 1 WLR 2218; [2014] Bus LR 711, SC(E)

  17 Jun 2015 [2015] UKSC 38; [2015] 1 WLR 2961; [2015] Bus LR 830; [2015] 4 All ER 482; [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 965; 160 ConLR 28; [2015] BLR 503; The Times, 22 June 2015; [2015] WLR (D) 261; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive. Subsequent citations: 32.
  ADJUDICATION — Adjudicator’s decision — Finality

  BUILDING — Contract — Adjudication

  CONTRACT — Construction — Implied term
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  ADJUDICATION — Adjudicator’s decision — Finality — Reference of dispute under construction contract — Whether precluding litigation of same dispute — Whether adjudicator’s decision giving rise to separate cause of action with new limitation period — Whether term to be implied to that effect — Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, Sch, para 23(2)

  BUILDING — Contract — Adjudication — Reference to adjudicator of dispute under construction contract — Adjudicator making award — Whether adjudicator’s decision giving rise to separate cause of action for recovery of payment under award if dispute finally determined in favour of unsuccessful party — Whether term to be implied to that effect — Whether restitutionary right to recovery of any overpayment — Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s 108 — Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, Sch, para 23(2)

  CONTRACT — Construction — Implied term — Adjudicator in construction contract dispute making award in defendant’s favour — Claimant making payment in accordance with award — Claim for repayment of sum paid — Defendant counterclaiming for damages in excess of amount awarded by adjudicator — Whether implied term in contract providing claimant with cause of action for repayment if dispute finally determined in his favour — Whether claimant’s cause of action accruing at date of payment made in accordance with adjudicator’s award — Whether defendant’s cause of action accruing at date of breach of contract or duty — Whether claim or counterclaim statute-barred — Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s 108 — Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, Sch, para 23(2)

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• In re Itau BBA International Ltd

  28 Jun 2012 [2012] EWHC 1783 (Ch); [2013] Bus LR 490; [2012] WLR (D) 187, Ch D (Henderson J)

  Subsequent citations: 3.
  COMPANY — Merger — Cross-border merger
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMPANY — Merger — Cross-border merger — Regulations providing for cross-border merger by absorption where transferor company transferring all assets and liabilities to existing transferee company — Definition of “existing transferee company” — Whether excluding company formed for purposes of merger — Companies (Cross-Border Mergers) Regulations 2007, regs 2(2)(b), 3(1)

  1 Case considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• Financial Services Authority v Sinaloa Gold plc (Barclays Bank plc intervening)

  25 Jan 2011 [2011] EWHC 144 (Ch), Ch D (Judge Hodge QC)

  18 Oct 2011 [2011] EWCA Civ 1158; [2012] Bus LR 753; [2011] WLR (D) 295, CA

  27 Feb 2013 [2013] UKSC 11; [2013] 2 AC 28; [2013] 2 WLR 678; [2013] Bus LR 302; [2013] 2 All ER 339; [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 1089; [2013] WLR (D) 90; Case details, SC(E)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 17.
  INJUNCTION — Interlocutory — Undertaking as to damages
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  INJUNCTION — Interlocutory — Undertaking as to damages — Financial Services Authority alleging defendants operating share scam and obtaining interlocutory freezing injunction against them — Order including standard cross-undertaking to pay third parties’ costs and losses — Authority subsequently seeking to exclude losses from undertaking — Whether cross-undertaking liability in “damages” — Whether authority’s statutory immunity in respect of damages rending cross-undertaking unenforceable — Whether court to exercise discretion to require authority exercising law enforcement role to give undertaking to third parties — Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Sch 1, para 19

  6 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Schering Pharma AG

  17 Mar 2011 [2011] EWHC 583 (Pat); [2011] Bus LR D153, Ch D (Floyd J)

  07 Mar 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 235; [2013] Bus LR D17; [2012] WLR (D) 66, CA

  Subsequent citations: 4.
  PATENT — Revocation — Obviousness
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PATENT — Revocation — Obviousness — European patent for medical invention — Claim for revocation on ground of obviousness in items of prior art — Guidance as to how to identify inventive step — Whether principle to examine each step of process by skilled person leading to determination on obviousness — Whether steps in process capable of hindering finding of inventiveness

  1 Case considered

• Tidal Energy Ltd v Bank of Scotland plc

  13 Sep 2013 [2013] EWHC 2780 (QB); [2013] Bus LR 1379; [2013] CN 1405; [2013] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 605, QBD (Judge Havelock-Allan QC)

  31 Jul 2014 [2014] EWCA Civ 1107; [2014] Bus LR 1167; [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 38; [2015] 2 All ER 15; [2014] 2 CLC 124; The Times, 28 August 2014; [2014] WLR (D) 369; [2014] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 549, CA

  15 Dec 2014 (appn all) [2015] Bus LR 94, SC(E)

  Subsequent citations: 4.
  BANKING — Payment — Liability
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  BANKING — Payment — Liability — Claimant authorising bank to transfer funds electronically to named recipient — Claimant correctly naming intended recipient but giving incorrect account number and sort code — Funds credited to holder of account number and sort code in accordance with usual banking practice governing such transactions — Whether bank entitled to make payment on basis of sort code and account number without reference to account name — Whether liable to re-credit funds to claimant’s account

  3 Case(s) considered

• Systech International Ltd v PC Harrington Contractors Ltd

  27 Oct 2011 [2011] EWHC 2722 (TCC); [2012] Bus LR 1013; [2012] 1 All ER (Comm) 381, QBD (Akenhead J)

  23 Oct 2012 [2012] EWCA Civ 1371; [2013] Bus LR 970; [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 1074; [2013] 2 All ER 69; [2012] WLR (D) 284, CA

  Subsequent citations: 3.
  BUILDING — Contract — Adjudication
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  BUILDING — Contract — Adjudication — Adjudicator giving decision in construction dispute involving defendant — Court ruling adjudicator’s decision made in breach of natural justice and unenforceable — Adjudicator’s employer seeking payment of fees from defendant — Whether adjudicator’s fees payable for services preparatory to making of decision — Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s 108 — Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, Sch

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered