SPCMA Sa and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 11 Oct 2007

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2610 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.261382

Matra Communication SAS v Home Office: CA 25 Feb 1999

In the absence of comparable situations, a member state is entitled to choose the time limits within which a public service contract is to be challenged, provided only that it did not make it impossible to challenge and there was no prejudice against non-nationals.
Damages under the Remedies Directive 89/665/EEC were not subject to the Norbrook (Francovich) conditions.
The ‘damages provided by domestic law remain damages on the basis envisaged by Directive (89/665/EEC); but regulation 32(5)(b)(ii) none the less thereby creates a private law, non-discretionary, remedy, because within the national legal order any remedy in damages necessarily has those qualities’.

Citations:

Times 08-Mar-1999, Gazette 08-Apr-1999, [1999] 1 WLR 1646, [1999] EWCA Civ 860, [1999] 1 CMLR 1454

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 92/50/EC (OJ 1992 I209/1) on co-ordination of systems for awarding public service contracts

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Norbrook Laboratories v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food ECJ 2-Apr-1998
ECJ Directives 81/851/EEC and 81/852/EEC – Veterinary medicinal products – Marketing authorisation . .

Cited by:

Cited – Phonographic Performance Limited v Department of Trade and Industry HM Attorney General ChD 23-Jul-2004
The claimant represented the interests of copyright holders, and complained that the defendant had failed to implement the Directive properly, leaving them unable properly to collect royalties in the music rental market. The respondent argued that . .
Disapproved – Nuclear Decommissioning Authority v Energysolutions EU Ltd (Now Called ATK Energy EU Ltd) SC 11-Apr-2017
This is an appeal on preliminary points of European Union and domestic law regarding the circumstances in which damages may be recoverable for failure to comply with the requirements of the Public Procurement Directive (Parliament and Council . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145775

Regina v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ex parte Lunn Poly Limited and Bishopsgate Insurance Limited: CA 26 Feb 1999

A tax on holiday insurance premiums which differentiated between policies sold by independent insurance brokers and those sold by travel agents was unlawful in European law, constituting state aid without the appropriate notice having been given.

Citations:

Times 11-Mar-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 867

Statutes:

EC Treaty Art 92

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Insurance, Customs and Excise, Taxes – Other

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145782

Regina v H M Treasury; Commissioners of Customs and Excise and Attorney General ex parte Shepherd Neame Ltd: CA 12 Feb 1999

Community law does not impose any obligation on member states to refrain from imposing increases in excise duty. The differences between English and French rates are substantial, and damaging to brewers near the channel, but there remains no such duty.

Citations:

Times 17-Feb-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 776

Statutes:

ECTreaty art 99

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145691

Deutsche Lufthansa And Others v Commission (Judgment): ECFI 16 Dec 2015

Citations:

T-46/11, [2015] EUECJ T-46/11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.556998

Deza v ECHA: ECFI 6 May 2015

ECJ (Order) Interim measures – REACH – Registration of the chemical bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) in the list of ‘candidate substances’ – Application for stay of execution – Lack of urgency’

Citations:

T-115/15, [2015] EUECJ T-115/15 – CO, [2017] EUECJ T-115/15

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.546596

Klausner Holz Niedersachsen v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen: ECJ 11 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 107 TFEU and 108 TFEU – State aid – Aid granted in breach of Article 108(3) TFEU – Decision of a Member State court establishing the validity of the contract granting that aid – Res judicata – Interpretation in conformity with EU law – Principle of effectiveness

Citations:

C-505/14, [2015] EUECJ C-505/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

TFEU 107

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.554657

Dyson v Commission: ECFI 11 Nov 2015

Judgment – Directive 2010/30/EU – Indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products – Delegated Regulation (EU) No 665/2013 – Competence of the Commission – Equal treatment – Obligation to state reasons

Citations:

T-544/13, [2015] EUECJ T-544/13, ECLI:EU:T:2015:836

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2010/30/EU, Delegated Regulation (EU) No 665/2013

Jurisdiction:

European

Consumer

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.554649

Greece v Commission: ECFI 11 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – EAGGF – Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Reasonable time – Lack of key controls – Extrapolation of findings of failures

Citations:

T-550/13, [2015] EUECJ T-550/13, ECLI: EU: T: 2015 835

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.554651

Generics UK Ltd v Synaptech Inc: CA 16 Oct 2009

Reference to ECJ – expiry date of Supplementary Protection Certificate

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1119

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.377233

British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 21 Jul 2009

Reference of questions to the ECJ

Citations:

[2009] UKFTT 197 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.409000

Pablo Star Ltd v Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company PJSC (T/A Du): CA 14 Oct 2009

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1044

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Jurisdiction, Contract

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.376133

In re Stanford International Bank Ltd and Others: ChD 3 Jul 2009

Sir Andrew Morritt explained the relationship of the Regulation, the Model Law, and the still earlier European Convention on Insolvency Proceedings: ‘To understand the arguments and explain my conclusion it is necessary to consider the evolution of both the Insolvency Proceedings Regulation and UNCITRAL. Both were preceded by the European Convention on Insolvency Proceedings. Its preparation began in 1960. It was open for signature by member states from 23 November 1995. The Convention applied to proceedings which satisfied four conditions but as there might be more than one proceeding satisfying those conditions it also provided for ‘main insolvency proceedings’. They were defined as proceedings in the contracting state where the debtor had his centre of main interests. In May 1996 the UK Government refused to sign the Convention. In July 1996 there was signed what became known as the Virgos-Schmit Report on the Convention (Report on the Convention on Insolvency Proceedings, Brussels, 3 May 1996). Though never formally adopted, it was and is regarded as an authoritative commentary on the Convention and the subsequent regulation derived from it.’

Judges:

Sir Andrew Morritt (Chancellor), Arden LJ, Hughes LJ

Citations:

[2011] 1 Ch 33, [2009] EWHC 1441 (Ch), [2010] 3 WLR 941, [2010] Bus LR 1270, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 357, [2010] BPIR 679

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – In re Stanford International Bank Ltd and Others ChD 9-Jul-2009
One of the parties wanted to request permission to appeal, but had not done so at the hearing. The court considered whether it had power to do so at a later hearing.
Held: It did not. The Rules set out a deliberately prescriptive regime which . .
Appeal from – Stanford International Bank Ltd, Re CA 25-Feb-2010
Hughes LJ said: ‘it is essential that the duty of candour laid upon any applicant for an order without notice is fully understood and complied with. It is not limited to a duty not to misrepresent. It consists in a duty to consider what any other . .
Cited – Olympic Airlines Sa Pension and Life Insurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines Sa CA 6-Jun-2013
The court considered the the jurisdiction under EU law to commence a secondary winding-up in England of a company whose main liquidation is taking place in Greece. That depended upon whether the company, registered in Greece had a sufficient . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, International, European

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.347459

European

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.430341

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.196637

Pusa (Judgment): ECJ 29 Apr 2004

Citizenship of the Union – Article 18 EC – Right to move freely and to reside in the Member States – Attachment of remuneration – Detailed rules

Citations:

C-224/02, [2004] EUECJ C-224/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001

Jurisdiction:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

VAT

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.543909

Cited – Varsani v Relfo Ltd CA 27-May-2010
The defendant appealed against refusal of a declaration that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. He said that he lived in Kenya, and the claimant had failed first to apply for leave to serve out of the jurisdiction. The claimant had . .
Cited – Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated v Brownlie SC 19-Dec-2017
The claimant and her family were in a car crash while on holiday in Egypt. The claimant’s husband and his daughter died. The holiday had been booked in England and the car excursion booked in advance from England. The hotel operator was incorporated . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Bailii

Statutes:

Employment Act 2002 32(2) Part 3, Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council v Pratt EAT 4-Oct-2006
EAT Practice and Procedure
Statutory dispute resolution procedures introduced by the Employment Act 2002 – modified grievance procedure – whether employee complied with requirement to set out in writing the . .
Cited – Shergold v Fieldway Medical Centre EAT 5-Dec-2005
The claimant had submitted a grievance complaining in general terms of the way in which she had been treated by a manager. She did not, however, refer to a particular incident relied on in her pleading as one of the two ‘last straw’ incidents that . .
Cited – Canary Wharf Management Limited v Edebi EAT 3-Mar-2006
EAT Practice and Procedure – striking-out/dismissal
Grievance procedures. Were they complied with? Held not to be in the circumstances of this case. Observations on what counts as compliance and how . .

Cited by:

Cited – Molaudi v Ministry of Defence EAT 15-Apr-2011
molaudi_modEAT11
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
The Claimant sought to bring a claim for racial discrimination against the defendant relating to events which occurred while the Claimant was a serving soldier. He had previously . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, European

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.267397

Official Custodian for Charities v Parway Estates Developments (In Liquidation): CA 1985

The consideration for the grant of a lease was not a capital sum, but substantial building works. Application was made for its forfeiture.
Held: Dillon LJ assumed that the words ‘if the tenant shall enter into liquidation whether compulsorily or voluntarily’ in a re-entry clause in a lease refer to the making of the winding up order.
Save in relation to non-payment of rent, the power to grant relief from forfeiture to lessees is now exclusively contained in section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925.
Dillon LJ said in relation to section 9(3) and (4) of the 1972 Act: ‘The question then is whether, even so, it is implicit in section 9 (4), or necessary in order to give effect to section 9 (4), that, after an official notification of an event has become fully effective, all persons must be treated as having constructive notice of that event. Three matters can be urged in support of the argument, viz.: (i) if an event has not been officially notified a company can still rely on it against a person who has actual knowledge of it, and so official notification is in a sense treated as the counterpart of actual knowledge, in enabling the company to rely on the event; (ii) during the period of grace before the official notification has become fully effective, the person concerned can prevent the company relying on the event by showing he was unavoidably prevented from knowing of the event, absence of the event being treated in the period of grace as countervailing the official notification: and (iii) it is difficult to think of the circumstances in which a company will wish to rely as against a third party on the happening of the event of its own liquidation and in which the real issue will not be the third party’s knowledge of that event rather than the happening of the event itself.
This question whether official notification of a relevant event constitutes notice of that event to all the world, is an important question. If indeed the notification does constitute notice at all, the very many landlords who are not in the habit of studying the London Gazette regularly of effecting regular searches of the files of their company tenants in the Companies registry will be at risk of inadvertently waiving the forfeiture of leases by accepting rent after the company tenants went into liquidation.
The deputy judge, after considering the wording of section 9(4) and views expressed in Palmer’s Company Law 23rd ed., vol. 1, pp. 184, 185 – 186, concluded that subsection (4) did not impute knowledge to anyone. It was essentially negative in its impact. It provided that a company cannot rely upon a relevant event if it is not in the Gazette but it did not make the positive counter proposition that a company can rely upon that event – sc. it can rely upon everyone having notice of that event – merely because it is in the Gazette. I agree with the deputy judge’s analysis of the subsection and with his conclusion.
I would add two further comments. In the first place, I do not think that the link, such that it is, in section 9(4), between official notification of a relevant event, and actual knowledge of the event if it has not been officially notified, requires that official notification should be treated as importing notice of the event to everyone. The object of the legislation is that persons dealing with a company should be officially given an opportunity to finding out important information concerning the company vis-a-vis those who have actual knowledge of the relevant event. Hence the qualification of the restriction imposed by the subsection of the company. It is not necessary to treat official notification as the equivalent of actual knowledge in all circumstances.
In the second place, among the events, other than liquidation and the appointment of a liquidator, listed in section 9(4) as events on which a company cannot rely in the absence of official notification are making of any alteration in the memorandum of association of the company, including, of course, its object clause, and the making of any change among the company’s directors. But it is plain to my mind from section (9)1 that a person dealing in good faith with a company is not to be treated as having constructive notice (as under the previous ultra vires doctrine of English law) of the terms of the company’s objects clause, whether in its original form or as from time to time altered, and is not to be treated as having constructive notice of the composition from time to time of the Old Aachener Re board of directors of the company. The tenor of the section is thus against imputing constructive notice of the relevant events to persons dealing with a company, while ensuring that they have an opportunity to find information about those events.’

Judges:

Dillon LJ

Citations:

[1985] Ch 151

Statutes:

European Communities Act 1972 9(3) 9(4), Law of Property Act 1925 146

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, European

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.592685

Council v Boehringer: ECJ 26 Feb 2002

Citations:

C-23/00, [2002] EUECJ C-23/00P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.167757

Georgios Orfanopoulos and Others v Land Baden-Wurttemberg.: ECJ 29 Apr 2004

When considering a claim to resist deportation ‘the requirement of the existence of a present threat must, as a general rule, be satisfied at the time of the expulsion.’
Europa On the interpretation of Article 39(3) EC and Article 9(1) of Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the coordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health (OJ, English Special Edition, 1963-1964, p. 117) (C-482/01), and of Article 39 EC and Article 3 of the same directive (C-493/01).

Citations:

C-482/01, [2004] EUECJ C-482/01, C-493/01, [2004] EUECJ C-493/01, [2005] 1 CMLR 18

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Machado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment CA 19-May-2005
At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold . .
Cited – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.213799

Commission v Boehringer: ECJ 26 Feb 2002

Citations:

C-32/00, [2002] EUECJ C-32/00P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.167758

FTA and others v Council: ECFI 24 Feb 2000

(Rec 2000,p II-373) Action for annulment – Application signed by a lawyer not authorised to practise before a court of a Member State or of a State which is a party to the European Economic Area Agreement – Inadmissibility.

Citations:

T-37/98, [2000] EUECJ T-37/98

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.173496

Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Richardson: ECJ 19 Oct 1995

ECJ Different ages for prescription charges between sexes were an unlawful discrimination. Pension differences were no justification for different eligibility for prescription.

Citations:

Independent 17-Nov-1995, Times 27-Oct-1995, C-137/94, [1995] EUECJ C-137/94

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 79/7/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits, Discrimination, European

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.161354

Commission v Giannini: ECJ 13 Apr 2000

(Judgment)

Citations:

C-153/99, [2000] EUECJ C-153/99P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2008/118/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Customs and Excise

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.543918

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.464256

Ventouris v Commission: ECFI 11 Dec 2003

(Judgment)

Citations:

T-59/99

Jurisdiction:

European

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.192038

Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd: CA 20 Jun 2007

The claimants appealed refusal of an order restricting comparative advertising materials for the defendant’s competing veterinary medicine. The claimant said that the rule against prior restraint applicable to defamation and other tort proceedings did not apply to trade mark infringement.
Held: The rule against prior restraint applied to actions involving reputation, but did not apply to actions alleging trade mark infringement, which protect a property right.
Jacob LJ said: ‘I think a man who makes a damaging statement involving use of another’s mark which he reasonably believes to be true at the time but which later turns out to be untrue would not be acting in accordance with an honest practice if he were not prepared to compensate the owner of the damaged mark. He can express his honestly held opinion, but unless that is on the basis that he will compensate his trade rival if it is proved to be wrong, he is not acting in accordance with an honest practice and will be adjudged to infringe.
. . Indeed the Comparative Advertising Directive (97/55/EC) rather confirms the position. It is not in dispute that a comparative advertiser will be acting in accordance with ‘honest practices’ provided he does so in accordance with the conditions of Art 3a of the Misleading Advertising Directive (84/450/EC). One of those conditions is that the advertising must not be misleading. If an advertisement is in fact misleading, however honestly the advertiser believed what he said at the time, he would be outside the Directive.’
However: ‘A man who finds his trade mark disparaged by a rival trader in a comparative advertisement can obtain a prior restraining order only if he can show that it is more likely than not that the disparagement is wrong and misleading. Unless he can do that, then his rival, both for his own commercial interests and in the interests of the public, ought to be free to say that which he honestly believes.’ The claimant had not achieved the necessary standard and his appeal failed.

Judges:

Jacob LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 583, Times 27-Jun-2007, [2007] FSR 29

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Comparative Advertising Directive (97/55/EC), Misleading Advertising Directive (84/450/EC, Control of Misleading Advertisement Regulations 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bonnard v Perryman CA 2-Jan-1891
Although the courts possessed a jurisdiction, ‘in all but exceptional cases’, they should not issue an interlocutory injunction to restrain the publication of a libel which the defence sought to justify except where it was clear that that defence . .
Cited – Bestobell v Bigg 1975
The rule in Bonnard preventing prior restraint in defamation proceedings applies also in the context of an allegation of malicious falsehood. . .
Cited – American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .
Cited – Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs Com Ltd CA 3-Mar-2004
The claimant alleged trade mark infringement by the respondents by the use of a mark in a pop-up advert.
Held: The own-name defence to trade mark infringement is limited. Some confusion may be allowed if overall the competition was not unfair . .
Cited – O2 Holdings Ltd and Another v Hutchison 3G Ltd CA 5-Dec-2006
The court faced an allegation based on allegedly false comparative advertising, and referred to the European Court the question: ‘Where a trader, in an advertisement for his own goods or services uses a registered trade mark owned by a competitor . .
Cited – Service Corporation International plc v Channel Four Television ChD 1999
The court considered an application for an interlocutory injunction to restrain a broadcast, based on copyright. The defendant argued that this was merely an attempt to circumvent difficulties in a defamation action.
Held: Where an interim . .
Cited – Microdata v Rivendale 1991
The need to protect freedom of speech overrode the need to protect a person’s trade reputation. . .
Cited – Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
Cited – Harrods Ltd v Harrodian School CA 3-Apr-1996
No passing off was to be found to have been shown without the public believing that the plaintiff was responsible for the defendant’s services or goods. It was not enough to show only that the defendant was somehow ‘behind’ the defendant. Millet LJ . .
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others HL 14-Oct-2004
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the . .
Cited – Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma v Marks and Spencer plc 1990
Italian regulations are not directly enforceable within the United Kingdom. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Boehringer Ingelheim and others v Vetplus Ltd CA 5-Jul-2007
. .
Cited – Tiscali UK Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc QBD 16-Dec-2008
The claimant internet provider claimed damages against the defendant who it said had written to its clients making false assertions about the claimant. An earlier defamation claim had been struck out, but the claimant now alleged interference with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.173849

The Scotch Whisky Association and Others, Re Judicial Review: SCS 3 May 2013

(Outer House, Court of Session) The petitioners challenged the legality of an enactment of the Scottish Parliament – the Act. They also challenged the legality of the Scottish Ministers’ decision that they would make an Order setting the minimum price at 50 pence per unit of alcohol.
Held: The claim was rejected

Judges:

Lord Doherty

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSOH – 70, 2013 SLT 776

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

C-406/10, [2011] EUECJ C-406/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 91/250/EEC, Directive 2001/29/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

At ChD (1) – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd ChD 23-Jul-2010
The court considered the impact of the distinction drawn by Article 9(2) of TRIPS and Article 2 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty between ‘expressions’ and ‘ideas, procedures, methods of operation and mathematical concepts as such’ on domestic copyright . .
Reference – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd ChD 22-Nov-2010
The parties sought to agree the terms of a reference to the European Court of Justice. . .

Cited by:

At ECJ (Opinion) – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd ECJ 2-May-2012
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Intellectual property – Directive 91/250/EEC – Legal protection of computer programs – Articles 1(2) and 5(3) – Scope of protection – Creation directly or via another process – Computer . .
At ECJ (Opinion) – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd ChD 25-Jan-2013
The parties disputed the extent to which elements of the claimant’s software package could be used by the defendants. SAS had written software including its own computer language to create a data processing environment. The defendants had wanted to . .
ECJ Opinion – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd CA 21-Nov-2013
The court was asked as to the extent to which the developer of a computer program may lawfully replicate the functions of an existing computer program; and the materials that he may lawfully use for that purpose. SAS had produced a computer software . .
See Also – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd ComC 13-Dec-2018
SAS sought to enforce its North Carolina judgment which was contrary to decisions already made by the UK and European Courts.
Held: Cockerill J held that the terms of the contract which purported to prohibit WPL’s conduct constituted a . .
See Also – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd (2495) ComC 25-Sep-2019
Post judgment orders . .
See Also – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd (Injunction) ComC 25-Sep-2019
Continuation of anti-suit injunction – refused . .
See Also – SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd CA 12-May-2020
Appeal from refusal of continuance of anti-suit injunction . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.459581