*Singularis Holdings Ltd (in official liquidation) (a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd
Negligence Duty of care. The Financial List of the Chancery Division held that, on the facts, the defendant stock broker (Daiwa) was in breach of the duty of care that it had owed to the claimant (Singularis) in making disputed payments to third parties from the client account it had held for the benefit of Singularis, notwithstanding that those payments (in excess of $200m), had been made on the instructions of Singularis' then owner and sole director. By making those payments without proper or any inquiry, Daiwa was liable to Singularis in negligence and for breach of contract for the sum of $203,741,900, reduced by 25% to take account of Singularis' contributory negligence. Singularis' claim of dishonest assistance was dismissed on the facts.
Trade mark Infringement. The Chancery Division dismissed claims brought by Argos Ltd for alleged passing off and infringement of two trade marks in respect of the use, by the defendant, Argos Systems Inc, of the sign: 'ARGOS' in form of domain name, in conjunction with some versions of the defendant's website. Among other things, the court considered the correct approach to the issue of targeting and the effect of a foreign trader's use of Google advertising for the purposes of the assessment of targeting.
Teekay Tankers Ltd (a company incorporated in the Marshall Islands) v STX Offshore & Shipbuilding Co Ltd (a company incorporated in the Republic of Korea)
Contract Implied term. The Commercial Court considered proceedings concerning the alleged repudiation by the defendant company of a contract to build and sell a number of vessels. The court held that neither of the implied terms put forward by the claimant to support the claim was capable of forming part of the contract in issue and, consequently, the defendant's defence succeeded. The defendant's counterclaim was dismissed, as the claimant had not breached arbitral confidentiality by disclosing information about awards and arbitrators' reasons given in an earlier arbitration.
Disclosure and inspection of documents Order for disclosure. The Queen's Bench Division made orders for specific disclosure in the claimant's action against the defendants in respect of a number of communications containing the imputation he had been running a minicab company without the necessary licence.
Adoption Confidential information. The Family Court allowed the applicant Adoption Authority's application for an order preventing it from disclosing the existence of a child to any member of his birth family. Taking into account the rights of the parties, it was appropriate to give effect to the wishes of the mother and the potential adopting couple, and to allow the application.
European Union Consumer protection. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling, deciding, among other things, the interpretation of arts3(1) and 4 of Council Directive(EEC) 93-13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts. The request had been made in proceedings between the respondent bank and the applicant concerning enforcement proceedings in respect of immovable property owned by the latter and used as security for a loan granted by the bank.
Copyright Infringement. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court allowed the defendant's application that representatives of Her Majesty's Stationery Office be allowed to join a confidentiality club in a claim in which the claimant sought a declaration that its data provision product did not infringe the defendant's rights or breach any contract with it. A short extension would be granted for the service of any defence and counterclaim.
Employment Unfair dismissal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employer's appeal, held that the employment tribunal had erred in holding that the dismissal of the employee for storing and sharing confidential information, for trade union purposes, was protected under of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The tribunal's findings of automatic unfair dismissal and ordinary unfair dismissal were set aside.
Practice Commencement of proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal by companies concerned with the financing of a film against a decision to allow the claimant to bring two sets of proceedings, in which he alleged breach of duty. The court held that the proposed claims fell foul of an exception to the rule in Foss v Harbottle69 ER 189, by which only the company against which a wrong was said to have been committed could bring proceedings in respect of that wrong.
Trade mark Infringement. The Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court awarded the first claimant producer of 'Veuve Clicquot' champagne and the second claimant, Moet-Hennessey UK Ltd, damages of 125,000 for the infringement of United Kingdom and European Union registered trade marks and for passing off. The court held that, on the evidence, the defendants were jointly and severally liable for passing off and for certain acts of infringement, which had been outside of the scope of consent given for the use of those marks.