European Union Intellectual property rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union made a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of art 7 of Directive 96-9-EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the legal protection of databases). The reference had been made in proceedings between Football Dataco Ltd, Scottish Premier League Ltd, Scottish Football League and PA Sport UK Ltd and Sportradar GmbH and Sportradar AG concerning, amongst other things, an alleged infringement by Sportradar of the sui generis right which Football Dataco and others claimed to have in a database relating to football league matches in progress (Football Live).
*MedImmune Ltd v Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd and another; Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd v MedImmune Ltd and another
Patent Validity. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, considered an appeal from the Patents Court of the Chancery Division, concerning the alleged infringement by the defendant company of two patents in the manufacture of a product used for the treatment of macular degeneration of the eye. It held that the judge had not erred in determining the skilled team to whom the patent was addressed, or in assessing obviousness or phage display, and hence the appeal was dismissed.
Employment Remuneration. The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the employees' appeal against, inter alia, the decision of the employment tribunal to dismiss their claims for guarantee payments as s28(1) of the did not preclude an agreed temporary variation constitutinga change to an employee's normal working hours so as to prevent the award of a guarantee payment merely because the variation was temporary.
Nuisance Smell. The claimants had complained that the defendant company, Norton Aluminium Ltd, had caused nuisance by the emission of odour, noise, and particulate matter-dust from its foundry to which the claimants lived close by to as residential residents. The Queen's Bench Division held, inter alia, that the claimants had failed to establish a legal nuisance by way of dust and noise emanating from the foundry but had established an unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of their properties by reason of odour for a period beginning in mid 2003 and ending in mid 2010.
Landlord and tenant Lease. The Chancery Division held that, on the true construction of a sublease, a purported transfer of the sublease by the defendant to another company had been void and the defendant remained liable, under the sublease, to the claimant for payment for arrears of rent and, alternatively, for damages.
Occupier's liability Common duty of care. The Queen's Bench Division held that the defendant landlord bore no liability for the fall of the claimant as she was ascending a flight of three steps leading to the front door or a property.
*Perry and others v Serious Organised Crime Agency; Perry and others No.2 v Serious Organised Crime Agency
Proceeds of Crime Civil recovery of proceeds of unlawful conduct. The Supreme Court, having considered the in allowing the appellants' appeals against a worldwide property freezing order and a disclosure order in respect of which notices were addressed to the appellants all of whom were outside the jurisdiction, held that the High Court of England and Wales had no jurisdiction under Pt 5 of the Act to make a recovery order in relation to property outside England and Wales and orders for requests for information could only be exercised in respect of persons who were within the jurisdiction.
Contract Implied term. The Commercial Court held that the defendant company was not in breach of its contract with the claimant company as the terms alleged by the claimant could not be implied into the contract.
Rates Rateable occupation. The Administrative Court, on appeal by way of case stated against the defendant local authority's decision to impose unoccupied property rates on the claimant, MPL, held that the relevant property owned by MPL had been so occupied during specified periods to benefit from exemptions from those property rates.
European Union Intellectual property. The Court of Justice of the European Communities (Fourth Chamber) made a preliminary ruling on whether in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings: (i) there was 'distribution to the public' under art 4(1) of Directive 2001-29 of the European Parliament and of the Council (on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society); and (ii) arts 34 and 36 of TFEU should be interpreted as precluding a member state from bringing a prosecution under national criminal law for the offence of aiding and abetting the prohibited distribution of copyright protected works in the circumstances of the instant case.