The Family Division ruled in proceedings concerning the reporting of the financial details of Liam Gallagher’s divorce from Nicole Appleton.
The Chancery Division held that the claimant was entitled to summary judgment on its claim against Dreamland for delivery up of a mural, attributed to Banksy, which had been removed by Dreamland from the building of which it was the tenant.
The Queen’s Bench Division dismissed an application by two Burmese men accused of murdering British citizens in Thailand to view a report compiled by a British police team relating to the Thai investigation.
The claimant, Freddie Starr, issued proceedings against the defendant for slander and libel for words spoken and subsequently broadcast on the BBC and ITV, and contained in an ebook she published.
In a case where the relevant health care trust wished to discontinue life-sustaining treatment with the inevitable consequence that as a result the patient would quickly die, the Court of Protection held that having regard to the diagnosis of the patient by experts, the balance lay strongly in favour of preserving P’s life through continuing treatment.
A child had been made the subject of non-molestation injunctions, which extended to her mother, while she was a ward of court. As the child approached her 18th birthday, the mother applied to court for an extension of the injunction to extend indefinitely beyond the conclusion of the wardship proceedings.
Ex parte wardship proceedings were brought in respect of four children, all British citizens, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that the entire family had left the UK to join Islamic State in Syria.
The full judgment in Simply Pleasure’s challenge to local authorities charging fees that could be used to pay for enforcing a regulatory regime.
The Court of Appeal considered appeals by both parties in proceedings brought by the Mattel, which controlled the rights in the well-known game Scrabble in the European Union, to prevent the respondent company (Zynga) from selling an electronic game called Scramble or Scramble with Friends.
The Supreme Court held that none of the exceptions to the general approach applicable to awards of costs in children’s cases as set out in Re T (Children)  applied in the present case.
The court had booked two interpreters, but they were not provided and a hearing was adjourned. The local authority sought recovery of its costs of that hearing against Capita, which is contracted to provide interpreters.
Following concerns about the safety of the claimant’s factory in Bangladesh, Primark withdrew its outstanding contracts with the claimant. The claimant brought a claim for damages for alleged defamatory statements published by Primark. Primark applied for the claim to be struck out as an abuse of process.
Prisoners complained that they were prevented from voting in elections, relying on article 3 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights, in allowing the application, held that there had been a violation of article 3, given that the impugned legislation remained unamended after the court’s decision in Greens v United Kingdom .
G-Star brought proceedings against the defendants, alleging that they had been involved in alleged infringement in the UK unregistered design rights in the design of a pair of jeans.
The defendant disputed the costs that related to the period when the claimant had been acting through a deputy appointed on her behalf.
In claims by many hundreds of Iraqi civilians against the defendant Ministry of Defence for damages for their allegedly unlawful detention and ill-treatment by British armed forces, the preliminary issue was whether the claims were barred by an applicable statute of limitations.
The claimant issued proceedings against Sotheby’s alleging negligence in its investigation of a painting, which is purported to be by Caravaggio.
The claimant Law Society applied for an injunction making permanent prohibitions against the defendant, S, to prevent him holding himself out as a solicitor or becoming involved with legal work.
The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal by the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust (the trust) against certain orders for costs made during the course of proceedings in respect of the administration of the estate of Jimmy Savile. Its appeal against various other orders was dismissed.
In the course of litigation following ‘Plebgate’, the claimant police officers sought judicial review of the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s decision to re-determine the mode of investigation of them.