UK: Hemophiliac wins access to recombinant factor VIII

On 17 July 2003, the England and Wales High Court granted a hemophiliac leave to appeal a decision to refuse to provide him with recombinant factor VIII, a treatment for hemophilia not derived from human blood. The applicant had been infected with HIV and hepatitis B, C, and G through tainted blood products.     

Google liability for misleading or deceptive conduct: Australian perspective

On 6 of February 2013, the Australian High Court handed down an important decision in respect of the Google Inc's (Google) appeal against the decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia, holding that Google a search engine operator was not liable under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act (TPA) 1974 (Cth) for misleading or deceptive conduct (in respect of misleading advertisements published using Google's online ‘AdWords program’). The decision of the High Court is of great significance for jurisprudence on misleading and deceptive conduct with its broad implications for search engine providers such as Google, advertisers and trademark owners.     

Access to medicine and the dangers of patent linkage: lessons from Bayer Corp v. Union of India

In February 2010, the Delhi High Court delivered its decision in Bayer Corp v Union of India in which Bayer had appealed against an August 2009 decision of the same court. Both decisions prevented Bayer from introducing the concept of patent linkage into India's drug regulatory regime. Bayer appealed to the Indian Supreme Court, the highest court in India, which agreed on 2 March 2010 to hear the appeal. Given that India is regarded as a global pharmaceutical manufacturer of generic medications, how its judiciary and government perceive their international obligations has a significant impact on the global access to medicines regime. In rejecting the application of patent linkage, the case provides an opportunity for India to further acknowledge its international human rights obligations.     

Admissions appeals in 1999: the impact of the 1998 regulations and R,v. Birmingham city council ex parte M 1998

School admission appeal committees hearing appeals in 1999 will have to grapple with two main changes. Firstly, they will have to identify which of the three tests available applies to the appeal before them. The Education Act 1996 (Infant Class Sizes) Modification Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1948) have replaced the ‘standard’ prejudice test with a ‘new’ and much narrower prejudice test for certain admission appeals. The third test applies to appeals relating to the admission of a pupil who has been permanently excluded from a school on two or more occasions. Secondly, the recent decision of the High Court in R. v. Birmingham City Council x parte M 1998 requires an appeal committee to give specific grounds for their decision in the letter informing parents of the committee's decision. This goes beyond the broad grounds hitherto considered adequate and has implications for both the appeal hearing and for the form of letter used by local authorities.     

Hong Kong's first criminal file-sharing conviction

On appeal, the High Court of Hong Kong affirmed the defendant'sconviction on three charges of attempting to distribute an infringingcopy of a copyright work via a peer-to-peer online file-sharingprogram (BitTorrent).     

Race against timekeeper: big cat can't stop non-competing registration of identical mark

The Irish High Court dismissed an appeal by Jaguar Cars againstthe rejection of its opposition to the registration of the trademark JAGUAR by Montres Jaguar.     

UK: AIDS treatment main factor in decision to grant permission to appeal immigration decision

On 26 June 2003, the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) granted an application for leave to appeal a decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal, which had overturned an adjudicator's decision to allow an HIV-positive citizen of Uganda to immigrate to the United Kingdom (UK).     

Why Does the Federal Government Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in Charter of Rights Cases? A Strategic Explanation

Despite the impressive body of scholarship dedicated to analyzing litigation involving the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Supreme Court of Canada, there remains an incomplete understanding of why these cases come to the Court. Notably absent from the literature is sustained analysis of why governments, the most frequent class of appellant, bring Charter cases to the Supreme Court. Recent work has addressed the decision to appeal by the U.S. federal government and state attorneys general and provides an excellent theoretical starting point. I use case data collected from interviews with federal government lawyers and law reports to test whether the Canadian federal government's decisions to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in Charter cases are also "procedurally rational." I conclude that these decisions are primarily shaped by strategic considerations related to policy costs, case importance, reviewability, and the prospect of winning on appeal, regardless of the party in power. In the process, the article further extends the application of strategic decisionmaking theory with regard to law and courts beyond judicial behavior, and beyond the U.S. context.     

A Refugee from Justice? Disparate Treatment in the Federal Court of Canada

This article paints a troubling picture of disparate treatment in the Federal Court of Canada. Examining more than 600 immigration and refugee claims, the results link judicial action to litigants' representation, their demographics and national region, and the background and ideology of the judges involved. When compared with prior research in Canada and similar studies from the United States, the findings suggest that an applicant in search of a just result would do as well to hire an experienced lawyer and hope for a sympathetic judge as to prepare an excellent appeal. Canada's immigration process requires greater attention so that the reality of its operation matches the promise of the nation's intentions.     

I wonder if this is a Wunderbaum

The Court of First Instance, dismissing a Community trade markapplicant's appeal against the decision to allow an oppositionin part, affirms that the public's recognition of the opponent'searlier Community trade mark may be assessed in relation tothe degree of recognition achieved by that mark through itsclose similarity to an earlier national registered trade markbelonging to the opponent.     

Canadian court upholds Glaxo's patent on AZT

In October 2000, the Federal Court of Appeal issued the latest ruling in the ongoing dispute over the validity of Glaxo's Canadian patent for AZT, upholding Glaxo's patent but narrowing the scope of the claims it could validly make. The decision is now on appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.     

Supreme Court denies leave to appeal in medical marijuana charter challenge

As previously reported in this publication, in January 2002 the Ontario Court of Appeal denied Jim Wakeford's claim that Canada's laws prohibiting marijuana possession and cultivation infringe his constitutional rights to liberty and security of the person. On 22 November 2002 the Supreme Court of Canada announced that it would not hear his appeal from that decision.     

Consent to Treatment for Transgender Youth: The Next Chapter – Bell & Anor v The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust & Ors

In September 2021, the Court of Appeal reversed the controversial decision of Quincy Bell v Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust in a victory for transgender rights. At first instance, the Divisional Court had set a high legal threshold for transgender children to attain Gillick competence to consent to treatment with puberty blockers – effectively restricting access to treatment for many. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that children are capable in law of giving valid consent to treatment for gender dysphoria, and court authorisation would not be routinely required before children could access such treatment. This note considers the implications of the Court of Appeal decision for the law on minors and consent to medical treatment in the transgender health context.     

Forensic palynology in Canada: an overview with emphasis on archaeology and anthropology

Palynological analysis is shown from published and unpublished Canadian examples to be a useful tool in forensic investigation, although the technique is almost unknown and therefore under-utilized by forensic investigators. The techniques of pollen and spore identification and interpretation are continually improving, indicating that the potential for forensic applications is real. Focus in this paper is on an updated interpretation of palynological data that was presented during a trial involving a scientific test of oral history as part of a claim for aboriginal title to a large area of British Columbia (BC) (Delgamuukw versus the Queen). Although the original decision in British Columbia Supreme Court was decided in favor of the government defendants, an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the original decision, and established new principles and rights for aboriginal peoples.     

United Kingdom: HIV status,psychiatric problems of asylum seeker did not stop removal

In November 2002, the High Court of Justice rejected an application for judicial review of a decision to remove an Ivoirian asylum seeker to France, despite her HIV status, tuberculosis, psychiatric condition, and attempted suicides. The Court argued that removal to France would not necessarily result in a return to Ivory Coast or in poorer health care.     

ICC Pre-Trial Chamber Allows Victims to Participate in the Investigation Phase of Proceedings

The decision rendered by the International Criminal Court (ICC)Pre-Trial Chamber I on 17 January 2006 allows victims to beinvolved in ICC proceedings at an early stage of the investigation.The Prosecutor, who has filed an appeal against this decision,has consistently argued that the right of victims to participatein the proceedings does not cover the investigation phase. Itis argued that the impact of this decision goes far beyond theissue of victims’ participation in the investigations;it has general implications for the balance of power betweenthe judiciary and the prosecution in proceedings before theICC.     

Kenya: AIDS-law sensitization results in schooling for orphans

In a landmark victory for children living with HIV/AIDS, in January 2004 the Kenyan High Court approved an agreement between the government and the Nyumbani Children's Home whereby the Ministry of Education will admit HIV-positive children to government schools. Prior to the agreement, government practice was to refuse admission of children from the Nyumbani Children's Home, Kenya's oldest and largest AIDS orphanage, on grounds such as that the school was full to capacity or that the applicant had failed to produce a birth certificate. This was in spite of the fact that Kenya's schools are already overcrowded and that births are often unregistered.     

Mt. Laurel: A Note to Petaluma

Facilitated by the phenomenon of Xerox reproduction, though perhaps delayed by the United States Mails, the decision of the Supreme Court of New Jersey in Southern Burlington County NAACP, et al. V. Mt. Laurel arrived in California. As we await the decision of the United States Court of Appeals in Construction Industry Association v. Petaluma, mapy of US form a captive aubience. In the mail which brought a request for a commentary for this publication I also received a copy of a cover letter from the attorney for the Construction Industry Association, which letter directed a copy of Mt. Laurel opinion to the judges of the Federal Court of Appeals. My receipt of these diverse items was not accidental, for I participated in the oral argument in the Petaluma appeal as one of the amicus counsel in support of the city-appellant. The following are my impressions.     

Ethnic origin of the victim as an aggravating factor in sentencing sexual offenders

This article examines R v Jamal Muhammed Raheem Ul Nasir, a Court of Appeal case where leave to appeal against a seven-year custodial sentence for sexual offences against children was refused. The appellant argued that his sentence length was excessive because the judge viewed the female victims’ ethnic and religious origin as an aggravating factor. In light of a number of charities’ condemning the judgment, this article evaluates whether the Court of Appeal made the correct decision, particularly in the wider context of sentencing principles. It also considers whether causing shame to a victim and her family can be regarded as an aggravating factor when sentencing sexual offences, and discusses the circumstances where the victim’s ethnic origin should be taken into account.     

Governmental Rejections of Ombudsman Findings: What Role for the Courts?

This article discusses the recent Bradley litigation before the High Court and Court of Appeal, in which applicants sought judicial review of a Government Minister's decision to reject findings made by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration in her report, 'Trusting in the Pensions Promise'. The article critically analyses the Court of Appeal's approach to reviewing the Minister's decision, focusing on the standard of review applied and placing the Court's approach in the wider context of the Ombudsman process, which is inherently political.