High Court cases

The standard forms of contract invariably contain agreements to arbitrate in the event of a dispute and some even name the arbitrator or a professional body who will appoint an arbitrator, upon the application of one of the parties. Where no agreement to arbitrate exists, the injured party may sue in either a County Court or High Court, depending upon the value of the claim, and he must then prove his case before a judge. 

An interesting legal case ensued in the English High Court [87], where Ethicon (Johnson Johnson) maintained, among other things, that the formation and hydrolytic behaviour of polyglycolide fibres were already known and that it was therefore obvious to use the material as an absorbable suture. The outcome was basically favourable to American Cyanamid. 

Second, high-stakes cases are more likely to be litigated (Priest 1985,220). When facts are far from the standard decision rules, cases usually are not worth litigating unless the potential benefits are enormous. And because courts do err, there will be some bizarre decisions involving large amounts of money. 

Barnard, D. 2002. In the High Court of South Africa, Case No. 4138/98 The Global Politics of Access to Low-Cost AIDS Drugs in Poor Countries. Kennedy Institute of Ethics lournal 12(2) 159-174. 

High Court. XYZ and others (Claimants) versus (1) Schering Health Care Limited, (2) Organon Laboratories Limited and (3) John Wyeth Brother Limited. Judgement by the Hon. Mr Justice Mackay. London, 29 July 2002. Case No 0002638. Neutral Citation No (2002) EWHC 1420 (QB). 

Having now some notion of how a patent specification should be drawn, let us apply our knowledge to an actual patent. The patent I wish to discuss—Jones, Kennedy, and Rotermund (9) — issued on June 9, 1936, originally to Union Carbide Carbon Corp. An examination of the reports reveals that this patent has the distinction of being the last one to have been sustained by the U. S. Supreme Court. To be sure, since the Union Carbide case, the high court has taken a number of patent cases for consideration, but save for the so-called A P case (/), in which the patent was held void, none required consideration of the issues of validity and infringment. 

Wermid, Stephen. 1991. High Court Lets Stand the Conviction of Employers in Workplace Safety Case. The Wall Street Journal. February 20 B4. 

A unique feature of the Targeted Killings Case is that it provides the most detailed and considered judicial interpretation to date of proportionality in a targeting context. In doing so it innoduced the concept of a zone of proportionality when assessing the respective roles of the court (i.e., accountability) and the military commander (i.e., the targeting assessment). As the Israel High Court of Justice stated ... 

This court hears claims for damages arising out of an accident at work where the sum involved is less than 5000 above that sum the case is heard in the High Court. 

Criminal cases in England are heard in the magistrates courts and in the Crown Court in Scotland mostly in the Sheriff Court, and in the High Court of Justiciary. In Northern Ireland criminal cases are tried in magistrates courts and in the Crown Court. In all three countries the more serious criminal cases are heard before a jury, except in Northern Ireland for scheduled offences under the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Acts of 1978 and 1987. 

English courts hearing civil actions are the country courts and the High Court in Scotland the Sheriff Court and the Court of Session. In Northern Ireland the County Court and the High Court deal with civil accident claims. Civil cases rarely have a jury in personal injury cases only in the most exceptional circumstances. 

The Employment Appeal Tribunal is a superior court associated with the High Court. It sits with a judge and 2 lay members, and all have equal voice. Parties may be represented by any person they wish, and legal aid is available. Further appeal is to the Court of Appeal (in Scotland to the Inner House of the Court of Session). In N. Ireland there is no Employment Appeal Tribunal. An Industrial Tribunal s decision may be challenged by review by the Tribunal itself, by judicial review by the High Court, or by way of case stated to the Court of Appeal. 

Where an employee considers he has been dismissed unfairly he is given a right to make a complaint (ss. 67,68,69) to an industrial tribunal, who can, if the complaint is found to have substance, decide on a prescribed remedy (re-instatement, re-engagement or compensation) to suit the case, a remedy to which the employer is bound. If the tribunal decides the dismissal was fair and the employee is still not satisfied, he can appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (s. 136) which is presided over by a High Court judge, appointed by the Lord Chancellor, sitting with two lay members. 

Gavan, D. J. (1920, August 31). High Court of Australia Engineers Case. Melbourne. 

---