CASE(S) OF THE WEEK
-
KPS-HCM SDN BHD v. SHAHRUL IZEWAN MAT HUSIN & ORS
[2018] 6 CLJ 772
HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM
ZALITA ZAIDAN JC
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: BA-12B-167-09-2016]
22 JANUARY 2018
LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Maintenance and repair – Negligence – Tree branch fell and injuring road user – Whether local authority negligent – Road reserve bordering road – Whether State road – Duty to maintain trees along State road – Whether within purview of local authority – Whether local authority statutorily bound to ensure safety of road users – Whether negligent in failing to carry out regular inspection – Local Government Act 1976, s. 101 – National Land Code, ss. 42(b) & 62(1)
TORT: Negligence – Maintenance of tree – Tree branch fell and injuring road user – Whether local authority negligent – Road reserve bordering road – Whether State road – Duty to maintain trees along State road – Whether within purview of local authority – Whether local authority statutorily bound to ensure safety of road users – Whether negligent in failing to carry out regular inspection – Local Government Act 1976, s. 101 – National Land Code, ss. 42(b) & 62(1)
Read more
-
CASE(S) HIGHLIGHT
Uber rape case: Cab driver Shiv Kumar Yadav found guilty, faces life imprisonment
More than 10 months after a 25-year-old woman was raped and sexually assaulted inside a radio taxi in the national capital, a fast-track court in Delhi Tuesday convicted cab driver Shiv Kumar Yadav, holding him guilty on charges of rape and endangering the life of the victim. Yadav, a former driver of Uber taxi service, faces a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
Read more
Judgment
Sentencing Decision
-
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHT
Sacking by phone, text or email only acceptable in ‘rare circumstances’, Fair Work rules
AUSTRALIAEmployment
Beauty salon worker should have been sacked face-to-faceEmployees should only be sacked by phone, text or email in “rare circumstances” such as when there is a genuine risk of physical violence, the Fair Work Commission has warned.
The industrial relations tribunal made the comment in throwing out an unfair dismissal case, finding in favour of the employer but “making one criticism of the process”.
That was despite the employer complying with the Small Business Unfair Dismissal Code laid out by the workplace cop, the Fair Work Ombudsman, which makes no requirement for employees to be let go face-to-face.
Read more
-
Colour swatch error proves fatal in V Energy trademark war with Coca-Cola
AUSTRALIAIntellectual property
Frucor's original error proves fatal in trademark war with Coca-Cola
It's good to be green, especially if you're an energy drink. But a trademark war between the maker of V Energy drinks and Coca-Cola proves it's also good to be attentive to detail.
Frucor Beverages has lost its fight to trademark the signature green of its V Energy range, after attaching the wrong colour swatch to its initial application six years ago.
Read more
-
Flying instructor whose boss threw cup of tea at him awarded £19,000
UKEmployment
Flying instructor whose boss threw tea at him was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed
A flying instructor whose boss threw a cup of tea at him in a dispute over an aircraft has been awarded more than £19,000, after an employment tribunal found he was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed.
Phil Jones worked as the only fixed wing flying instructor at Flylight Airsports in Northamptonshire from 2006 up to his dismissal in 2017.
He left his job following an argument that erupted in August 2017, after discovering that the aircraft he usually flew had not been serviced despite two colleagues having previously said they would do so.
Read more
-
Ohio v. American Express: Supreme Court rules in favor of Amex in antitrust case
USAntitrust
The Supreme Court handed American Express a win Monday in a lawsuit over rules it imposes on merchants who accept its cards.
Under their contracts, merchants who accept American Express generally can't encourage customers to use other credit cards, even though those cards may charge merchants lower fees. The federal government and a group of states sued over those so-called anti-steering provisions, arguing that they violate federal law.
But on Monday the high court ruled 5-4 in favor of American Express.
"In this case, we must decide whether Amex's antisteering provisions violate federal antitrust law. We conclude they do not," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in an opinion for himself and his conservative colleagues, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.
Read more
-
Hermes couriers are workers, not self-employed, tribunal rules
UKEmployment
Hermes couriers are workers, not self-employed, tribunal rules
A group of Hermes couriers have won their fight to be treated as workers instead of independent contractors in what has been described as one of the most significant victories against exploitation of gig-economy workers.
An employment tribunal in Leeds ruled that the couriers were entitled to receive the minimum wage and holiday pay, and to reclaim unlawful deductions from their wages, because they had incorrectly been classified as self-employed.
Read more
-
Coca-Cola's 'Zero' trademark worth, well, maybe zero?
US
Intellectual property
Decade-long trademark battle between bitter rivals takes another twist as court overturns 2016 decision
The Federal Circuit has ruled that The Coca-Cola Company might not be able to register its “Zero” brand as a trademark, ordering more proceedings on whether it is just a generic term for calorie-free soda.The US Court of Appeals overturned a 2016 decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that the "Zero" brand name served as a source-designating trademark for Coca-Cola. The court sided with the Dr Pepper Snapple Group in a case that has been in litigation for over a decade.
Read more
Emails sent to you weekly with the latest updates on the law.
