Men jailed over rape of boy, 14, in Manchester Debenhams – BBC News
“Two men have been jailed for 15 years for raping a boy, 14, in the toilets of a Manchester department store.”
BBC News, 6th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Two men have been jailed for 15 years for raping a boy, 14, in the toilets of a Manchester department store.”
BBC News, 6th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Crown court judges have delivered a damning response to government plans to prevent defendants from choosing their solicitor and slice a further £220m off the legal aid budget.”
The Guaridan, 6th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Businesses that encourage staff to use social networks for commercial purposes are subject to UK data protection laws, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 6th June 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“What can legal education offer to the present and the future? In the midst of attempts to transform legal education into a commodity for the privileged few, our 2013 season of Law on Trial asks whether it is possible to engage the current climate of professionalization, vocational training and the narrowing of law as an education on citizenship and political imagination from more creative and alternative perspectives.”
Date: 17th – 21st June 2013
Location: Room B34, Malet Street Building, Birkbeck, University of London
Charge: Free
More information can be found here.
“The attorney general, Dominic Grieve, has intervened in the debate over so-called secret arrests and said police should confirm the name of a suspect if they have been correctly identified by the media.”
The Guardian, 4th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Lawyers waving placards and chanting blocked the road outside the Ministry of Justice on Tuesday evening in protest over proposals to slice a further £220m out of criminal legal aid and remove defendants’ ability to choose a solicitor.”
The Guardian, 4th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The Attorney General is considering referring the sentence of an internationally renowned artist from Cornwall to the Court of Appeal to see if it was ‘unduly lenient’.”
The Independent, 6th June 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Newbold and others v Coal Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 584 ; [2013] WLR (D) 216
“Where damage notices relating to subsidence said to have been caused by coal mining contained ostensibly inaccurate particulars, the effect of the failure to comply strictly with the applicable statutory requirements had to be considered by construing the statutory or contractual requirement in question and then asking whether strict or adequate compliance was required, bearing in mind that even non-compliance with a requirement might not be fatal to the notice’s validity.”
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Hobson [2013] EWCA Crim 819 ; [2013] WLR (D) 215
“Where specimen counts were charged but complainants described in their evidence particular incidents, the trial judge should direct the jury of the necessity to be sure that the offence had been committed on the same occasion, either on an occasion in the course of the unspecified pattern of offending, or on one of the particular occasions identified in the evidence.”
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Halaf v Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite pri Ministerskia savet (Case C-528/11); [2013] WLR (D) 214
“Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003, establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the member states by a third-country national, permitted a member state, which was not indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of the Regulation, to examine an application for asylum even though no circumstances existed which established the applicability of the humanitarian clause in article 15 of the Regulation. That possibility was not conditional on the member state responsible under those criteria having failed to respond to a request to take back the asylum seeker concerned. The member state in which the asylum seeker was present was not obliged, during the process of determining the member state responsible, to request the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to present its views where it was apparent from the documents of that office that the member state indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of Regulation No 343/2003 was in breach of the rules of European Union law on asylum.”
WLR Daily, 30th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Genil 48 SL and another v Bankinter SA and another (Case C-604/11); [2013] WLR (D) 213
“An investment service was offered as part of a financial product within the meaning of article 19(9) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/39/EC of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments only when it formed an integral part thereof at the time when that financial product was offered to the client.”
WLR Daily, 30th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v X Ltd [2013] EWCA Crim 818; [2013] WLR (D) 212
“For the purposes of regulations protecting consumers from unfair trading, the term ‘commercial practices’ could cover isolated acts as well as repeated behaviour; it depended on the circumstances. The concept was concerned with systems rather than individual transactions.”
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2013
The Groceries Code Adjudicator Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2013
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order 2013
The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Temporary Class Drug) Order 2013
The Detergents (Amendment) Regulations 2013
The Animal Health (Miscellaneous Fees) Regulations 2013
The Ecodesign for Energy-Related Products and Energy Information (Amendment) Regulations 2013
The Welfare Reform Act 2012 (Commencement No. 10) Order 2013
Source: www.legislation.gov.uk
“Separating couples will be legally required to find out about ways to settle disputes away from the courtroom, under new laws currently going through Parliament.”
Ministry of Justice, 5th June 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
“Leading human rights barrister Dinah Rose challenges cabinet minister Ken Clarke over the Government’s extension of the use of secret courts.”
BBC Unreliable Evidence, 5th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Shoreline Housing Partnership Ltd v Mears Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 639 (05 June 2013)
Berney v Saul (t/a Thomas Saul & Co (Solicitors)) [2013] EWCA Civ 640 (05 June 2013)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1427 (QB) (05 June 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
MacDermid Offshore Solutions Llc v Niche Products Ltd [2013] EWHC 1493 (Ch) (05 June 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
“A mother arrested on suspicion of murder after her son died of natural causes has accepted an undisclosed settlement from the police.”
BBC News, 6th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“There has been a lot of commentary on the Report of the Bill of Rights’ Commission, and the ‘damp squib’ analysis of the Report (see Mark Elliott) as a whole is one most commentators appear to assent to (see eg Joshua Rozenberg for the Guardian here). My view in general is that the squib could reignite post-2015 if a Conservative government is elected, not in relation to the very hesitant ideas as to the possible future content of a Bill of Rights that the Report put forward, but in relation to its majority recommendation that there should be one (see further my previous post on the Commission Report here). If a BoR was to emerge under a Conservative government post-2015 I suggest that it would reflect the ideas of the Conservative nominees on the Commission which assumed a far more concrete form in the Report than the majority recommendations did (eg see here at p 192). This blog post due to its length is not intended to examine the probable nature of such a BoR based on those ideas in general, but to focus only on two aspects: the idea of curtailing the effects of an equivalent to Article 8 ECHR (right to respect for private and family life), and of requiring domestic courts to disapply Strasbourg jurisprudence under a BoR in a wider range of situations than at present under s2HRA (see Roger Masterman’s post on s2 on this blog here). In respect of the latter issue the potential impact of so doing will only be linked to selected aspects of Article 8 jurisprudence of especial actual and potential benefit to women.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 5th June 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org