NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; KJ (Angola) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; WM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; MY (Kenya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; KJ (Angola) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; WM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; MY (Kenya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 662

‘The claimant foreign nationals, NA, KJ, WM and MY, who had resided for significant periods of time in the United Kingdom, were convicted of offences to which they were sentenced to periods of imprisonment of 12 months or more. As a result, they fell within the definition of foreign criminals in section 32 of the UK Border Act 2007, in respect of whom the Secretary of State was liable to make a deportation order, subject to the exceptions in section 33, which included where deportation would breach the offender’s rights under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The claimants in each case made representations against their deportation in reliance on their rights to a private and family life under article 8 of the Convention. Paragraph 398 of the Immigration Rules, as they applied between July 2012 and 27 July 2014 (“the 2012 Rules”), provided that when assessing a claim that deportation would be contrary to an offender’s rights under article 8 of the Convention, the Secretary of State was required to consider whether the circumstances in paragraph 399 and 399A of the 2012 Rules existed, and that if they did not, it was only in exceptional circumstances that the public interest in deportation would be outweighed by other factors. The circumstances: (1) in paragraph 399 were that the claimant had a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a child dependent on the claimant or a partner and it was not reasonable to expect the child to leave the United Kingdom or there were insurmountable obstacles to family life with the partner continuing outside the United Kingdom; and (2) in paragraph 399A were the long residence of the claimant in the United Kingdom and lack of family, social or cultural ties with the country to which he was to be removed. Pararaphs 399 and 399A applied to offenders sentenced to imprisonment for at least 12 months but less than four years (“medium offenders”) but not to those sentenced to periods of four years or more (“serious offenders”). ‘

WLR Daily, 16th June 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; KJ (Angola) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; WM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; MY (Kenya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department – WLR Daily

Surrey and others v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust – WLR Daily

Surrey and others v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1598 (QB)

‘Three separate cases involving clinical negligence litigation against the defendant hospital had been proceeding for several years prior to 1 April 2013. Under new legislation coming into force on 1 April 2013, a claimant entering into a conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) from that date would be unable to recover success fees and after the event (“ATE”) insurance premiums from the defendant if successful in the litigation. In each case the claim had initially been advanced with the benefit of legal aid, but in the month prior to 1 April 2013 the claimant’s solicitors, with the agreement of the claimant’s litigation friend, arranged for the legal aid certificate to be discharged and for the claim henceforth to be funded by a CFA to preserve the ability to recover the success fee and ATE premiums. In none of the cases was the litigation friend informed that the consequence would be the loss of the recognised 10% uplift on general damages. In each case the defendant challenged the successful claimant’s bill of costs, in so far as it sought to recover the success fee and the ATE premium, contending that the litigation friend’s decision was based on materially unreasonable advice (by reason of the omission to mention the 10% uplift) and that, since the burden was on the receiving party to establish that a cost was reasonably incurred and it was unknown what decision would have been made had proper advice been given, the doubt as to whether the additional costs were reasonably and proportionately incurred should be resolved in favour of the paying party. The costs judge in each case upheld the defendant’s challenge to those items, holding that the changed funding arrangements were not reasonable. Each claimant appealed, contending that the reasonableness of the decision to change funding had to be objectively assessed, so that the quality of any antecedent advice given to the claimants’ litigation friends was irrelevant.’

WLR Daily, 1st July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Surrey and others v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust – WLR Daily

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) – WLR Daily

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) [2016] EWHC 1609 (Ch)

‘Where a party intervenes in an appeal from a decision of a hearing officer acting on behalf of the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, ordinary a costs order will not be made in the intervener’s favour. The court will only consider departing from its ordinary position if it is satisfied that (1) the intervener’s position was successful, (2) its submission added value to the hearing, and (3) it had not duplicated the respondent’s submissions (paras 10, 12).’

WLR Daily, 7th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) – WLR Daily

City West Housing Trust v Massey; Manchester and District Housing Association v Roberts – WLR Daily

Posted July 13th, 2016 in appeals, evidence, housing, landlord & tenant, law reports, repossession by sally

City West Housing Trust v Massey; Manchester and District Housing Association v Roberts [2016] EWCA Civ 704

‘When exercising the discretion to suspend a possession order where a tenant’s evidence was considered to be untrue in whole or part, the judge has to be persuaded by cogent evidence that there is a sound basis for the hope that the previous conduct will cease or not recur. Cogent evidence regarding future compliance does not need to stem solely from the tenant himself, without regard to how others might behave, rather the likelihood or possibility of action by others, or even the perception that others might take action, may in an appropriate case be evidence which supports an overall assessment that there is real hope of compliance in the future (post, paras 47–49).’

WLR Daily, 7th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on City West Housing Trust v Massey; Manchester and District Housing Association v Roberts – WLR Daily

Government alters thresholds for scrutiny of neighbourhood planning appeals – OUT-LAW.com

Posted July 13th, 2016 in appeals, housing, local government, news, planning by sally

‘The UK government has extended its scrutiny of planning appeals involving housing development in neighbourhood planning areas, but the thresholds for the recovery of such appeals have been altered.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 13th July 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Government alters thresholds for scrutiny of neighbourhood planning appeals – OUT-LAW.com

Lingerie firm wins court fight over tax on bras for breast cancer patients – Daily Telegraph

‘Lingerie company bosses have won a Supreme Court fight over tax on special bras worn by women who have had a mastectomy.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 13th July 2016

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Lingerie firm wins court fight over tax on bras for breast cancer patients – Daily Telegraph

Right to light appeal: bad conduct ‘key factor’ in grant of injunction, experts say – OUT-LAW.com

‘The Court of Appeal has upheld an injunction over what was a relatively minor breach of a right to light, primarily because of the developer’s poor conduct throughout the dispute.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 12th July 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Right to light appeal: bad conduct ‘key factor’ in grant of injunction, experts say – OUT-LAW.com

Avoid/evade – Counsel

‘Recent news analysis of the Panama Papers, and high-profile-personality stakes in offshore funds, have turned up the heat in the tax avoid v evade debate. Kevin Prosser QC sheds light on this greyest of areas.’

Full story

Counsel, July 2016

Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk

Comments Off on Avoid/evade – Counsel

McDonald (by her litigation friend) v McDonald and others [2016] UKSC 28 – Henderson Chambers

‘In this alerter Hannah Curtain & George Mallet consider the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonald (by her litigation friend) v McDonald and Ors [2016] UKSC 28.’

Full story

Henderson Chambers, June 2016

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on McDonald (by her litigation friend) v McDonald and others [2016] UKSC 28 – Henderson Chambers

How To Prevent Miscarriages Of Justice: Let Journalists Speak To Prisoners – RightsInfo

’17 years ago, the highest court in the UK declared that a policy prohibiting journalists from interviewing prisoners to uncover potential miscarriages of justice violated the right to free expression.’

Full story

RightsInfo, 8th July 2016

Source: www.rightsinfo.org

Comments Off on How To Prevent Miscarriages Of Justice: Let Journalists Speak To Prisoners – RightsInfo

How can a right of way be simultaneously continuous and non-continuous? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, news, rights of way by sally

‘In Wood v Waddington [2015] EWCA Civ 538, at first instance, Morgan J. found the Claimants had not established they had rights of way over the Defendant’s land. Lewison L.J. (with whom Richards and McCombe L.J.J. agreed) thought otherwise. The case raises some nice points in respect of easements.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 7th July 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off on How can a right of way be simultaneously continuous and non-continuous? – Hardwicke Chambers

Fixed recoverable costs-settling at the court door – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, costs, news, trials by sally

‘The case of Dos Santos Medes v Hochtief (UK) Constructions Ltd dealt with the issue of fixed recoverable costs (FRC) under the Civil Procedures Rules (CPR) in a claim brought under the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (RTA Protocol). Jasmine Murphy examines the case and its potential implications.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 15th June 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off on Fixed recoverable costs-settling at the court door – Hardwicke Chambers

Joint and several obligations – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, contracts, damages, joint liability, news, sale of land by sally

‘Andy Creer considers the recent decision of Laditi and another v Marlbray Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 476 in which Brie Stevens-Hoare QC and Lina Mattsson acted for the Claimants/Respondents.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 13th June 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off on Joint and several obligations – Hardwicke Chambers

Benjamin Gray Discusses Taiwo v Olaigbe: Discrimination on Immigration Status is not Race Discrimination – Littleton Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has held that less favourable treatment on the grounds of or because of immigration status is not discrimination because of nationality in Taiwo v Olaigbe and another [2016] UKSC 31.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 23rd June 2016

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Comments Off on Benjamin Gray Discusses Taiwo v Olaigbe: Discrimination on Immigration Status is not Race Discrimination – Littleton Chambers

‘Avoiding Too Narrow a Focus on Relief from Sanctions’ – Littleton Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, disclosure, documents, evidence, news, sanctions by sally

‘Ashley Cukier considers the decision in McTear and another v Engelhard and others [2016] EWCA Civ 487, the successful appeal of a first instance judgment handed down after Mitchell but before Denton.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 9th July 2016

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Comments Off on ‘Avoiding Too Narrow a Focus on Relief from Sanctions’ – Littleton Chambers

Expanding the Frontiers of Indirect Discrimination: Disadvantage and Associative Discrimination – Littleton Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, EC law, employment, employment tribunals, equality, judgments, news by sally

‘This paper address recent developments where the courts have considered the fundamental concepts of discrimination law and, the case law has both expanded the frontiers of discrimination whilst at the same time created some difficult hurdles for Claimants. The issues can best be considered by way of a factual example, which is set out below, and which will be considered at each stage of the paper.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 7th June 2016

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Comments Off on Expanding the Frontiers of Indirect Discrimination: Disadvantage and Associative Discrimination – Littleton Chambers

Liability of the MIB for Insolvent Insurers – Park Square Barristers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, insolvency, insurance, Motor Insurers’ Bureau, news by sally

‘Caroline Wood considers the recent Court of Appeal decision concerning the liability of the MIB where an insurer has become insolvent.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 3rd June 2016

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Comments Off on Liability of the MIB for Insolvent Insurers – Park Square Barristers

No Nisi, No Dice – Tanfield Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, costs, divorce, litigants in person, news by sally

‘In K v K (Financial Remedy Final Order prior to Decree Nisi) 2016 EWFC 23, Cobb J remitted a case for rehearing on the basis that the trial judge had made an order prior to the grant of decree nisi of divorce. The case provides a salutary warning for lawyers about the limits of the Family Court’s powers to correct what was an innocent and – at first glance – merely procedural mistake.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 22nd June 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on No Nisi, No Dice – Tanfield Chambers

Uncorroborated children’s allegations – procedure – Park Square Barristers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, child abuse, children, evidence, news, witnesses by sally

‘This article summarises a recent appeal against findings of fact made in the family court. It’s an interesting case as it serves to remind practitioners of the factors that should be taken into account in considering the investigation procedure when the court is dealing with uncorroborated children’s allegations. Will Tyler QC, a member of Park Square Barristers, acted for the appellant.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 21st June 2016

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Comments Off on Uncorroborated children’s allegations – procedure – Park Square Barristers

Credit where Creditor’s due – Tanfield Chambers

Posted July 12th, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, news, probate, wills by sally

‘In Randall v Randall [2016] EWCA Civ 494, the Court of Appeal considered whether a creditor of a beneficiary of an estate had sufficient standing to bring a probate claim to challenge the validity of a purported will of the testatrix.’

Full story

Tanfield Chambers, 22nd June 2016

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Credit where Creditor’s due – Tanfield Chambers