Moyo v Nursing and Midwifery Council – WLR Daily

Moyo v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2015] EWHC 3547 (Admin); [2015] WLR (D) 555

‘In fitness to practise hearings there was no formal burden or standard of proof at the sanction stage of the proceedings; rather it was for the panel to use its own professional judgment to decide what sanction would be proportionate in order to protect the public interest, which included: (1) protection of patients and others; (2) maintenance of public confidence in the professions and the regulatory body; and (3) declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct and behaviour.’

WLR Daily, 10th December 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Moyo v Nursing and Midwifery Council – WLR Daily

Court of Appeal rules burden for proving sham marriage rests with Home Office – Free Movement

‘The Court of Appeal has reiterated that the burden of proof for proving whether a marriage is a sham for immigration law purposes rests with the Home Office. The case is Agho v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1198 and it confirms the obiter remarks of former President Blake in the earlier tribunal case of Entry Clearance Officer, Nicosia v Papajorgji [2012] UKUT 00038 (IAC) (FM post: New case law on meaning of genuine and subsisting marriage).’

Full story

Free Movement, 9th December 2015

Source: www.freemovement.org.uk

Comments Off on Court of Appeal rules burden for proving sham marriage rests with Home Office – Free Movement

MOJ Portal Stage 3 and Part 36: What are protocol offers? – Park Square Barristers

‘A regular issue that is being raised at MOJ Stage 3 hearings, particularly since the introduction of the 13th edition of the JC Guidelines: can parties make new offers in their Part B forms and benefit from the cost consequences of Part 36.29 for beating/matching them? This article aims to set out the relevant rules and paragraphs to determine this issue.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 6th November 2015

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Comments Off on MOJ Portal Stage 3 and Part 36: What are protocol offers? – Park Square Barristers

Refusing a subject access request: proportionality, anxious scrutiny and judicial discretion – Panopticon

Posted August 26th, 2015 in burden of proof, data protection, disclosure, news, police, proportionality by sally

‘Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2015] EWHC 2484 (QB), a judgment of Green J handed down today, is an interesting – if somewhat fact-specific – contribution to the burgeoning body of case law on how subject access requests (SARs) made under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) should be approached, both by data controllers and by courts.’

Full story

Panopticon, 25th August 2015

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off on Refusing a subject access request: proportionality, anxious scrutiny and judicial discretion – Panopticon

Revenge porn: ‘We need a second law to stop porn sites escaping justice’ – Daily Telegraph

Posted August 4th, 2015 in burden of proof, civil justice, crime, harassment, internet, news, pornography, victims by sally

‘The Government needs to introduce a second civil law to tackle revenge porn – because the current criminal law does not go far enough to help victims – according to a specialist in the field.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 4th August 2015

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Revenge porn: ‘We need a second law to stop porn sites escaping justice’ – Daily Telegraph

Service charges, the burden of proof and reasonableness of decisions – Park Square Barristers

‘Last week wrote an introductory article on a service charge case, The Gateway (Leeds) Management Ltd v Naghash and Shamsizadeh (citation above), a decision of Martin Rodger QC, Deputy President in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), in which I acted for the Defendants/Respondents. The facts are set out in that piece, and I do not propose to rehearse them here.’

Full story

Park Square Barristers, 15th July 2015

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Comments Off on Service charges, the burden of proof and reasonableness of decisions – Park Square Barristers

Summary Disposal of Unfair Relationships Claims: Axton & Axton v GE Money Mortgages Limited and another [2015] EWHC 1343 – Henderson Chambers

Posted July 27th, 2015 in burden of proof, consumer credit, insurance, news by sally

‘The High Court (Swift J, 22 May 2015) has upheld an order dismissing a claim under section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) on the summary basis, in the absence of conduct on the part of a lender causative of unfairness in a debtor/creditor relationship.’

Full story

Henderson Chambers, 3rd June 2015

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Summary Disposal of Unfair Relationships Claims: Axton & Axton v GE Money Mortgages Limited and another [2015] EWHC 1343 – Henderson Chambers

Government accepts case to exempt lawyers from ‘groundless threats’ laws – Legal Futures

‘Lawyers who act on instructions in threatening potential intellectual property infringers with action are to be exempt from being sued when the threat turns out to be groundless, after the government recently gave the go-ahead for law reforms.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 13th April 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Government accepts case to exempt lawyers from ‘groundless threats’ laws – Legal Futures

Disability discrimination goes to full trial – Nearly Legal

‘When the Court of Appeal held that a disability discrimination defence to possession under Equality Act 2010 had to face the same ‘seriously arguable’ summary test as an Article 8 defence, we were surprised, and very unimpressed. It seems the Supreme Court felt similarly (and unanimously), although sadly it did not help the tenant in this case.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 29th March 2015

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off on Disability discrimination goes to full trial – Nearly Legal

Law firms need to rethink approach under ‘fundamentally dishonest’ rule, barristers warn – Litigation Futures

Posted February 23rd, 2015 in barristers, burden of proof, law firms, news, personal injuries, solicitors by sally

‘Claimant solicitors have been warned that they need to review their retainers and advise clients about the implications of the new ‘fundamentally dishonest’ rule being introduced shortly.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 23rd February 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Law firms need to rethink approach under ‘fundamentally dishonest’ rule, barristers warn – Litigation Futures

Presumed guilty? Ministry of Justice is forced to withdraw advice leaflet – The Guardian

‘Red-faced Ministry of Justice (MoJ) officials have been forced to deny claims that they had dismantled a centuries-old cornerstone of British law in advice that the ministry gave to people facing criminal trials.’

Full story

The Guardian, 1st February 2015

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Presumed guilty? Ministry of Justice is forced to withdraw advice leaflet – The Guardian

Non-accidental Injury and Re-balancing the Burden of Proof – Family Law Week

Posted December 1st, 2014 in burden of proof, care orders, child abuse, child neglect, news, personal injuries by tracey

‘Dr John Fox, barrister of Lamb Building, reviews some recent cases which may suggest a re-consideration of the burden of proof in cases of alleged non-accidental injury.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 27th November 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Non-accidental Injury and Re-balancing the Burden of Proof – Family Law Week

Birmingham ‘exploitation’ order: Two more men banned – BBC News

Posted November 21st, 2014 in burden of proof, child abuse, injunctions, local government, news, sexual grooming by tracey

‘Two more men have been banned from contact with young girls in an “innovative” High Court case to prevent child sexual exploitation.’

Full story

BBC News, 20th November 2014

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off on Birmingham ‘exploitation’ order: Two more men banned – BBC News

Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc (No 5) – WLR Daily

Posted November 11th, 2014 in advertising, appeals, burden of proof, internet, law reports, trade marks by tracey

Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc (No 5): [2014] EWCA Civ 1403; [2014] WLR (D) 473

‘On a claim for infringement of a trade mark under article 5(1)(a) of Council Directive 89/104/EEC through keyword advertising the onus of proof lay on the trade mark proprietor to establish that the advertisement complained of did not enable normally informed and reasonably attentive Internet users, or enabled them only with difficulty, to ascertain whether the goods or services referred to by the advertisement originated from the trade mark proprietor or an undertaking economically connected to it or, on the contrary, originated from a third party.’

WLR Daily, 5th November 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc (No 5) – WLR Daily

No loss of confidence – establishing causation in confidential information claims – RPC Privacy Law

‘This case is an interesting example of a claim for breach of confidence (both in contract and in equity) where, although liability was established, only nominal damages (£1) were awarded to the Claimant.’

Full story

RPC Privacy Law, 7th October 2014

Source: www.rpc.co.uk

Comments Off on No loss of confidence – establishing causation in confidential information claims – RPC Privacy Law

The different burdens of proof in “highway tripping” and “shop slipping” cases – Zenith PI Blog

Posted September 9th, 2014 in accidents, burden of proof, news, personal injuries by sally

‘There is an important difference in the burden of proof between tripping accidents on highway and slipping accidents in shops.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog,

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on The different burdens of proof in “highway tripping” and “shop slipping” cases – Zenith PI Blog

Proving and Disproving Discrimination – Cloisters

‘This talk looks at the legal and practical tools available to employment lawyers to prove or disprove direct discrimination and harassment, exploring in particular three areas:
How judges apply the burden of proof s136(2)(3) EA 2010.
What is the role of Comparators in light of the Supreme Court decision of Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] ICR 1054, SC.
What role does knowledge of the protected characteristic now play in light of IPC Media Ltd v Millar [2013] IRLR 707.’

Full story

Cloisters, 29th August 2014

Source: www.cloisters.com

Comments Off on Proving and Disproving Discrimination – Cloisters

Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 996; [2014] WLR (D) 335

‘Where a claimant applied to introduce a new claim by amendment under CPR r 17.4, and the defendant could show a prima facie defence of limitation, the burden was on the claimant to show that the defence was not reasonably arguable. Amendments seeking to add or substitute a new cause of action would only be permitted if they arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue on the existing claims.’

WLR Daily, 17th July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another – WLR Daily

IA (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted January 31st, 2014 in asylum, burden of proof, law reports, refugees, Scotland, treaties, United Nations by sally

IA (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees intervening) [2014] UKSC 6; [2014] WLR (D) 36

‘National decision-makers had an independent and autonomous responsibility under the Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) (Cmd 9171) and (1967) (Cmnd 3906) to determine the applications of those who had applied for asylum. An earlier decision of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”) to grant refugee status was not binding on the national decision-maker, nor did it create any presumption or shift the burden of proof.’

WLR Daily, 29th January 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on IA (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees intervening) – WLR Daily

Proving and disproving discrimination – Cloisters

Posted January 29th, 2014 in burden of proof, employment, equality, harassment, news by sally

‘This talk looks at the legal and practical tools available to employment lawyers to prove or disprove direct discrimination and harassment, exploring in particular three areas:

a. How judges apply the burden of proof s136(2)(3) EA 2010
b. What is the role of Comparators in light of the Supreme Court decision of Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] ICR 1054, SC
c. What role does knowledge of the protected characteristic now play in light of IPC Media Ltd v Millar [2013] IRLR 707.’

Full story (PDF)

Cloisters, 14th January 2014

Source: www.cloisters.com

Comments Off on Proving and disproving discrimination – Cloisters