Human Rights: Whether in Europe or Out – Gresham College

Posted April 27th, 2016 in constitutional law, EC law, human rights, jurisdiction, news, referendums by sally

‘With the in/out Europe vote to come (or having gone) what will the result mean for Human Rights? How is or has the debate been framed?’

Video

Gresham College, 6th April 2016

Source: www.gresham.ac.uk

Comments Off on Human Rights: Whether in Europe or Out – Gresham College

Cabinet rift widens over European convention on human rights – The Guardian

Posted April 27th, 2016 in EC law, human rights, jurisdiction, news, referendums by sally

‘The cabinet split over Theresa May’s call to withdraw from the European convention on human rights has deepened, after Michael Gove’s Ministry of Justice confirmed it was not government policy.’

Full story

The Guardian, 26th April 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Cabinet rift widens over European convention on human rights – The Guardian

Direct access barrister ‘no substitute’ for solicitor – judge – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Direct access barristers are no substitute for experienced solicitors, a judge has told a court, ruling that a woman was not advised on the proper process for appealing her council tax liability. ‘

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 24th April 2016

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off on Direct access barrister ‘no substitute’ for solicitor – judge – Law Society’s Gazette

In re N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) (AIRE Centre and others intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted April 20th, 2016 in adoption, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports, transfer of proceedings by sally

In re N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) (AIRE Centre and others intervening) [2016] UKSC 15

‘Two children, who like their parents were Hungarian nationals, were born in England and habitually resident in the United Kingdom, having lived with the same English foster carers for most of their lives, initially with the consent of their parents. The local authority sought a care order under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 and, subsequently, an order for placement of the children with the foster carers with a view to their adoption pursuant to section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. The mother, who had returned to Hungary and had a third child with the father, opposed the orders and applied under article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 for the proceedings to be transferred to Hungary. The Hungarian authorities supported her application, maintaining that only the Hungarian authorities could order the adoption of a Hungarian national minor. They proposed that upon return to Hungary the children would be placed with English speaking foster parents but maintain contact with their parents. The judge directed that both the care and placement order proceedings be transferred in accordance with article 15 on the ground that the Hungarian courts would be better placed to determine the welfare issues. The Court of Appeal decided, inter alia, that the placement order proceedings were outside the scope of article 15 by virtue of article 1(3)(b) of the Regulation and could not, therefore, be transferred to Hungary, but that, since the judge had not erred in ordering the transfer of the care proceedings, the placement order proceedings would be stayed even though they could not be transferred. ‘

WLR Daily, 13th April 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) (AIRE Centre and others intervening) – WLR Daily

Council wins battle over mother’s bid to name twins ‘Cyanide’ and ‘Preacher’ – Local Government Lawyer

‘A local authority has won a Court of Appeal battle with a mother over her desire to name her twin children ‘Cyanide’ and ‘Preacher’.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 15th April 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Council wins battle over mother’s bid to name twins ‘Cyanide’ and ‘Preacher’ – Local Government Lawyer

Pressure builds for investigation into London arms trade fair after judge sees evidence of illegal weapons sales – The Independent

‘Anti-arms trade campaigners have put pressure on the Government to act after officials’ business-as-usual response to a court ruling warning that illegal arms could be changing hands at at London arms fair.’

Full story

The Independent, 16th April 2016

Source: www.independent.co.uk

Comments Off on Pressure builds for investigation into London arms trade fair after judge sees evidence of illegal weapons sales – The Independent

No child transfer to the EU under Article 15 BIIR without a best interests analysis of its effects on the child – Family Law Week

‘Roger McCarthy QC and Mark Twomey, barrister, of Coram Chambers address the central point of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Re N (Children) [2016] UKSC 15.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 13th April 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on No child transfer to the EU under Article 15 BIIR without a best interests analysis of its effects on the child – Family Law Week

What are you referring to…?” The increased latitude required when considering adjudicators’ jurisdiction – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 14th, 2016 in arbitration, construction industry, contracts, jurisdiction, news by sally

‘With both the US and London mayoral elections gaining momentum, and leading commentators poised to offer independent research, enlivened views and sage analysis, you really would be forgiven for not having had your eyes trained on recent enforcement action in the TCC.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 1st April 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off on What are you referring to…?” The increased latitude required when considering adjudicators’ jurisdiction – Hardwicke Chambers

Supreme Court hands down key ruling on welfare of foreign national children – Local Government Lawyer

Posted April 14th, 2016 in appeals, children, EC law, immigration, jurisdiction, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed an appeal brought by a Children’s Guardian in a case concerning whether the courts of England or Hungary should have jurisdiction to determine proceedings concerning the future welfare of two young girls.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 13th April 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Supreme Court hands down key ruling on welfare of foreign national children – Local Government Lawyer

The Future of Employment Tribunals: A Need for Change? – Littleton Chambers

‘Dodge the tumbleweed blowing down the corridors, enter any Employment Tribunal (ET) waiting room and you will almost certainly see at least one employment lawyer sitting, staring at the dregs in their polystyrene cup looking to see whether the tealeaves will reveal if and when ET litigation will rise again, or whether the end of the ET system is nigh.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 24th March 2016

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Comments Off on The Future of Employment Tribunals: A Need for Change? – Littleton Chambers

English law will remain ‘gold standard’ despite impact on case law caused by confidential arbitrations, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

‘The law in England and Wales will continue to be regarded as “gold standard” internationally despite the fact that the development of case law risks being stifled by the number of confidential arbitrations taking place in London, an expert has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 4th April 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on English law will remain ‘gold standard’ despite impact on case law caused by confidential arbitrations, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

General Medical Council v Michalak – WLR Daily

General Medical Council v Michalak [2016] EWCA Civ 172

‘The claimant doctor made a complaint of discrimination against the respondent General Medical Council, alleging that, as a qualifications body, it had subjected her to a detriment in the course of its Fitness to Practise Panel procedure, contrary to section 53(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010. At a preliminary hearing to determine whether the employment tribunal had jurisdiction under section 120 of the Act, an employment judge held that the claim was not excluded by section 120(7), as the act complained of was not subject “by virtue of an enactment” to “an appeal or proceedings in the nature of an appeal”, since there was no right of appeal under the Medical Act 1983 from a decision of the panel, nor did judicial review provide a means to challenge its decision. The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the General Medical Council’s appeal, holding that judicial review proceedings were proceedings “in the nature of an appeal” that arose “by virtue of an enactment”, namely section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, that were available to the claimant, thereby precluding the jurisdiction of the employment tribunal.’

WLR Daily, 23rd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on General Medical Council v Michalak – WLR Daily

Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others- WLR Daily

Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others [2016] EWCA Crim 71

‘In each of the 13 applications before the court, the applicants applied for an extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against sentences of imprisonment or detention for public protection (“IPP”)), imposed between 2005 and 2008 under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Before the sentence of IPP was amended by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, the court was required to make the assumption that an offender was dangerous if he had been convicted on an earlier occasion of a specified offence, unless it was unreasonable to do so. Where he was found to be dangerous, and over 18, the court was required to pass a sentence of IPP or life imprisonment; the 2003 Act removed all discretion from the court once it was found that the offender was dangerous. All the applicants had either been detained in custody long after the expiry of the minimum term or had been recalled for breach of licence. The applicants submitted (1) that whatever might have been the position at the time the sentences of IPP were passed, the Court of Appeal had power under section 11 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 to pass sentences that, in the light of what had happened over the intervening years, now would be the proper sentence; (2) the Court of Appeal should reconsider the assessments made by sentencing judges in the light of R v Lang [2005] EWCA Crim 2864; [2006] 1 WLR 2509, and (3) a time could and had been reached when the length of the imprisonment was so excessive and disproportionate compared to the index criminal offence that it could amount to inhuman treatment under article 3 or arbitrary detention under article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. That was because the detention no longer had any meaningful link to the index offence. A much delayed review of a sentencing decision could therefore be a mechanism the court could employ to avoid a breach of those Convention Rights. As the period now served by each of the applicants was so much longer than any conceivable determinate sentence would have required, the continued detention amounted to preventative detention and was therefore arbitrary. ‘

WLR Daily, 18th March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Regina v Roberts (Mark) and others- WLR Daily

Judge rules on Madonna custody dispute – BBC News

‘Madonna has been granted permission to end the British legal action over the custody of her 15-year-old son, Rocco.’

Full story

BBC News, 21st March 2016

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off on Judge rules on Madonna custody dispute – BBC News

In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption) – WLR Daily

In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption): [2016] EWHC 440 (Fam)

‘In two cases babies, JL and AO, were born in England to mothers from Eastern Europe but relinquished at birth for adoption. In the case of JL the child, whose Estonian mother worked in England and whose putative father lived in Estonia, was accommodated by the local authority with the mother’s consent pursuant to an agreement under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and was placed with foster carers. The mother gave her written consent to his adoption and the putative father, maternal family and the Estonian authorities all supported his adoption in this country. The local authority sought a placement order under section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. In the case of AO, the Hungarian parents working in England wished the child to be adopted in this country. AO had been removed at birth and placed with foster carers and had been made a ward of court. The local authority, children’s guardian and Hungarian authorities sought the child’s return to Hungary so that she could be placed for adoption there. Common issues arose as to what jurisdiction the court had to make orders facilitating such placements, (ii) the factors which had to be taken into account when making decisions about relinquished babies, the possible outcomes and the procedures to be followed and (iii) where a child born to nationals of a foreign country had been placed voluntarily in the care of a local authority, with a view to adoption or otherwise, whether the authority was under an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 to inform the consular officials of that country about the placement. In the case of JL, the further issues arose whether the court had jurisdiction to make a placement order and what order, if any, should be made. In the case of AO, the further issues arose whether it was open to the court either to transfer jurisdiction to Hungary under Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels IIA”) or to make an order permitting the local authority to send AO to Hungary; and what order, if any, the court should make.’

WLR Daily, 3rd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption) – WLR Daily

Children: Public Law Update (February 2016) – Family Law Week

Posted February 26th, 2016 in adoption, child abuse, jurisdiction, news by tracey

‘John Tughan QC of 4 Paper Buildings analyses recent significant judgments in public children law.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 22nd February 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Children: Public Law Update (February 2016) – Family Law Week

In the matter of B (A child) – Supreme Court

Posted February 18th, 2016 in appeals, jurisdiction, law reports, residence orders, Supreme Court, wardship by sally

In the matter of B (A child) [2016] UKSC 4 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 3rd February 2016

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off on In the matter of B (A child) – Supreme Court

Finance and Divorce Update, February 2016 – Family Law Week

‘According to the Law Society Gazette, the outcome of more than 2,000 may have been voided by the Form E software fault.  Justice Minister Shailesh Vara MP has indicated, in a statement to Parliament, that the assets of more than 3,600 couples were miscalculated.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 15 February 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Finance and Divorce Update, February 2016 – Family Law Week

In the Matter of B (A Child): Habitual Residence and the Child-Centric Approach to Jurisdiction – Family Law Week

‘Habitual residence lies at the heart of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the 1980 Hague Convention”), and is the cornerstone of jurisdiction in international child law.  Yet despite the centrality of the concept, its definition and application have always left much room for argument; and although it is often described as “a question of fact”, it has generated large volumes of authority at the highest level.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 14 February 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on In the Matter of B (A Child): Habitual Residence and the Child-Centric Approach to Jurisdiction – Family Law Week

Early guilty pleas: Justice for whom? – UK Human Rights Blog

‘New guidelines incentivising people accused of criminal offences in England and Wales to plead guilty as early as possible were proposed last week. While existing rules allow for a maximum one-third reduction in the sentence to those who plead guilty at the ‘first reasonable opportunity’, this benefit is now only available to those who plead guilty at their very first court hearing, with the available reduction falling on a steeper sliding scale thereafter.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 15th February 2016

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off on Early guilty pleas: Justice for whom? – UK Human Rights Blog