‘The coronavirus pandemic and the current and continuing lockdown imposed by government has led to a number of consequences for the resolution of commercial disputes, and the administration of justice. First is where trials are being adjourned to uncertain dates, currently unable to take place due to the inability or unwillingness of people to attend court. Second is what is going to happen when the lockdown is eased or lifted, and disputes, which have been building up in the normal course, enter the system creating a backlog. Judges are understandably concerned that the courts and arbitral tribunals could face and potentially be overwhelmed by a wave of commercial cases. A number of these disputes will have arisen due to the parties’ inability to honour their contractual obligations due to the lockdown with complicated issues of law as to the remedies available.’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 8th June 2020
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
‘Courts across the jurisdiction have struggled for years to run small claim and fast track lists efficiently in order to reduce the backlog. Coronavirus lockdown has brought this to a head, as cases are adjourned and the huge backlog is set to rise. Waiting several months, if not years, to have a case of modest value heard is contrary to the interests of justice. Memories fade, individuals cannot enforce their rights until the issue is litigated, the deserving go uncompensated, and the pressure to under-settle increases.’
No. 5 Chambers, 1st June 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘As the lockdown has progressed, it has become evident that the remote learning services being offered are of differing standards between institutions, with some offering services which are far superior to others. This is particularly so in the case of independent schools. Some independent schools are effectively offering pupils a full timetable, with plenty of contact time with teachers and opportunities to review work and consolidate learning. In contrast, other schools are offering little to no contact time with teachers – disseminating worksheets or PowerPoint presentations, but expecting parents to supervise and effectively teach topics, or for the child to be able to learn independently.’
Park Square Barristers, 4th June 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘On 11 May 2020, the Government published practical Guidance[1] in a bid to encourage workplaces to be made as safe as possible for returning employees during the Covid-19 pandemic. Whilst the Guidance has been developed in consultation with unions and industry bodies, there still exists the very real possibility that employees do not have sufficient confidence that their workplaces are, in fact, ‘Covid-19 secure’ and consider that by returning, they have been subjected to a detriment by their employer.’
Six Pump Court, 9th June 2020
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘Issue #33 of Spire Barristers’ Family Law Newsletter: edited by Connie Purdy and Taz Irshad; news and Case Reviews by Georgina Dalton. Georgina commences pupillage at Spire Barristers in September 2020.’
Spire Barristers, 2nd June 2020
Source: spirebarristers.co.uk
‘Beyond the medical and physical toll that Covid-19 is taking on sufferers and their families, the economic crisis with lockdown is also expected to lead to a surge in corporate and individual insolvencies. Individuals in particular are likely to be unfamiliar with their options when facing insolvency and with the procedures that aim to balance the twin goals of granting individuals relief from their debt whilst fairly distributing the individual’s assets to creditors.’
Thomas More Chambers, 29th May 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
‘This case determines, definitively, that a thorough vulnerability assessment with an acknowledgement of a consideration of the Public Sector Equality Duty (‘PSED’) can satisfy the statutory duty pursuant to section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. No further assessment is automatically required.’
St Ives Chambers, June 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
‘The interplay of cases and statutes including some from the last century hardly makes for exciting bedtime reading but Barlow v Wigan MBC is an important decision for those who suffer injury as a result of a highway defect particularly if they are walking on a path in a park established many years ago. It is also a tribute to solicitors and counsel who pursue such claims with dogged determination, and in the case of those acting for Claimants, at a risk if the claim is unsuccessful of receiving no payment in return.’
No. 5 Chambers, 8th June 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘David Reade QC and Daniel Northall provide their fourth update on the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme and examine the relationship between furlough and annual leave.’
Littleton Chambers, 5th June 2020
Source: littletonchambers.com
‘A flexible tenancy is a species of secure tenancy which is granted for a fixed term of at least two years (s.107A-D, Housing Act 1985). At the end of the fixed term, the landlord has a mandatory ground for possession (s.107D). During the fixed term, commentators have differed on how the landlord can terminate the tenancy. In Flexible Tenancies and Forfeiture, [2014] Journal of Housing Law 17 (Andrew Dymond), it was suggested that the tenancy needed to include a forfeiture clause and the fixed term needed to be terminated by way of forfeiture (see s.82(3), 1985 Act). By contrast, in In a Fix New Law Journal, 29 June 2012 (Jon Holbrook), it was suggested that a flexible tenancy could be determined in the same manner as a periodic secure tenancy, i.e. by the landlord obtaining and executing an order for possession.’
Landmark Chambers, 2nd June 2020
Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk
‘The exigencies of the coronavirus pandemic, which has led to a high demand for will writing services, and the challenges of meeting that demand whilst observing social distancing, have brought the issue of will reform into sharp focus. At a time when technology provides a solution to so many of the problems that we currently face, the insistence on wet ink and the physical presence of witnesses for the making of a valid will appears increasingly archaic. Citing the dignity and peace of mind that putting one’s affairs in order brings and the urgent need people have to make provision for those they may leave behind, Gina Miller and Baroness Helena Kennedy QC have this month called on the government to extend the provisions relating to privileged (wartime) wills to the current situation so as to allow purely oral testamentary statements to be admitted to probate.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 3rd June 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘“If the government were an employee of mine I would have sacked them for gross negligence” – so said Anita Astley, manager of Wren Hall nursing home in Nottinghamshire, where 10 residents died from Covid-19 and 48 carers caught the virus in a three week period[1]. Ms Astley’s complaint poses in stark terms a question which has been circulating since the full and devastating extent of the consequences of the pandemic have become clear: what, if any, legal liability does the state have for deaths caused by Covid-19?’
Garden Court Chambers, 9th June 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘The Tobacco Products Directive (2014/40/EU) (“the Directive”) came into force on 19 May 2014, becoming applicable in Member States on 20 May 2016. This article provides a brief update on UK product regulation law as applicable from 20 May 2020.’
3PB, 4th June 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The Home Office is being investigated over whether it breached equality law when it introduced the “hostile environment” immigration measures that caused catastrophic consequences for thousands of Windrush generation residents living legally in the UK.’
The Guardian, 12th June 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The general rule is that everyone has the right to associate with others and to gather together for a common purpose. Article 11 of the ECHR safeguards our right to peaceful assembly and is one of the foundations of a democratic society. This means that the State cannot interfere with your right to join a peaceful assembly and protest, even if the protest is against the State itself, or simply because the protest might cause inconvenience or lead to heated debate and tension. Article 11 does not safeguard intentionally violent protests; the State can interfere where a protest turns violent.’
3PB, 4th June 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘Liz Andrews, barrister at 1|GC Family Law reviews the judgment in A Local Authority v The Mother and others where Williams J was required to determine, in light of the guidance of the President of the Family Division alongside the recent decisions concerning adjournments during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, whether a fact-finding hearing taking place within long-running care proceedings was to continue following the conclusion of expert evidence and, if so, in what form, or whether the hearing should be adjourned to allow the lay parties to give evidence in person.’
1 GC: Family Law, 5th June 2020
Source: 1gc.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024