‘A teenager has been sentenced to life in prison for using his car to kill a mother-of-three.’
The Independent, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The mother of a TikTok influencer, who was convicted of the murder of her lover and his friend in a high-speed car chase, has had an appeal to reduce her sentence rejected.’
BBC News, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Unilever has received a stark warning from a coroner after one of its long-serving scientists died by suicide, having suffered intense work-related stress.’
The Independent, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘MacDonald J has refused permission for judicial review in R (ATN) v WellBN Partnership & Ors [2026] EWHC 1567 (Admin), in which the Claimant sought to use his daughter’s medical care as a launching post for an attempt to ask the court to determine “whether the Cass Review’s recommendations are actually enforceable to protect vulnerable children” ([37]). The Cass Review was an independent report commissioned by NHS England, published in 2024, looking at a range of issues touching on NHS gender identity services. ATT, the Claimant’s daughter, had been receiving gender-affirming care as an adolescent from a GP surgery run by WellBN, but was no longer doing so by the permission hearing, and the arrangements pursuant to which WellBN had cared for her were no longer in place. This set the stage for argument about whether the claim was academic, such that permission should be refused.’
Administrative Court Blog, 3rd July 2026
‘It is notoriously difficult to successfully appeal costs decisions. In F & C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy (No 3) [2012] EWCA Civ 843, Davis LJ explained that costs orders involve an evaluative exercise entrusted to the trial judge, whose familiarity with the case places them in a position that an appellate court cannot replicate. It follows that an appellate court will interfere only where the judge has erred in principle, considered irrelevant factors, overlooked relevant matters or reached a decision that is plainly unsustainable (see also SCT Finance v Bolton [2002] EWCA Civ 56). However, in the recent case of Ward and others v Donnellan and others [2026] EWCA Civ 729, the Court of Appeal overturned the first instance judge’s decision to make no order as to costs following the failure of a claim in which both parties were dishonest.’
Law Society's Gazette, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In contract law, an ‘election’ conventionally refers to certain finally binding choices exercised outside of court—including to rescind or affirm and to terminate or affirm a contract. This article proposes a new analysis of ‘election’, as a choice between mutually exclusive powers which destroy one another. One power (eg the power to rescind/terminate) changes the power holder’s legal relations with respect to another by destroying a primary set of rights and the other power. The other power (eg the power to affirm) destroys the former power without affecting any pre-existing set of primary rights. This ‘two power model’ explains why affirmation is binding, and thereby gives the concept of ‘election’ some explanatory value.’
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Summer 2026
Source: doi.org
‘A wife made a chilling remark to police after murdering her husband of 27 years with a vegetable knife in their Greater Manchester home.’
The Independent, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The government, the Gambling Commission, and local authorities are responsible for regulating gambling in Great Britain.’
House of Commons Library, 2nd July 2026
Source: commonslibrary.parliament.uk
‘Private law uses counterfactual reasoning to determine if loss—for which compensatory damages may be awarded—has been suffered because of a wrong: is the claimant in a worse position than it would have been in without the wrong? Counterfactual reasoning is, therefore, an essential part of private law. Yet, it is far from clear what this counterfactual for determining loss is. Different counterfactuals seem to be used, depending on the claim and the claim’s circumstances. Counterfactuals remain, in general, an undertheorised concept. This article proposes a new, principled theory, and conceptualisation, of counterfactuals in private law. Its central claim is that, as a rule, the counterfactual for determining loss is, and should be, ‘what would have happened without the wrong’, but that there are, and should be, exceptions to this rule, if normatively justifiable.’
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Summer 2026
Source: doi.org
‘A man who was falsely convicted and spent more than five years in prison has said he felt “sick” to learn that his compensation claim has been rejected again.’
BBC News, 5th July 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Lord Chancellor has pledged to MPs that legislation to curb SLAPPs would be brought forward by the end of this Parliament – and hinted it may be sooner.’
Legal Futures, 6th July2026
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Annie’s lawyers argue that prosecution was so badly executed it breached her human rights.’
The Guardian, 4th July 2026
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A prison officer has been spared an immediate jail term after engaging in a romantic relationship with an inmate, an affair a judge branded as far more serious than merely “stupid”.’
The Independent, 3rd July 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2026