‘Does domestic law protect workers who take part in lawful strike action from detriment short of dismissal?’
Guildhall Chambers, 24th April 2024
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘Dispute Resolution analysis: The Managing Judges of the large GLO NOx emissions litigation have dismissed applications seeking the protection of documents used in open Court from use for collateral purposes and for information about the funding arrangements which the Claimants have in place in contemplation of a security for costs application.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 9th April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘For claims concerning alleged failures by social services departments to remove children from situations of neglect and abuse, the sands continue to shift. Decisions of the Supreme Court in CN v Poole [2019] UKSC 25 and HXA and YXA [2023] UKSC 52 appear to have narrowed the scope of claims in negligence. Attention has increasingly turned to the scope of similar claims that may be brought pursuant to Article 3 of schedule 1 to the Human Rights At 1998, in particular, relying on the ‘operational duty’ to take reasonable preventative measures to protect a member of the public from a real and immediate risk of harm of which the authorities are or ought to be aware.’
Doughty Street Chambers, 22nd March 2024
Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘Solicitors dealing with complex fraud, money-laundering and corruption cases are very well used to having clients who are particularly vexed about their assets being restrained by a law-enforcement agency at a without notice hearing, the application perhaps being made without a charging decision even being in sight. This article focuses on the reliance, arguably the over-reliance by investigators and prosecutors, of complex financial arrangements uncovered by the financial investigators which are then labelled as, e.g. a ‘complex web’, ‘designed to obfuscate’ or to keep the world in the dark about true beneficial ownership etc. In a challenge to the Restraint Order are these complex arrangements a difficult hurdle to clear for defenders?’
Doughty Street Chambers, 22nd April 2024
Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘A firm of solicitors was instructed to act in relation to a trust of property, but negligently failed to give effect to the settlor’s intentions with the result that the trust failed to confer the intended benefit on the settlor’s children. Faced with a claim brought by the settlor, the trustees and the intended beneficiaries, the defendants1 sought to argue that all the claims should be struck out, on the basis that nobody other than the settlor had standing to sue, and his claim was statute barred. Martin Spencer J permitted all the claims to proceed. Most strikingly, he held that in his judgment, the solicitors owed the intended beneficiaries a direct duty of care. Accordingly, the judgment amounts to an open invitation to the court, at any subsequent trial of this or a similar claim, to dispense with the complexity that bedevils this area of the law and adopt a relatively straightforward route to a remedy for disappointed beneficiaries of irrevocable inter vivos trusts.’
Hailsham Chambers, 16th April 2024
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
‘The decision of Ritchie J in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 gives, for the first time, judicial guidance on how the courts will apply the “substantial injustice” exception to the statutory rules on fundamental dishonesty. The case is also of interest for its clarification of when and how defendants should plead fundamental dishonesty.’
Exchange Chambers, 12th April 2024
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
‘In this article, David Sharpe KC and Jake Loomes consider the recent decisions on breaches of the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules.’
12 King's Bench Walk, 4th April 2024
Source: 12kbw.co.uk
‘Breaches of the rules of natural justice have been raised in several recent cases to resist the enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision. Only in AZ v BY [2023] EWHC 2388 (TCC), which concerned the deployment of without prejudice material in an adjudication, did the court refuse to enforce an adjudicator’s decision due to a breach of natural justice (see Legal update, Disclosure of without prejudice material renders adjudicator’s decision unenforceable due to apparent bias (TCC)).’
Gatehouse Chambers, 17th April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘In this episode Katherine Apps KC speaks with environmental law pioneer Stephen Tromans KC about similarities, differences and lessons which can be learned for AI from the development of environmental, nuclear, chemicals and contaminated land law. They touch on the balance between international and domestic legal toolmaking, the effectiveness, or otherwise, of human rights and the common law and how law can best work in the context of rapidly developing technology and complex market pressures.’
39 Essex Chambers, 19th April 2024
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Dispute Resolution analysis: An application by the former administrators of a company for an increase in their remuneration has been dismissed, despite the Court concluding that they had standing to bring the application itself.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 19th April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘Thomas Horton writes for Football Law, on 26 February 2024, it was announced that Everton Football Club (“EFC”) had succeeded in its appeal against a Premier League Commission’s decision to sanction EFC with an immediate ten-point deduction for EFC’s breach of the Premier League’s (“PL”) Profitability and Sustainability Rules (“PSR”) (found in section E of the PL Rules) for the period ending season 2021/22.’
3 Hare Court. 11th March 2024
Source: www.3harecourt.com
‘In PSA v NMC and Kadiatu Jalloh [2023] EWHC 3331 (Admin), the Administrative Court allowed the PSA’s referral of the NMC’s decision only to suspend the Registrant, a psychiatric nurse. The proceedings in the High Court were, essentially, an appeal against sanction on the ground that it was too lenient.’
2 Hare Court, 5th April 2024
Source: www.2harecourt.com
‘In this series of two articles, we will discuss points of interest arising from the recent case Barclays Bank UK PLC v Terry & Anor (“the Barclays litigation”, “Barclays” and “Mr and Mrs Terry”) in which the writers were counsel for the defendants. This, the first article, discusses a point of substantive law (the court’s exercise of its equitable jurisdiction to rescind disposition made as a result of a unilateral mistake) the focus of the second article will be procedural (re: representative claims under CPR 19.8).’
Gatehouse Chambers, 22nd April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘The Archbishops of Canterbury and York and Bishop of Southwark have joined with leaders of the Roman Catholic, Methodist, Baptist and United Reformed Churches in England and issued a joint statement; the Church’s Press Release is reproduced below.’
Law & Religion UK, 23rd April 2024
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
‘In Hilton Foods Solutions v Wright [2024] EAT 28 the Employment Appeal Tribunal considered the meaning of “sought to take” parental leave in the Maternity and Parental Leave etc. Regulations 1999. Whether an employee “sought to take” parental leave is a factual matter for the Employment Tribunal taking into account all relevant evidence. Importantly, it is not necessary for an employee to give formal notice under Schedule 2 of those Regulations. This may also apply to other forms of leave with protection for those who “sought to take” it, including the new entitlement to carer’s leave.’
Henderson Chambers, 25th March 2024
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘In Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB), Ritchie J found that, despite the Claimant having sustained serious injuries, which would have warranted damages of almost £600,000, that she had been fundamentally dishonest. This resulted in the entirety of her claim being dismissed under s57 of the Criminal Justice & Courts Act 2015 (‘CJCA 2015’).’
39 Essex Chambers, 16th April 2024
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (“the Council”) is the freeholder of a building on the Portobello Road, London W11. In 2012, Mellcraft Ltd (“Mellcraft”) took a five year lease of the first and second floors of the property (“the flat”). Shortly afterwards, a lease of the ground floor shop was granted to another company controlled by the same director. The director (“M”) lived in the flat and conducted Mellcraft’s business from it. Mellcraft had no other business premises.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 16th April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘Hugh Grant has put civil costs on the public radar, in his latest thread on X (formerly Twitter) (via: @HackedOffHugh), concerning the settlement of his privacy claim against The Sun. In one out of a series of posts from the thread on April 17th 2024, Grant wrote, “I don’t want to accept this money or settle. I would love to see all the allegations that they deny tested in court,” and he goes on to write in a subsequent post in the thread: “But the rules around civil litigation mean that if I proceed to trial and the court awards me damages that are even a penny less than the settlement offer, I would have to pay the legal costs of both sides.”’
Gatehouse Chambers, 23rd April 2024
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘The High Court has rejected a judicial review claim brought by a City Technology College, which challenged a decision by Ofsted to rate the leadership and management at the school as ‘good’, rather than ‘outstanding’.’
Local Government Lawyer, 25th April 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A 45-year-old man has been found guilty of murdering a complete stranger, telling police he wanted to kill people because of the conflict in Gaza.’
The Guardian, 25th April 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025