‘The chairman of the Grenfell Tower inquiry has backed a request from firms that refurbished the building that evidence they give should not be used against them in criminal prosecutions.’
BBC News, 7th February 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Shane Sutton’s evidence at the hearing of former Team Sky and British Cycling doctor Richard Freeman is admissible, a tribunal has ruled.’
The Guardian, 6th December 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘On 21 January 2014, a road traffic accident took place in Milton Keynes (liability having been conceded). The Claimant’s (hereinafter referred to as “C”) Honda Jazz was struck from behind by a Fiat Punto; there are 3 defendants (referred to collectively as “D”).’
3PB, 4th November 2019
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The Claimant was employed as a Senior Legal Counsel by Shell until his dismissal, allegedly for redundancy, in January 2017. Whilst employed by Shell, he submitted a grievance and commenced an employment tribunal claim (“the First Claim”) for disability discrimination. In March 2017, he commenced a second ET claim (“the Second Claim). In broad terms, he alleged that Shell relied on a planned re-organisation of its in-house legal department as a pretext by which to terminate his employment by way of redundancy such that his dismissal was unfair, and that this was also unlawful discrimination and victimisation as a result of the First Claim and his grievance.’
3PB, 4th November 2019
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘Two recent cases have cast light on the issue of legal professional privilege in employment disputes.’
Littleton Chambers, 12th November 2019
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘A High Court master has urged the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and the Forum of Insurance Lawyers to agree a protocol to govern the recording of medico-legal examinations.’
Litigation Futures, 15th October 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The trial of a man accused of murdering UK-born toddler Cheryl Grimmer almost 50 years ago will not go ahead, after a judge ruled his 1971 police interview was not admissible.’
The Guardian, 15th February 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘That mediation proceedings are confidential is taken as axiomatic. What is said and done in the course of a mediation remains there. The same goes for documents of whatever kind, and their contents, created for the purposes of the mediation. In the above case Master Howarth appears to have qualified these propositions to some extent.’
Garden Court Chambers, 31st January 2017
Source: www.gardencourtmediation.co.uk
‘In Darby Properties Limited and another v Lloyds Bank plc, Master Matthews has given judgment in a case concerning the admissibility of expert evidence in an interest rates hedging products case.’
Littleton Chambers, 24th November 2016
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Rachel Barrett discusses Kennedy v Cordia (Services) LLP, in which the Supreme Court has given detailed and practical guidance on the admissibility and use of expert evidence in the course of a judgment concerning the remit of employers’ duties to take care for their employees’ safety at work.’
Cloisters, 10th February 2016
Source: www.cloisters.com
Kennedy (Appellant) v Cordia (Services) LLP (Respondent) (Scotland) [2016] UKSC 6 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 10th February 2016
Regina v Bhatti [2015] EWCA Crim 1305; [2015] WLR (D) 346
‘Where the police obtained financial information from a credit ratings agency in reliance on section 29(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998, such information having been obtained by the agency from customers who had expressly agreed in their credit applications and agreements that their data might be shared for the purpose of crime detection, prevention and prosecution, the procedural requirements of Schedule 1 to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 were not bypassed and the information was lawfully obtained, so that it was not precluded from admissibility in criminal proceedings.’
WLR Daily, 30th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Charles Crow reviews recent decisions in relation to covert recordings by employees and the implications for Tribunals and employers.’
No. 5 Chambers, 12th January 2015
Source: www.no5.com
‘A leaked diplomatic cable published on the internet by a third party did not violate the archive and documents of the diplomatic mission which sent the cable since it had already been disclosed to the world by a third party. On that narrow ground it was admissible as evidence in court. However, even if the evidence in question had been admitted, it would not have led to a different decision and therefore was not a ground for allowing the appeal.’
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A tribunal conducting asylum proceedings could admit, as expert evidence, a report by an organisation based on a telephone interview with an asylum claimant in which its analysts commented on the likelihood of that person originating from his claimed place of origin, based on the person’s dialect and answers to questions about the area in question, even though the report was in the name of the organisation rather than an individual and those contributing to it were identified only by serial numbers. However it was necessary for the tribunal in each particular case to be satisfied that the anonymity was necessary, with safeguards for the claimant in place, and that the authors of the report had demonstrated that they had relevant expertise for each matter on which they had commented.’
WLR Daily, 21st May 2014
‘Rosalind English has summarised this unsuccessful appeal against the rejection of the Chagossians’ claims by the Divisional Court, and I have posted on this litigation arising out of the removal and subsequent exclusion of the population from the Chagos Archipelago in the British Indian Ocean Territory.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th May 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“An action for annulment of a ‘regulatory act’ within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of article 263FEU of the FEU Treaty was available to an individual with a direct concern in an act of general application which was not a legislative act.”
WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Where a patent specification made a technical effect “plausible” it was open to a party to mount a challenge to the existence of that effect by the use of later evidence. There was no principled objection to the admission of evidence as to the true nature of the advance made by the invention in connection with an objection of lack of inventive step.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Evidence in a trade mark and passing off case of the factual circumstances of a trade by a person in that trade, even when they deployed their experience in that trade to bolster their evidence, was not necessarily expert evidence within the meaning of CPR Pt 35.”
WLR Daily, 5th July 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2020