‘County courts can order tenants on the small claims track (SCT) to pay more than the costs of issuing the claim, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Full story
Litigation Futures, 6th August 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A tenant who “wilfully” breached the conditions of his lease by sub-letting to an obnoxious sub-tenant without the consent of the ultimate landlord should not be forced to forfeit the lease immediately, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Full story
OUT-LAW.com, 5th August 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
Regina (Giri) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 784; [2015] WLR (D) 341
‘On a claim for judicial review of a decision by the Secretary of State refusing to vary a foreign national’s leave to remain on the grounds of deception, the question of whether deception had been used was not a “precedent fact” to be determined by the court. Rather, the Secretary of State’s finding that deception had been used would be subject to review by the court on Wednesbury public law principles.’
WLR Daily, 28th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The settlement criterion, which precluded persons with discretionary leave to remain in the United Kingdom from eligibility to receive student loans within the meaning of the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011, discriminated unlawfully against a person with such leave who had lived and been educated in England for most of her life and was integrated into United Kingdom society.’
WLR Daily, 29th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Brown (Edward) [2015] EWCA Crim 1328; [2015] WLR (D) 344
‘By way of an additional common law qualification or exception to the inviolable nature of legal professional privilege, and in what was likely to be an extremely narrow band of cases, it was appropriate to impose a requirement that particular individuals could be present at discussions between an individual and his lawyers if there was a real possibility that the meeting would be misused for a purpose, or in a manner, that involved impropriety amounting to an abuse of the privilege that justified interference.’
WLR Daily, 29th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
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
‘No one can have avoided the recent publicity surrounding the case of Ilott -v- Mitson (2015). The case concerned the estate of the late Melita Jackson who died in 2004 and her estranged daughter Heather. Heather hadn’t been in touch with her mother since she left home at 17, 26 years previously, and who was excluded from her late mother’s Will. The daughter made a claim against Melita’s estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the Act) for reasonable financial provision.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 3rd August 2015
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Ms Tigere is 20. She arrived in the UK from Zambia when she was 6. She did very well at school. In 2013, she applied for a student loan to fund a university place.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 3rd August 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
‘In 2009, the Claimant had been in the army and his role was as a HGV driver. He had been taking part in a field exercise in freezing weather and snow for six days having been provided with unsatisfactory footwear. The Claimant suffered a non-freezing cold injury to his feet. Despite treatment he still suffered symptoms in cold weather but was assessed as fit for service. The Claimant obtained an early termination of military service in 2011 because of family commitments. Due to the ongoing symptoms in his feet he issued a claim for damages against the MOD. Liability was agreed at 75% but the parties could not agree quantum.’
Zenith PI Blog, 31st July 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘At issue in this second appeal from a s.204 appeal was whether it was reasonable for Ms Poshteh to have refused an offer of accommodation. Both parties agreed that the property was objectively suitable. The question then was the second part of the two stage test in Housing Act 1996 section 193(7F):
(7F) The local housing authority shall not –
(a) make a final offer of accommodation under Part 6 for the purposes of subsection (7);
… unless they are satisfied that the accommodation is suitable for the applicant and that it is reasonable for him to accept the offer.”’
Nearly Legal, 2nd August 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Upper Tribunal has another go at the separated families issue in CH 0062 2015-00 and this time, unsurprisingly, shuts down completely the FTT dissenting position in a Middlesborough FTT decision, while upholding and amplifying MR v North Tyneside.’
Nearly Legal, 1st August 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Gillingham and their chairman, Paul Scally, have each been fined £75,000 for “race victimisation” relating to the departure of the striker Mark McCammon in 2011.’
The Guardian, 31st July 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has refused the London Borough of Bromley permission to appeal in its battle with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets over the ownership of a Henry Moore sculpture.’
Full story
Local Government Lawyer, 30th July 2015
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘An Afghan suspect was detained illegally by British forces for almost four months and denied access to a lawyer, the court of appeal has ruled. Serdar Mohammed, who was captured by UK soldiers in April 2010, was not handed over to the Afghan security services until July that year, despite regulations requiring any transfer to take place within 96 hours. Mohammed, who was eventually released earlier this year to return to his home in Helmand province, claimed that the Afghan authorities tortured him.’
The Guardian, 30th July 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘In a judgment handed down this morning, the Court of Appeal has agreed with Nichol J’s earlier judgment in the High Court holding the Detained Fast Track appeal system to be inherently unfair. The new judgment is The Lord Chancellor v Detention Action [2015] EWCA Civ 840. The Home Office were an interested party.’
Free Movement, 29th July 2015
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
R v R [2015] EWCA Civ 796; [2015] WLR (D) 337
‘Neither article 9 of Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 nor regulation 10(2)(a) of the Ukraine (European Union Financial Sanctions) (No 2) Regulations 2014 were contravened by an order requiring a husband, who lived in Russia and who was subject to sanctions imposed by the EU Regulation, to pay interim maintenance into his former wife’s Russian bank account.’
WLR Daily, 24th July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina v Goldsborough [2015] EWCA Crim 1278; [2015] WLR (D) 324
‘Failure to obtain a firearm certificate for an air pistol which had become prohibited was an offence under section 1 of the Firearms Act 1968 rather than section 5(1)(af).’
WLR Daily, 23rd June 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘It was entirely logical for the Secretary of State for Health in the exercise of his duty under section 3 of the National Health Service Act 2006 to provide a range of NHS services including abortion services throughout the United Kingdom on the basis of local residence. The Secretary of State was not obliged to exercise his discretion so as to extend free abortion services to women from Northern Ireland and failure to supply such a service was not a breach of rights under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 22nd July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
NRAM plc v McAdam and another [2015] EWCA Civ 751; [2015] WLR (D) 334
‘In a specific loan agreement, which was the template for agreements between a bank and numerous customers, the protections under section 77A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 had not been incorporated, and no estoppel arose from the existence of the statutory wording in the agreement. Nor was it possible to treat the borrowers “as if” they had been under the protection provided by the 1974 Act. However, there had been a representation (and contractual warranty) arising from the statement that the loan agreement was a regulated agreement, when it was not, which would have entitled the borrowers to sue for misrepresentation or breach of contractual warranty.’
WLR Daily, 23rd July 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025