R (on the application of ZH and CN) (Appellants) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham (Respondents) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 12th November 2014
Supreme Court, 12th November 2014
‘At a time when the UK’s membership of the European Convention of Human Rights (“ECHR”) and our domestic Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”) is a hot political topic, it is timely that the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) has handed down a judgment considering Article 6 ECHR in relation to special time limit provisions for discrimination complaints brought by those in the Armed Forces: Duncan v Ministry of Defence.’
Cloisters, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Ahead of this week’s EAT judgment in Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton and Baxter, Hertel (UK) Ltd v Wood and others and Amec Group Limited v Law and others, employers feared the prospect of crippling retrospective pay claims dating back up to 16 years.’
Cloisters, 7th November 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Lantana Ltd. (“Lantana”) is a California company that offers communication cable services, telephone systems and services and computer and data network services mainly to customers in Southern California. One of the company’s employees invented a “method, systems, and computer program products for retrieving a file of machine readable data” for which Lantana applied for patents in the USA and around the world under the Patent Co-operation Treaty.’
NIPC Law, 17th November 2014
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
‘The circumstances of the claim are as follows. The Claimant had been visiting her parents who had lived for some years in sheltered housing owned by the Defendant. The Claimant’s parents’ accommodation had a back entrance, which was approached by way of a tarmac path, beside which were an area of patchy grass. There was a difference in level between the path and the earth of approximately two and a half inches. At trial the Judge found that the edge of the path was clear and did not need to be marked. He accepted that the Claimant had stepped half on and half off the path which has caused her ankle to cockle and for her to fall.’
Zenith PI Blog, 17th November 2014
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Grahame Anderson discusses the recent Court of Appeal decision in Energy Venture Partners Limited v Malabu Oil and Gas Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 1295 (9 October 2014).’
Littleton Chambers, 17th October 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Something that can take some housing practitioners by surprise is a Notice to Quit served, not by a landlord on a tenant, but by a tenant on a landlord (sometimes referred to by housing officers as a “notice to terminate”).’
Zenith Chambers, 13th November 2014
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
‘With the Supreme Court set to look at priority need this December, Ajilore v Hackney [2014] EWCA Civ 1273 may prove to be a brief footnote in the evolution of the bloated Pereira test. But, at least for the next four weeks, it tells us something about the construction of the “ordinary homeless person” against which, post Johnson v Solihull [2013] EWCA Civ 752, applicants for homeless assistance are assessed.’
NearlyLegal, 16th November 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘A Muslim convert, stripped of his British citizenship because of alleged extremism, is appealing to the Supreme Court that he has been left stateless.’
BBC News, 18th November 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has handed down guidance on the approach to take to allegations of bias in long-running cases where a judge has substantial involvement in the prior stages of a case’s history.’
Littleton Chambers, 27th October 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Fashions are a feature of so much in life, and employment law is no exception, where for the moment at least: Status is in vogue. In recent years the appellate courts have considered a range of relationships, and been asked to answer the question: what is the legal characterisation of the claimant’s relationship with the respondent? The question is put more specifically in each case; was the claimant an employee, a worker, an office holder, or truly self-employed as an independent provider of services? But this is merely to particularise the general question: what is the claimant’s status?’
Littleton Chambers, 31st October 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The North East Property Buyers litigation test cases finally reached the Supreme Court and judgment was handed down on 22nd October 2014. Any practitioner in property and housing litigation in the North East, and indeed further afield, will have had some knowledge of, or dealings with, schemes such as were in these cases examined. They concerned sale and lease back agreements, a simple enough notion, involving the purchase of a vendor’s home by a nominee, often at an undervalue, in return granting the vendor a lease of the property, thereby releasing equity to the vendor and allowing them to remain in the property at a reduced rent.’
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 24th October 2014
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
‘Online retailing is growing fast. Research suggests that it makes up over 12% of UK retail sales, with the US and Germany close behind. Many of the advertising and promotional techniques used in e-commerce are necessarily different from those deployed in more traditional sales methods. One of the techniques currently popular is the use of keyword advertising such as Google’s AdWords.’
Technology Law Update, 12th November 2014
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘In Laughton v Shalaby [2014] EWCA Civ 1450, the claimant appealed a decision that the defendant surgeon had not acted negligently in the course of carrying out a hip operation.’
Zenith PI Blog, 17th November 2014
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Last week, amid much media excitement, the Employment Appeal Tribunal handed down its judgment in the conjoined cases of Bear Scotland v Fulton, Amec v Law & Hertel v Woods. All three cases were appealing against the decisions of employment tribunals who determined that the calculating “normal remuneration” for holiday pay purposes should include overtime even if the overtime is not guaranteed.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 14th November 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘The Daily Mail faces a potential legal bill that could be as high as £3m, believed to be among the highest since controversial no-win, no-fee agreements were introduced, after libelling a businessman.’
The Guardian, 14th November 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘R (on the application of Lord Carlile of Berriew QC and others) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 60. The exclusion of a dissident Iranian from the UK, on grounds that her presence would have a damaging impact on our interests in relation to Iran, has been upheld by the Supreme Court.’
Uk Human Rights Blog, 12th November 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘“Extraneous factors”, including an assault on a bus driver, are not relevant in deciding whether a surgeon had acted negligently while carrying out a hip operation, appeal judges have ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 14th November 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Home Secretary’s decision to maintain an order excluding the entry into the United Kingdom of a dissident Iranian politician, invited by members of the Houses of Parliament to meet them in London to discuss human rights and democratic issues in Iran, was not a disproportionate interference with their right to freedom of expression under article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: the Home Secretary was entitled to accept the recommendation of the Foreign Secretary that to permit such entry would risk jeopardising the United Kingdom’s diplomatic and economic interests and might provoke a violent reaction in Iran resulting in damage to British property and endangering the safety of British and local personnel.’
WLR Daily, 12th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The power of a local housing authority under section 160ZA(7) of the Housing Act 1996 to set the qualification criteria for registration on a housing allocation scheme under that Act was subject to the authority’s duty under section 166A(3) of the 1996 Act to secure that reasonable preference was given to specified classes of people, including those who were owed a housing duty under section 193(2) of that Act.’
WLR Daily, 6th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk