Laing v The Queen [2013] UKPC 14; [2013] WLR (D) 198
Although the giving of reasons for dismissing an appeal against conviction was an important part of an appellant’s entitlement to a fair hearing of the appeal, if the conviction were otherwise sound it did not have to be quashed simply because of the failure to give reasons.
WLR Daily, 14th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The entrepreneurialisation of social housing over the last twenty years has led to a diversity in the types of shared ownership. Of course, the standard leasehold type (what in the old days was called DIYSO) predominates, but there are a multitude of other types. In Ker v Optima Community Association [2013] EWCA Civ 579, the Court of Appeal had to deal with one of these other types in Optima’s claim for possession; but in quite odd circumstances for, by the time of the hearing of the appeal, Ms Ker had accepted that the property was unaffordable for her so that she had to give up possession. What was in issue seems to have been whether she was entitled to return of some of the amounts she had paid. Patten LJ, who gave the only substantive judgment, held that she did not have such a claim and ordered possession.”
NearlyLegal, 25th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“A judge hears a case and accepts one party’s version. That party provides a convincing closing speech (in a Word document) which the judge lifts, makes some modifications, and circulates as his judgment.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th May 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“A sex shop chain in Soho has won a major victory against license fees charged by Westminster City Council, in a landmark decision that the council believe could ‘open the flood gates for illegal pornography.'”
The Independent, 24th May 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
In re Tambrook Jersey Ltd: HSBC Bank plc v Tambrook Jersey Ltd: [2013] EWCA 576; [2013] WLR (D) 193
“The English court could ‘assist’ a foreign insolvency court for the purposes of section 426(4) of the Insolvency Act 1986 where there were no existing insolvency proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction.”
WLR Daily, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
SS (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: [2013] EWCA Civ 550; [2013] WLR (D) 192
“A claim under article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms made in reliance on the interests of a child with British citizenship by a foreign criminal seeking to resist deportation under section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007 needed to be very strong to prevail given the pressing public interest in removal and the great weight to be attached to the policy of deporting foreign criminals by virtue of its origin in primary legislation. Only in extremely rare circumstances should a tribunal exercise an inquisitorial function on its own initiative in evaluating the interests of such a child.”
WLR Daily, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“RE F (CHILDREN) 14 May 2013, Court of Appeal – A topical case, this, given legal aid cutbacks. It concerns the ability of unrepresented litigants to choose those to help them out as advocates in court. Not an unconstrained right, as this case demonstrates. The High Court ruled that a judge had been entitled to refuse an application for a particular person to act as a McKenzie friend despite that individual not being present in court at the time of the application. The Court of Appeal upheld that decision.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 24th May 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Anthony White admitted fraud over mortgages, but analysis seems to show problems that senior judges failed to spot.”
The Guardian, 23rd May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 554; [2013] WLR (D) 189
“Where a judge at first instance had carried out the careful balancing exercise required in respect of an individual’s right of privacy and a publisher’s right of freedom of expression, an appellate court should not intervene unless the judge had erred in principle, or reached a conclusion which was plainly wrong or outside the ambit of conclusions that could reasonably be reached.”
WLR Daily, 20th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
In re ITN News and others [2013] EWCA Crim 773; [2013] WLR (D) 187
“The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) had jurisdiction under section 159 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to entertain an appeal against an order under section 46 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 prohibiting the reporting of any matter relating to a witness, even where the court was not otherwise concerned with any proceedings between the defendant at trial and the Crown or any issue arising from it.”
WLR Daily, 21st May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A map produced to a scale of 1:25,000, even if digitally derived from an original map of a different scale, satisfied the requirements for a map accompanying an application to modify a right of way that were set out in paragraph 1(a) of Schedule 14 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.”
WLR Daily, 20th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“If the conditions in section 34 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 were met then an injunction to prevent gang-related violence was appropriate. The court would not be required to ask itself whether an anti-social behaviour order under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 would have provided an adequate remedy.”
WLR Daily, 17th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Closed material and closed proceedings are commonplace in FOIA litigation. As regards the disputed information itself, the need is self-explanatory. But what about closed material other than the disputed information, such as evidence in support of a public authority’s reliance on exemptions? To what extent is it appropriate for FOIA proceedings to be determined by reference to such material which the requester is unable to see and challenge? Also, if the public authority’s concern is with public disclosure of such material, is the solution to be found in a readiness to bring the requester’s legal representatives into a ‘confidentiality ring’? In other words, do natural and open justice demand that requesters’ legal representatives be allowed to attend the closed part of the hearing and see the closed material?”
Panopticon, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
Novartis AG v Hospira UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 1285 (Pat); [2013] WLR (D) 184
“When considering an application for an interim injunction pending an appeal, the court must not mechanically equate the existence of a real prospect of success on an appeal by a losing party with that of a good arguable case on the merits at the outset of proceedings prior to trial so that the granting of an interim injunction at the outset of proceedings before the parties’ rights had been decided would automatically justify an interim injunction pending an appeal.”
WLR Daily, 14th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Businesses do not have to pay compensation for causing distress to consumers if they break data protection laws unless the distress suffered by consumers is linked to the breach itself, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The public has a right to know that Boris Johnson had an extramarital affair with a woman who later gave birth to their daughter, the appeal court has ruled.”
The Guardian, 21st May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
LexisNexis asked David Nicholls to consider the court’s discretion to make a vesting order in light of the recent case Hunt and another v Conwy County Borough Council [2013] All ER (D) 101 (May) in the Chancery Division.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, 15th May 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
“Paul Mosley, jailed for his part in the deaths of six children in a house fire, is to appeal against the length of his jail term, his legal team has said.”
BBC News, 20th May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of ‘care and attention’ in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.”
NearlyLegal, 20th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Sheila Hamilton Macdonald, barrister, examines the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment in Thompson v Hurst; a cohabitee property dispute in which the property had been registered in the name of only one of the cohabitees.”
Family Law Week, 16th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024