Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants: further blurring boundaries in employment status? – by Anna Williams – UK Human Rights Blog

‘In a judgment handed down on 1 April 2020, the Supreme Court reversed the decisions of Nicola Davies J (as she then was) and a unanimous Court of Appeal, allowing the appeal on the ground that no vicarious liability can lie for the acts of an independent contractor: Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants (“Barclays”).’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 28th July 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Unfit for work? Fair trial rights means benefit pending review – Doughty Street Chambers

Posted July 28th, 2020 in appeals, benefits, disabled persons, employment, human rights, news by sally

‘Mr Connor, a litigant in person, yesterday persuaded the High Court to strike down a benefit review rule as a breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.’

Full Story

Doughty Street Chambers, 25th July 2020

Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk

Landlord who converted house in 12 flats loses appeal over £500k+ confiscation order – Local Government Lawyer

Posted July 28th, 2020 in appeals, confiscation, fines, news, planning by sally

‘A defendant who turned a house into 12 flats without planning permission has lost an appeal over the subsequent imposition of a confiscation order for more than £500,000.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 27th July 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Upper Tribunal judge suggests review “long overdue” of appellate mechanisms for Data Protection Act rights – Local Government Lawyer

Posted July 28th, 2020 in appeals, data protection, news, time limits by sally

‘A comprehensive strategic review of the various appellate mechanisms for rights exercisable under the Data Protection Act is “arguably long overdue”, an Upper Tribunal judge has said.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 27th July 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

No wasted costs order after QC instructed on wrong issue – Litigation Futures

Posted July 28th, 2020 in appeals, news, stay of proceedings, time limits, VAT, wasted costs orders by sally

‘The First-tier Tribunal has refused to grant HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) a wasted costs order despite its opponents instructing their QC on the wrong issue.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 23rd July 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

English judges rule lying about fertility to sexual partner is not rape – The Guardian

Posted July 24th, 2020 in appeals, consent, deceit, news, rape, sexual offences, statutory interpretation by sally

‘A convicted rapist could make a bid for early release after winning an appeal in which judges ruled that lying to a sexual partner about being infertile is not rape.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd July 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Stevie Martin: Bullying, threatening and animus: what remains of the rule against apparent bias following the Supreme Court’s judgment in Serafin? – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘At the heart of the Supreme Court judgment in Serafin v Malkiewicz was the question of whether the Court of Appeal was correct in finding that the defamation proceedings before Justice Jay had been unfair (though the Court’s reasons with respect to the public interest defence under s 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 are also profoundly significant).’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 22nd July 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Supreme Court rules there is no right to privacy against “paedophile hunters” – an extended look – UK Human Rights Blog

‘In Sutherland v Her Majesty’s Advocate, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it was compatible with the accused person’s rights under ECHR article 8 to use evidence obtained by “paedophile hunter” (“PH”) groups in a criminal trial.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 21st July 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Uber drivers to launch legal bid to uncover app’s algorithm – The Guardian

‘Minicab drivers will launch a legal bid to uncover secret computer algorithms used by Uber to manage their work in a test case that could increase transparency for millions of gig economy workers across Europe.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 20th July 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

What Shamima Begum’s Case Means For Our Right To A Fair Trial – Each Other

‘The UK is the country Shamima Begum was born, raised, groomed and radicalised in. Like any Briton accused of any crime – she must have the right to a fair trial, writes human rights lawyer Shoaib M Khan.’

Full Story

Each Other, 17th July 2020

Source: eachother.org.uk

Why is this government so eager to strip people like Shamima Begum of their citizenship? – The Guardian

Posted July 20th, 2020 in appeals, citizenship, government departments, human rights, news, terrorism by sally

‘As makeshift desert prisons collapse, Britain is in real danger of losing track of its imprisoned nationals.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 17th July 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Asbestos victims fail again in bid to access case papers – Litigation Futures

‘The group whose bid to access a bundle from litigation involving an asbestos manufacturer led to a Supreme Court ruling on open justice has failed in its application for the documents.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 16th July 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Jack Shepherd: Speedboat killer has sentence reduced – BBC News

Posted July 17th, 2020 in appeals, bail, extradition, homicide, negligence, news, wounding by sally

‘Speedboat killer Jack Shepherd has had his sentence reduced by almost three months by appeal judges.’

Full Story

BBC News, 16th July 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Who is Shamima Begum and how do you lose your UK citizenship? – BBC News

Posted July 17th, 2020 in appeals, citizenship, news, terrorism by sally

‘Shamima Begum is to be allowed to return to the UK to fight the decision to remove her citizenship.’

Full Story

BBC News, 16th July 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Shamima Begum can return to UK to fight for citizenship, Court of Appeal rules – BBC News

‘Shamima Begum should be allowed to return to the UK to fight the decision to remove her British citizenship, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

BBC News, 16th July 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

‘Paedophile hunters’ do not violate right to privacy, Supreme Court rules as convict’s appeal dismissed – The Independent

Posted July 15th, 2020 in appeals, child abuse, deceit, internet, news, privacy, sexual offences, Supreme Court by tracey

‘”Paedophile hunters” do not violate the right to privacy, the Supreme Court has ruled while dismissing a convict’s appeal.
Mark Sutherland was convicted after communicating with a member of an activist group, who he believed to be a 13-year-old boy. He appealed his conviction, arguing that his right to a private life and correspondence, enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Delivering the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wednesday, Lord Sales said the appeal had been “unanimously dismissed”.’

Full Story

The Independent, 15th July 2020

Source: www.independent.co.uk

The 4 Principles Applicable to Telephone Disclosure by Giles Bridge – Broadway House Chambers

‘You are the witness to or the victim of a crime. The police officer says that they need you to hand over your mobile phone. The officer says it will be examined and all of the contents may be downloaded. The officer cannot say when you will get your phone back. There is a long backlog of phones waiting to be downloaded, it could be a couple of months. It’s your phone, you really rely upon it. Like most people, your average screen time has rocketed during lockdown. There is so much detailed and very personal information on that phone. You ask the officer, ‘Do you really need to take my phone?’ You are very reluctant to hand it over. The officer says, if you do not hand it over the case probably will not go any further. Discussions like this take place every day across the United Kingdom.’

Full Story

Broadway House Chambers, 29th June 2020

Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk

The impact of COVID-19 on sentencing – Park Square Barristers

‘This article reviews two Court of Appeal cases which have considered the effect that COVID-19 can have in sentencing in cases where the custody threshold has been passed. In summary, the cases make clear that the adverse effects the pandemic has had on prison life is a relevant factor a sentencing court can take into consideration in deciding: 1) whether to impose a suspend a sentence; and 2) the length of any immediate custodial sentence.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 3rd July 2020

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

A Local Authority v JB [2020] EWCA Civ 735 – Pump Court Chambers

‘In this recent decision the Court of Appeal has arguably reset the last 15 years of jurisprudence surrounding P’s capacity in regards of sexual relations. The previous case law focused on P’s ability to consent to such relations, and whether P understood the information relevant to that decision. Traditionally the ‘information relevant’ analysis took a protectionist stance, considering whether P understood the risks or pregnancy or sexual disease etc. This decision however makes it clear that information relevant to the decision, also includes the ability to understand the importance of a partner consenting to such relations.’

Full Story

Pump Court Chambers, 23rd June 2020

Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com

Case Preview: R (Gourlay) v Parole Board – UKSC Blog

Posted July 13th, 2020 in appeals, costs, jurisdiction, news, parole, Supreme Court by sally

‘In this case the “court” in question is the Parole Board. The inverted commas are because one of the issues is whether the Board is, in fact, a court for these purposes. Mr Gourlay is a life sentence prisoner. On 10 March 2014 the Parole Board refused to recommend that he be transferred to open conditions (almost always an essential precondition to later release). The Secretary of State usually, but does not always, accept such recommendations. Mr Gourlay challenged the Board’s refusal to make a recommendation. In accordance with a published “litigation strategy” that it has had since 2013 the Board did not engage with that challenge. That strategy takes advantage of a practice encapsulated in a case concerning coroners, R (Davies) v Birmingham Deputy Coroner [2004] 1 WLR 2739, which is that courts and tribunals will not usually be ordered to pay costs provided they have maintained a neutral stance. Mr Gourlay succeeded in his challenge, but both the High Court, and the Court of Appeal, held that Davies applied to the Board, and so Mr Gourlay did not recover his costs. This meant, amongst other things, that his lawyers were only entitled to be paid at around a quarter to a third of the rate they would have received if party-party costs had been awarded in Mr Gourlay’s favour.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 10th July 2020

Source: ukscblog.com