‘What are the practical consequences of the removal of judicial immunity for police misconduct panels in discrimination cases? This article considers that the acts that give rise to a cause of action, the common scenarios in which these could arise and the practical steps to take to address or avoid such issues.’
UK Police Law Blog, 23rd January 2018
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has ordered a solicitor who tried to overturn a fine of £2,000 from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) to pay £54,000 in costs following her unsuccessful appeal.’
Legal Futuresm 9th January 2018
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘On Monday 8th January, the Church of England reported the findings of the Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal for the Diocese of Oxford in the matter of a complaint under the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 against The Reverend Timothy Davis, Vicar of Christ Church Abingdon, (‘TD’), in respect of the mentoring he provided to a 15/16 year old schoolboy (‘W1’) whose family were members of his congregation. The BBC reports that Church of England officials believed that this was the first occasion on which a tribunal had convicted a priest of spiritual abuse.’
Law & Religion UK, 9th January 2018
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘A Church of England vicar has been convicted by a tribunal of spiritually abusing a teenage boy.’
BBC News, 8th January 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This recent judgment of the Court of Appeal resolved two important questions:
1. Where a line manager, who is not involved in the investigatory or disciplinary process, has tainted the evidence supplied to a person deciding whether an employee should be dismissed, and that decision-maker is innocent of any discriminatory motivation, whose knowledge or state of mind is to be attributed to the employer for the purpose of s.103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996)?
2. Can an employee recover damages for dismissal consequent on detriment in the whistleblowing context?
Old Square Chambers, 6th December 2017
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘The principles of fair procedure ought to be well known to most sporting disciplinary bodies by now, but a case before the disciplinary and appellate bodies of the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) illustrates how procedural slips can still occur, causing substantial unfairness to a person facing disciplinary action. The case also shows the power of a fair appellate body to put right procedural defects.’
Blackstone Chambers, 4th December 2017
Source: www.sportslawbulletin.org
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has criticised both the Solicitors Regulation Authority and two former directors of a Preston law firm for their “careless and disrespectful approach” in applying for approval of an ‘agreed outcome’ only a day before their hearing.’
Legal Futures, 29th November 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The head of a Bradford law firm has been struck off after being convicted of conspiracy to defraud the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) and also failing to supervise an unpaid junior member of staff who is suspected of producing fraudulent decree absolutes – and whose surname nobody at the firm can remember.’
Legal Futures, 28th November 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The recent Supreme Court ruling that changed the test of dishonesty could cause delays and more hearings at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), its chief executive has warned.’
Legal Futures, 27th November 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘In his last blog post, The Problem of Iago: Whistleblowing and tained information, Benjamin Gray considered the cases of Royal Mail Ltd v Jhuti [2017] EWCA Civ 1632 and International Petroleum Ltd v Osipov [2017] UKEAT/0058/17 and the difficulties faced by both claimants and respondents in ‘tainted information’, or ‘Iago’, cases, where employers are manipulated into dismissing employees by their co-workers.’
Littleton Chambers, 22nd November 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘On 1 November 2017, the Church of England Document Library posted Huntley 2, the Decision and Penalty of the Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal for the Diocese of Durham between Mr Andrew Thurston (Complainant) and The Reverend David George Huntley (Respondent). This followed the Tribunal’s earlier Decision, May 2016, and Decision (Appeal) and Order in August 2016, which concerned the same clergyman but on a significantly different matter.’
Law & Religion UK, 15th November 2017
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘The Supreme Court has held in P v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2017] UKSC 65, that police misconduct hearings no longer benefit from judicial immunity in respect of discrimination claims. They also held that the Chief Constable is vicariously liable for the discriminatory acts of such panels. However, the decision related to an internal panel under the old regime when a misconduct hearing panel was chaired by an assistant chief constable.’
UK Police Law Blog, 10th November 2017
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal today confirmed its largest-ever fine levied against a law firm in England and Wales.’
Law Society's Gazette, 8th November 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024