‘An experienced personal injury solicitor who forged his client’s signature on two court documents to progress her case “acted stupidly” and had to be struck off, a tribunal has decided.’
Legal Futures, 28th August 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A deputy district judge lambasted law firms’ approach to low-value road traffic claims, describing them as “drivel” and saying “they are mostly prepared in a way which makes me ashamed of our profession”.’
Litigation Futures, 28th August 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The sister of a man found in a mortuary 11 years after he was believed to have been buried is planning to take legal action against South Yorkshire Police.’
BBC News, 25th August 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘On appeal, a High Court judge reversed the finding that a claimant was not fundamentally dishonest due to inconsistencies in the longevity of his injuries and the non-disclosure of a subsequent road traffic accident to a medical expert (“the deafening silences”). On this basis, the claimant was found to be fundamentally dishonest pursuant to s.57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 and was consequently ordered to pay 70% of the defendant insurer’s costs. Matthew Smith, co-founder of the PSQB fraud team, was instructed on behalf of the successful appellant insurer.’
Park Square Barristers, 3rd August 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘There are currently more than 11 million people in the UK with a criminal record. The latest research suggests that nearly three-quarters of ex-offenders are unemployed on release from prison, with 50% of employers saying they would not even consider hiring an ex-offender. This amounts to a second sentence for those who have already served their time, often trapping offenders in a cycle of reoffence. The Ministry of Justice estimates the total economic and social cost of reoffending at £18.1bn per year. The criminal records regime contributes to an extortionately expensive revolving door.’
The Guardian, 13th August 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A local authority must cover the costs of redacting court documents which are being disclosed to a freelance journalist, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 12th August 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Although the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) did not bring to the court’s attention a Supreme Court decision (that held a notice issued under a disclosure order could not be sent to someone outside the jurisdiction) that did not invalidate the disclosure order itself and the non-disclosure was not sufficient to merit the discharge of the disclosure order.’
5SAH, 30th July 2020
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
‘The High Court handed down judgment on Friday in Newman v Southampton City Council & Ors [2020] EWHC 2103 (Fam), the first recorded judgment concerning journalistic access to the court file in public law family proceedings. The case is likely to be of interest to media lawyers generally, and throws up potential complications surrounding the scope and extent of the privacy rights of children vis-à-vis their parents.’
Panopticon, 7th August 2020
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘A British victim of trafficking is bringing a case against the home secretary, Priti Patel, arguing that her department unlawfully accessed personal information including details of her intimate thoughts.’
The Guardian, 30th July 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Cape v Dring litigation concerns an attempt by a non-party to obtain copies of the trial bundle used during a six-week asbestos trial involving Cape which settled before judgment in early 2017. At first instance the Master granted the non-party permission to have copies of all documents, including the trial bundle of 5000 pages of disclosure, referred to at the trial. The Supreme Court confirmed in July 2019 that the non-party was entitled to written submissions, witness statements and expert reports under the inherent jurisdiction of the court, but remitted the question of what, if any, documents in the trial bundle the non-party should obtain to the original trial judge. On 16 July 2020 Picken J considered that question and held that Mr Dring was not entitled to receive any other documents.’
Henderson Chambers, 17th July 2020
‘The mother of a 22-year-old insurance clerk murdered in 1988 has asked judges to quash a Parole Board decision to release her daughter’s killer.’
BBC News, 29th July 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The English High Court has refused to give access to court documents on the basis that doing so would not advance the principles of open justice.’
OUT-LAW.com, 28th July 2020
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘On 18 March 2020, the UK Government cancelled GCSE and A level exams for students in England. The closure of schools and the need to slow the spread of COVID-19 made exams impracticable. But the Prime Minister confirmed that students would still get ‘the qualifications they need and deserve for their academic career.’ This created an obvious headache for public administration: the objective was to create a legitimate system of assessment, which could maintain confidence, without actual assessments.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 28th July 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The parents of a young man whose death in a crash sparked an international diplomatic row have dropped their legal action against Northamptonshire Police.’
BBC News, 26th July 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Lawyers acting for whistleblowers have told MPs and peers that they can feel intimidated to raise concerns over non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) because of the threat of retaliation.’
Legal Futures, 23rd July 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘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.’
The Guardian, 20th July 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Fewer than one in 70 recorded rapes resulted in a charge last year, as tens of thousands of victims did not support demands from police and prosecutors and withdrew from the process.’
The Guardian, 17th July 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘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.’
Litigation Futures, 16th July 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025