‘This decision exemplifies the stricter approach the courts are now taking in disciplinary cases where the regulated person fails to attend a hearing.’
Blackstone Chambers, 13th May 2020
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘A judge has rejected a recusal application on the grounds of apparent bias, based on him being in the same class at school as the director of a defendant company more than 45 years ago.’
Litigation Futures, 13th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A former member of the board of the Weinstein Company does have to comply with a disclosure order in a sexual harassment case despite not living in the UK, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 7th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘It is “fundamental” to the disclosure duties of solicitors that clients are not allowed to select relevant documents, the High Court has stressed.’
Litigation Futures, 6th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The long anticipated judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department was handed down by the Supreme Court on the 25th March. The Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) that rendered the decision of the then Home Secretary- Sajid Javid- to hand over evidence to US authorities unlawful. While others have commented on the DPA aspect of this case (see here, here, and here), this post touches on the common law strand. However, rather than interrogating the Court’s decision, here I discuss the under-examined issue of rationality, arguing that the factual matrix of the case warranted a greater examination of the Home Secretary’s decision.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 6th May 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The government is facing a challenge to the legality of the coronavirus lockdown by a wealthy businessman who fears it will kill more people than it saves.’
The Guardian, 1st May 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Three senior judges have rejected a posthumous appeal against the conviction of Gordon Park, the so-called “Lady in the Lake” killer.’
BBC News, 1st May 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Lawyers representing Jeremy Bamber, who is serving a whole life sentence for killing five members of his family in 1985, will ask the high court to review the refusal of the Crown Prosecution Service to disclose evidence they believe could undermine his conviction.’
The Guardian, 30th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The government faces being taken to court if it refuses to disclose the findings of an exercise confirming the UK could not cope with a flu pandemic.’
The Guardian, 26th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘It is often the case that documents that must be disclosed in proceedings contain confidential information. Clients are understandably concerned to take all appropriate steps to safeguard the confidentiality of disclosed documents. This is particularly the case where the purpose of the proceedings is the protection of confidential information, such as the enforcement of a non-compete restrictive covenant or duty of confidence. The courts have recognised a number of legitimate techniques to limit the disclosure of confidential information in such circumstances. These include confidentiality rings and the redaction of documents. Both were considered in the recent case of Infederation v Google in which the High Court gave important guidance to solicitors in their approach to redaction of documents on grounds of confidentiality.’
Blackstone Chambers, 21st April 2020
Source: www.employeecompetition.com
‘How can the Home Office be prevented from withholding important information in immigration appeals?’
Doughty Street Chambers, 23rd April 2020
Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘Daphne Romney QC and Schona Jolly QC consider the recent High Court judgment in Rihan v Ernst & Young Global Ltd & others [2020] EWHC 901 (QB), which provides an interesting new angle for employment, international and commercial lawyers whose clients are not entitled to the statutory whistleblowing protection embedded within the Employment Rights Act 1996. Whilst the reach of the new duty of care is likely to be limited to very specific situations, it imposes a new duty of care on employers to protect against economic loss, in the form of loss of future employment opportunity, by providing an ethically safe work environment, free from professional misconduct (or indeed criminal conduct) in a professional setting.’
Cloisters, 21st April 2020
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘The Court of Appeal addressed in this case the interesting question of when it might be possible to exclude the right of a disclosed principal from enforcing and/or relying on the terms of a contract which does not expressly exclude such a principal from its remedies. The court considered the rare circumstances in which that might be a possibility, noting that they are rare indeed, as there is a strong presumption against finding that a disclosed but unnamed principal has given up their contractual remedies. Written by Adam Heppinstall, barrister, Henderson Chambers.’
Henderson Chambers, 17th April 2020
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘An Upper Tribunal judge has set aside a decision by a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that upheld – after a freedom of information request – the withholding of an agent’s advice to a local authority on the tactics it should apply in negotiations with Tesco over a proposed development.’
Local Government Lawyer, 20th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Many will no doubt pore over the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department to evaluate its significance for the common law constraint of prerogative power. Ultimately, however, the Supreme Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 that rendered the decision in question unlawful. This post considers the significance of the Data Protection Act 2018 for protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects. Although the narrow ground upon which the judgment was decided will offer some procedural protections for fundamental rights and freedoms, the case’s significance lies in its suggestion as to how data protection law might offer some scope for extending the extraterritorial application of human rights beyond the limits of the European Convention on Human Rights.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th April 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Practice Direction 31A of the CPR 1998 contemplates specifically that disclosure of electronic documents may be carried out by using keyword or other automated searches.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 6th April 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘A worker has the right not to be subjected to a detriment on the ground that s/he has made a protected disclosure. However, the test of whether the protected disclosure was the reason in the employer’s mind for subjecting the worker to the detriment, and the placement of the burden of proving the same, can be confusing. Hopefully, this short note clarifies matters.’
St John's Buildings, April 2020
Source: stjohnsbuildings.com
‘Since signing the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention in 1999, the UK has refused to extradite or deport persons to countries where they are facing criminal charges that carry the death penalty.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 14th April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Unexplained Wealth Orders (“UWOs”) have frequently been in the headlines since they came into force on 31 January 2018. They have been described in the media as, “McMafia Orders” and advertised as a new weapon in the war on illicit assets, creating an impression that they would single-handedly tackle the reputation of the United Kingdom as a haven for dirty money. The reality, as most lawyers recognise, is that UWOs are simply a type of disclosure order which have, as Lang J was keen to stress in her judgment in the case of NCA v Baker [2020] EWCA 822 (Admin) at para. 61 a, “relatively limited purpose”. They can “fill in the gap” when investigators cannot rely on full co-operation from other jurisdictions (e.g. the former Soviet states and the Caribbean tax havens).’
5SAH, 10th April 2020
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025