‘Sun has got it badly wrong on human rights. Again. On 24 August 2014 Craig Woodhouse reported that “Euro judges go against UK in 3 out of 5 cases” (£). This is false and seriously misleading.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th August 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The High Court has issued a declaration of incompatibility following a successful challenge to the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013. The regulations under the Act that sanctioned those who did not participate in unpaid “work for your benefit” schemes by depriving them of an allowance violated the rule of law protected by the Convention and this country’s unwritten constitution. However, the dispute did not engage Article 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 8th July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘This second appeal to the Court of Appeal from a s.204 Housing Act 1996 appeal raises three important questions. Unfortunately, the answers to them are rather brief and rather negative. The issues are i) whether a s.202 review of a s.184 decision can come to a finding which is substantially worse for the applicant that the original s.184 decision; ii) whether a review officer should conduct a hazard assessment (Housing Act 2004) when considering whether it is reasonable for an applicant to occupy their accommodation; and iii) how far should a review officer look to the future when considering whether the applicant is homeless.’
NearlyLegal, 30th June 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Judicial dissent is in decline in the UK’s top court as the Supreme Court moves towards a culture of collegiality on the bench, research by The Lawyer has revealed.’
The Lawyer, 23rd April 2014
Source: www.thelawyer.com
‘In his monthly column, James Bickford Smith discusses the Court of Appeal’s recent guidance on communications with judges after draft judgments are circulated, some interesting judicial
observations on defective witness statements, and the Commercial Court’s important relief from
sanctions decision in Re C (A Child) [2014] EWCA Civ 70.’
Littleton Chambers, 7th March 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
Is Fairchild a Leading case of the Common Law? (PDF)
Per Laleng, Inner Temple Academic Fellow, University of Kent
The Inner Temple, 20th January 2014
Source: www.innertemple.org.uk
‘It’s a familiar scenario to any lawyer.
You’re reading a practitioner handbook and see a case referred to that seems just a little bit odd.
You read the summary in the footnotes and can’t believe it really says that and, before you know it, you’ve been side-tracked from your original research plan into actually getting a copy of the case.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Many more judgments from some of the UK’s most secret hearings will be published in future, the judge in charge of the family court and the court of protection has ordered.’
The Guardian, 16th January 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The first grim details published about Alessandra Pacchieri’s brief stay in Britain were, as one commentator put it, “the stuff of nightmares”.
Over the past few days, however, a different story has emerged. Transcripts of judgments relating to the case have now been made public and they reveal the nuances behind the apparently callous decisions of judges.’
The Independent, 6th December 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The judge who ordered a mentally ill pregnant woman to undergo a Caesarian section instead of a natural birth insisted that it was in her best interests.’
The Independent, 4th December 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Technical evidence can sometimes be crucial to judicial decisions and this case shows how dramatic the consequences are for a family if evidence is unreliable. If the respondent in this case had not put probity before its commercial interests, a mother would have been deprived of the care of her child. Hence the importance of publishing the judgment.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th October 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“This is the latest in a series of annual reports to the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) setting out the Government’s record on the implementation of adverse Human Rights judgments.”
Ministry of Justice, 24th October 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
Commission of the European Union v Federal Republic of Germany: (Case C-95/12); [2013] WLR (D) 399
“The procedure laid down in article 260(2)FEU of the FEU Treaty had to be regarded as a special judicial procedure for the enforcement of the judgments of the court, ie a method of enforcement.”
WLR Daily, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“UK organisations looking to understand whether information they hold constitutes ‘personal data’ must not look solely at how the term was interpreted by the Court of Appeal in 2003, a High Court judge has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“In ‘Evans (No. 1)’, a 2010 case concerning the transfer of suspected insurgents for questioning in certain military centres in Afghanistan, the High Court had ruled, partly in an open judgment, partly in closed proceedings, that UK transfers to NDS Kandahar and NDS Lashkar Gah could proceed without risk of ill treatment (which is contrary to UK policy), but that it would be a breach of the policy and therefore unlawful for transfers to be made to NDS Kabul. It was subsequently discovered that there had not been jurisdiction to follow a closed procedure in that case, but what was done could not be undone, so the confidentiality agreements and the closed judgment remained in force.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 16th October 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Salzgitter Mannesmann Handel GmbH v SC Laminorul SA (Case C-157/12); [2013] WLR (D) 362
“Article 34(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L12, p 1) was of no application to irreconcilable judgments given by courts of the same member states.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Yesterday, before His Honour Judge Peter Murphy ruled that a female Muslim defendant in a criminal trial must remove her face-covering veil (niqaab) whilst giving evidence, Home Office Minister Jeremy Brown said he was ‘instinctively uneasy’ about restricting religious freedoms, but that there should be a national debate over banning the burka.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 17th September 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Frank Feehan QC and Anna McKenna who appeared for the appellant in the Supreme Court and Justin Leslie offer a tabular summary of the findings of the individual Justices on key issues in the appeal.”
Family Law Week, 16th August 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“This time of year, high court and appellate judges will have been trying to clear their desks – to stop the complex half-finished judgment from skulking around in their minds and spoiling their holidays.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th July 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024