‘A children’s charity is taking High Court action against the government over its claims that some protections of children in care are “myths”. The Article 39 charity is seeking a judicial review of Department for Education guidance to local councils responsible for vulnerable children.’
BBC News, 22nd February 2019
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A defendant cannot defend himself from prosecution for breach of a Community Protection Notice (‘CPN’), on the basis that the CPN is invalid. The reason, stated in Stannard v The Crown Prosecution Service [2019] EWHC 84 (Admin), is that there is an effective means to challenge the CPN – either by exercising the right of statutory appeal or by judicial review. Allowing a challenge to the validity of the CPN at trial is not what the relevant statute (the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, ‘the 2014 Act’) intends, nor is it an effective remedy because the person subject to a CPN should not be required to breach a CPN in order to exercise a right to challenge it.’
UK Police Law Blog, 31st January 2019
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘It may seem somewhat Dickensian that an unmarried parent would be ineligible for social benefits as a widow/er upon the death of their partner and co-parent, but that was the situation created by the legislation challenged in Re Siobhan McLaughlin for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2018] UKSC 48 (Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Hodge and Lady Black). The issue under scrutiny was entitlement to widowed parent’s entitlement (WPA). WPA is a contributory social security benefit payable to parents of dependent children who are widowed; but, at the time of the claim, a widowed parent was only eligible for WPA if at the time of the death, s/he was married to, or the civil partner of, the deceased [para 1 of the judgment]. The appellant, who had four dependent children with her deceased partner, but had never married him, argued that this requirement discriminated against the survivor and/or the children on the basis of their marital or birth status, contrary to ECHR, art 14. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal majority of 4 to 1 (Lord Hodge dissenting) and made a declaration that s 39A is incompatible with ECHR, art 14 read with art 8, insofar as it precludes any entitlement to WPA by a surviving unmarried partner of the deceased.’
‘The case was about the meaning of the Equality Act 2010, s 120(7), which removes from the jurisdiction of the employment tribunal any decision which is “subject to an appeal or proceedings in the nature of an appeal”.’
UKSC Blog, 29th January 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘An academy chain has pledged to look at criticism of its use of isolation units in a review of its behaviour policy, after a student mounted legal action against the trust.’
The Guardian, 30th January 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The appeal system for failed asylum-seekers has been “heavily abused by some lawyers”, the former Home Office director-general of immigration enforcement has claimed.’
Legal Futures, 21st January 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘R (Johnson, Woods, Barrett and Stewart) v SSWP CO/1552/2018 (11 January 2019) – this case was brought by four social security claimants contesting the proper method of calculating the amount of universal credit payable to each claimant under the Universal Credit Regulations 2013. Singh LJ and Lewis J concluded that treating claimants as having “earned” twice as much as they do if they happen to be paid twice within one monthly assessment period is “odd in the extreme” [para 54] and “…. could be said to lead to nonsensical situations” [para 55].’
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th January 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Another third-party bid to see documents used in a high-profile piece of litigation, this time involving the tobacco industry, has been successful.’
Litigation Futures, 17th January 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A group of parents are taking the government to court over its lack of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) funding which they say leave “thousands of children across the country in limbo”.
The Independent, 19th December 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard argument in R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal. This litigation has already attracted substantial scholarly attention in the published literature (notably in articles by Paul Scott and Tom Hickman in Public Law) and online (including a symposium at the Administrative Law in the Common Law World blog). In this two-part post, I seek to situate the case in its wider constitutional context, and argue that the Supreme Court ought to abandon the narrow approach the courts have adopted so far.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 18th December 2018
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘An attempt to overturn a key pillar of the government’s hostile environment policy that forces landlords to evict or turn away tenants they believe may be in the country illegally is due to begin in the high court.’
The Guardian, 18th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Ministers face a pair of legal challenges to their planning rules on fracking this week, from a national environmental group and the son of fashion designer Vivienne Westwood.’
The Guardian, 16th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Home Office is trying to force two British-born children with lifelong and complex physical and mental disabilities out of Britain in a move which experts say breaches UK and UN law.’
The Guardian, 12th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Councillor Paul Andrews was seeking permission at the High Court on 5 November 2018 to judicially review the Government’s decision to issue a written ministerial statement (WMS) on 17 May 2018 regarding the way in which local authorities should determine planning applications for fracking operations.’
Garden Court Chambers, 6th November 2018
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘The father of Poppi Worthington has failed in his latest bid to clear his name after the High Court ruled the coroner who said he “probably sexually assaulted” his daughter “cannot be faulted”.’
Daily Telegraph, 11th December 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Legal proceedings have been lodged in the high court against an academy trust for its use of so-called isolation units to discipline pupils.’
The Guardian, 11th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Judgment in the test case of SM & Ors v SSHD was handed down by the Upper Tribunal on 4 December 2018. The Tribunal quashed the decision to certify SM and RK’s human rights claims as “clearly unfounded” on the basis that their particular vulnerability, combined with the latest evidence of profound problems with the Italian reception system meant that that the Secretary of State should either exercise the discretion to consider their claims here or obtain an assurance that they would be provided with appropriate accommodation. The evidence before the Tribunal predated the latest Italian government’s anti-migrant policies.’
Garden Court Chambers, 4th December 2018
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Following a hearing that took place on 11 October 2018, Mr Justice William Davis, a High Court Judge sitting in the Upper Tribunal, ruled that the Home Office unlawfully removed ‘QH’, an exceptionally vulnerable young Afghan male, to Germany. As a result, the Court has today ordered the Home Office to take steps to return QH to the UK so that his asylum claim can be decided here.’
Garden Court Chambers, 4th December 2018
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Judgment was handed down today in R (MP) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2018] EWHC [3392] (Admin). Lewis J upheld the changes to system of charging ‘overseas visitors’ (those not ordinarily resident in the UK) for use of NHS services brought about by the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Amendment Regulations 2017 (“the 2017 Regulations”).’
11 KBW, 10th December 2018
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘By Judgment handed down on 29 November 2018 Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Ouseley dismissed the Claimants claims for Judicial Review of the Government’s decision to not embark on ‘Part 2’ of the Leveson Inquiry.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 11th December 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025