Revival of section 3C leave approved by Court of Appeal – EIN Blog

‘R (Akinola & Anor) v Upper Tribunal & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1308 (26 August 2021). In these judicial review proceedings, the Court of Appeal decided that in circumstances where an extension of time had been granted for an out-of-time appeal against the refusal of an application to vary limited leave to remain, the original leave was revived under section 3C(2)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971 with future effect from the time when the appeal was instituted. The appeal was instituted and became a pending appeal within section 3C(2)(c) when the notice of appeal was filed, not the date when the extension of time was granted. The Court of Appeal found that the withdrawal of a decision did not have the consequence of causing leave to be extended retroactively under section 3C from the date of the decision. Three conjoined appeals, namely those of Ms Akinola, Mr Abbas and Mr Anwar, raised issues about the interpretation and effect of section 3C which provides for the extension of immigration leave in certain defined circumstances. Of key importance was the position under section 3C where an application has been made to vary existing leave, the application has been refused by a decision of the SSHD, and later (i) there is an out-of-time appeal for which an extension of time is granted, or (ii) the decision-maker withdraws and/or reconsiders the decision. The issues arose in the context of applications under paragraph 276B of the Immigration Rules for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) on the ground of long residence.’

Full Story

EIN Blog, 13th September 2021

Source: www.ein.org.uk

Mastercard? That’ll do nicely! Do you need to issue a new claim if your amendment might be statute barred? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted September 14th, 2021 in amendments, civil procedure rules, construction industry, limitations, news by tracey

‘It is no coincidence that construction cases play a prominent role in many of the leading decisions concerning limitation. It is the nature of our work that problems have a tendency to emerge some time after the work was completed and, more than occasionally, new problems come to light after proceedings have commenced.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 7th September 2021

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Professional advisers beware – check the terms of your engagement – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted August 27th, 2021 in auditors, building societies, law firms, limitations, negligence, news by tracey

‘The scope of duty and the extent of liability of professional advisers are two hotly contested issues at the core of many a dispute between professional advisers and their clients in negligence claims.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 24th August 2021

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Outcry over plan to deport Jamaican nationals who came to UK as children – The Guardian

‘Preparations are being made for the deportation of a number of Jamaican nationals who came to the UK as children, in an apparent reversal of an earlier agreement not to deport people who arrived in this country as minors. A charter flight to Jamaica is scheduled for 11 August, returning several dozen people whose criminal convictions have triggered deportation orders. However, campaigners have protested that it is unreasonable to remove people who have spent a lifetime in the UK to a country where they have no ties.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 5th August 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Appeal judges reject “binary” approach to negligence claim – Legal Futures

Posted August 5th, 2021 in damages, limitations, negligence, news, personal injuries, striking out by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has rejected as “too binary” the approach taken by a High Court judge when striking out a negligence claim against lawyers over their former client’s capacity to litigate.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 5th August 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Case Comment: Matthew and others v Sedman and others [2021] UKSC 19 – UKSC Blog

‘In this post, Max Eshraghi, an associate working within the insurance team at CMS, comments on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court in the matter of Matthew and others v Sedman and others [2021] UKSC 19, which concerns the application of limitation timebar.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 4th August 2021

Source: ukscblog.com

If in doubt, don’t assume it’s a solicitor’s undertaking – Hailsham Chambers

‘In its 23 July 2021 judgment, the Supreme Court tackled the severe limitations of solicitors’ undertakings in the modern era in Harcus Sinclair LLP v Your Lawyers Ltd [2021] UKSC 32. All practitioners will need to know about this vitally important unanimous judgment.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, 26th July 2021

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

Inevitability as the New Discrimination Defence: UK Supreme Court Mangles Indirect Discrimination Analysis While Finding the Two-Child Limit Lawful – Oxford Human Rights Hub

‘The UK Supreme Court has delivered its long-awaited judgment in R (on the application of SC, CB and 8 children) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and others (Respondents) on the two-child rule (in the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016) limiting key subsistence benefits to two children per household, and it wastes no opportunity to disappoint.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 26th July 2021

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

Preserving causes of action in an insolvency context: reasonable diligence and the Limitation Act – Gatehouse Chambers

‘What is reasonable diligence when a company has entered an insolvency process and has abandoned its trading functions?’

Full Story

Gatehouse Chambers, 22nd July 2021

Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk

New Judgment: Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation & Ors v Revenue and Customs [2020] UKSC 47 – UKSC Blog

‘The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed this appeal concerning the law of limitation.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 23rd July 2021

Source: ukscblog.com

Negligence action against lawyers over amputation not time-barred – Legal Futures

‘A man who received “devastating news” that his lower leg needed to be amputated seven years after settling his personal injury claim is not prevented by limitation from suing his lawyers for negligence, the High Court has ruled.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 21st July 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

The Building Safety Bill – Nearly Legal

‘This is, so we have been repeatedly told, the vehicle through which the government will save leaseholders from having to pay life-changing sums to remediate the fire safety defects which are so prevalent at blocks of flats across the country. The headline is that it does not do that (nor does it contain the details of the much delayed loan scheme). To the contrary, this Bill creates a bespoke process by which landlords of “higher-risk” buildings can recover their building safety costs even if their leases do not let them do so.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 5th July 2021

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Axminster: Limitation and forfeiture revisited after Lloyds – Wilberforce Chambers

Posted July 2nd, 2021 in chambers articles, forfeiture, limitations, news, pensions, trusts by sally

‘The High Court (Morgan J.) has delivered judgment in Punter Southall Governance Services Ltd v Hazlett [2021] EWHC 1652 (Ch), concerning the Axminster Carpets Group pension plan. It is now the leading judgment on limitation in claims by pension scheme beneficiaries for arrears. It also gives key guidance on the court’s power to award interest on such claims and on the interpretation and exercise of forfeiture clauses, and makes certain findings on the scope of s.37 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993. This summary only scratches the surface of a detailed 347-paragraph judgment covering several different areas of pensions and trusts law. A more flippant title might have been: “The Axminster Carpets case: a pile of issues…”’

Full Story

Wilberforce Chambers, 24th June 2021

Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk

Professionals, continuing duty and limitation – Mills & Reeve

Posted June 15th, 2021 in contracts, limitations, mistake, negligence, news by sally

‘Does a professional such as a solicitor, architect or pensions adviser have a duty to revisit their work and to correct a mistake they’ve made earlier? This is an important question for any professional and can be particularly significant when a client alleges that work done many years ago was negligent.’

Full Story

Mills & Reeve, 14th June 2021

Source: www.mills-reeve.com

Duty of care for the acts of third parties – Law Society’s Gazette

‘In Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326, the Court of Appeal recently refused to dismiss a claim seeking damages from a UK-domiciled company following its sale of a ship to a third party, which arranged for its disposal in an unsafe manner. Although limited to arguability, it offers key insights into how duties could evolve into the consequences of corporates’ interactions with third parties.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 7th June 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Firm avoids negligence penalty following out-of-time ruling – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted May 20th, 2021 in leases, limitations, mistake, negligence, news, solicitors by tracey

‘A professional negligence claim against solicitors was issued too late because the clock began ticking from when the mistake was initially made rather than when damage ensued, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 19th May 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Defensive Advising Strategies 1: What you learn from practising in the field of professional negligence – Wilberforce Chambers

‘Relatively speaking, barristers usually have rather broad practices. Even if (like me) a significant part of their practice is concerned with advisory work and drafting, barristers are often also engaged on various litigious matters relating to their underlying area of expertise, including professional negligence claims. By contrast, despite exposure to a variety of areas of practice whilst training, the organisation of many firms of solicitors can often have the effect that private client solicitors know little of litigation. For example, I once saw a draft witness statement prepared by a private client solicitor, where the parties in the heading were referred to separately in each capacity – as with a deed. And it is particularly problematic that private client lawyers often do not know very much about the field of professional negligence.’

Full Story

Wilberforce Chambers, 13th May 2021

Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk

Alerter by Ben Norton – Meaning of ‘deliberate’, ‘concealment’ and ‘breach of duty’ under s.32 Limitation Act 1980 – Henderson Chambers

Posted April 15th, 2021 in consumer credit, insurance, limitations, news by sally

‘Ben Norton considers the meaning of “deliberate”, “concealment” and “breach of duty” under s.32 Limitation Act 1980 in the context of the Consumer Credit Act’s unfair relationship provisions following Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter.’

Full Story

Henderson Chambers, 19th March 2021

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

Limitation period for a tortious claim: when does it end? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted April 12th, 2021 in construction industry, contracts, damages, limitations, negligence, news, time limits by tracey

‘Some breaches of contract do not become apparent until many years have passed. This is especially true where the result is a defect. Recently, our colleague Charlotte Mears blogged on limitation periods under contract. But what happens after the limitation period under a contract has expired? This blog explores the extent to which an answer lies in tort focusing on the tort of negligence.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog , 7th April 2021

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Does the Limitation Act 1980 apply to adjudication? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted March 31st, 2021 in construction industry, dispute resolution, limitations, news by tracey

‘Your starting point, like mine, to the above question, which I will leave you to mull over the Easter break, is likely “of course!”. But why? This question was first explored by Peter Clyde in his blog in 2012. Since then we have had the benefit of the Supreme Court’s decision in Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction plc, but does this change the analysis?’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 30th March 2021

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com