Judicial review, standing and interest in the outcome – Local Government Lawyer

Posted March 15th, 2021 in children, fraud, local government, locus standi, news, practice directions by tracey

‘A recent ruling has confirmed that applicants for judicial review must have a sufficient interest in the relief sought to have standing to bring the claim, write Sarah Salmon and Joshua Swirsky.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 12th March 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Case Comment: R (Good Law Project & Others) v Secretary of State for Health AND Social Care [2021] EWHC 346 (Admin) – Late Publication of Coronavirus Contracts Unlawful – 39 Essex Chambers

‘Last Friday Chamberlain J handed down judgment in a challenge concerning the government’s compliance with procurement law and its own transparency guidance in the awarding of goods and services contracts during the COVID-19 pandemic. By reg. 50 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care was obliged to send for publication a contract award notice (“CAN”) not later than 30 days after the award of a contract. By its transparency policy and principles it was obliged to publish details of any contract.’

Full Story

39 Essex Chambers, 23rd February 2021

Source: www.39essex.com

Judgment in Good Law Project JR on publication of Covid-19 procurement notices – Monckton Chambers

‘This is the first in a series of procurement law judicial review (JR) cases relating to Covid-19 brought by the Good Law Project (GLP) to have reached the judgment stage. The case concerned the (non)publication of contract award notices (CANs) within 30 days under regulation 50 Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR) and of other contract notices and materials within 20 or 90 days under relevant transparency policies.’

Full Story

Monckton Chambers, 19th February 2021

Source: www.monckton.com

Northern Ireland’s abortion law violates human rights but challenge rejected on technical grounds, Supreme Court rules – The Independent

‘Supreme Court judges have said Northern Ireland’s abortion law violates human rights, but rejected a challenge brought by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIIHRC) on technical grounds.’

Full Story

The Independent, 7th June 2018

Source: www.independent.co.uk

Jessica van der Meer: Paws for Thought: The High Court tackles PSPOs in a Landmark Judgment – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘The end of April 2018 was a big week for local government governance. In the same week that Ealing Council enacted a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) to ban pro-life vigils from taking place outside a Marie Stopes clinic, the High Court handed down a landmark judgment dealing with PSPOs. The judgment is the first example of PSPOs being successfully challenged in the High Court.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 26th April 2018

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

“Virtually impossible” for solicitors to claim success fees in cases involving children – Litigation Futures

‘The Civil Procedure Rule Committee is to investigate claims that the Jackson reforms have made it “virtually impossible” for solicitors to claim success fees in cases involving children, it has emerged.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 11th June 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

High Speed 2, Hybrid Bills and Environmental Impact Assessment – Thirty Nine Essex Street

‘This paper considers the hybrid bill process, as occasionally used to promote major infrastructure projects, and how this interacts with the Environmental Impact Assessment regime. In particular it deals with the current High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands) Bill, which is seeking powers to build and operate Phase I of the High Speed 2 railway (“the HS2 Bill”).’

Full story

Thirty Nine Essex Street, May 2014

Source: www.39essex.com

Not in the Public Interest – London Review of Books

Posted February 28th, 2014 in judicial review, locus standi, news, public interest by sally

‘Stephen Sedley on the purpose of judicial review.’

Full story

London Review of Books, 28th February 2014

Source: www.lrb.co.uk

Eckerle and others v Wickeder Westfalenstahl GmbH and another – WLR Daily

Posted January 25th, 2013 in company law, law reports, locus standi, shareholders by tracey

Eckerle and others v Wickeder Westfalenstahl GmbH and another: [2013] EWHC 68 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 24

“The holders of dematerialised shares in a public company were not entitled to the same protection under section 98 of the Companies Act 2006 as registered minority shareholders.”

WLR Daily, 23rd January 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Regina v C(S) – WLR Daily

Posted January 25th, 2012 in conspiracy, law reports, locus standi, retrials by sally

Regina v C(S) [2012] EWCA Crim 6; [2012] WLR (D) 5

“At a retrial of a conspirator about whom the jury at the first trial had been unable to reach a verdict, the Crown would be entitled to tell the jury that it was the prosecution’s case that those who had been acquitted at the first trial were probably involved in the conspiracy and that the jury would be entitled to take into account the acquitted conspirators’ probable role in the importation when deciding whether they were sure that the defendant had conspired with a conspirator who had pleaded guilty.”

WLR Daily, 19th January 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, Landesverband Nordrhein Westfalen eV v Bezirksregierung Arnsberg, Trianel Kohlekraftwerk Lünen GmbH & Co KG, intervening – WLR Daily

Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, Landesverband Nordrhein Westfalen eV v Bezirksregierung Arnsberg, Trianel Kohlekraftwerk Lünen GmbH & Co KG, intervening (Case C-115/09);  [2011] WLR (D)  160

“A member state was precluded under article 10a of Directive 85/337/EEC from withholding, from a non-governmental organisation promoting environmental protection, the right to rely before a national court on the infringement of a rule flowing from the environmental law of the European Union on the ground that that rule only protected the interests of the general public and not the interests of individuals. Such a non-governmental organisation could derive from article 10a the right to rely, before the courts, on the infringement of rules of national law flowing from Council Directive 92/43/EC even where national law did not permit this.”

WLR Daily, 12th May 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

In re Charit-Email Technology Partnership LLP; Vermillion International Investments Ltd v Charit-Email Technology Partnership LLP – WLR Daily

Posted February 18th, 2009 in insolvency, law reports, locus standi, partnerships, winding up by sally

In re Charit-Email Technology Partnership LLP; Vermillion International Investments Ltd v Charit-Email Technology Partnership LLP; [2009] WLR (D) 57

“Although the interests and liabilities of a member of a limited liability partnership were different from those of a contributory to a limited company and those differences might lead to some changes in practice so far as petitions to wind them up were concerned, a person seeking to exercise a right to appear and be heard in court proceedings, whether as creditor or contributory, should at least claim to be a member of the class on whom that right was conferred.”

WLR Daily, 17th February 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.