“The Red line: Assessing “Proportionality” in Article 8 ECHR Family Rights” – Church Court Chambers

Posted December 4th, 2019 in citizenship, families, human rights, immigration, news, proportionality by sally

‘Islam Khan discusses a recent Court Of Appeal case in an immigration matter shifting the test on proportionality on Human Rights cases.’

Full Story

Church Court Chambers, 3rd December 2019

Source: churchcourtchambers.co.uk

Court of Appeal allows appeal over care and placement orders over failure by judge to give adequately reasoned judgment – Local Government Lawyer

‘The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal brought by a great-aunt from care and placement orders made by a judge at the conclusion of proceedings concerning a two-year-old boy, J.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 19th November 2019

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

EPA prosecutions and costs – Nearly Legal

‘This was a judicial review of a costs order made by Camberwell Green Magistrates on a settled Environmental Protection Act 1990 s.82 prosecution. The Magistrates had refused to state a case for the consideration of the High Court.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 31st October 2019

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Proportionality – Compared with what? And how to assess – No. 5 Chambers

‘Proportionality has been the watchword in costs for such a length of time that one might have been tempted into thinking that ‘new learning’ on the topic was unlikely. The Court of Appeal’s decision in West v. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust/Demouilpied v. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 (hereinafter “West”) provides fresh insight, however, in relation to both the matters that will be considered by a judge assessing the proportionality of costs, and also the procedure to be adopted.’

Full Story

No. 5 Chambers, 10th October 2019

Source: www.no5.com

ATE Insurance Premiums – one door closed, another opened? – No. 5 Chambers

Posted October 30th, 2019 in appeals, compensation, damages, hospitals, insurance, negligence, news, proportionality by sally

‘In July 2019 the Court of Appeal judgment was handed down in the joint appeals of West v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust and Demouilpied v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220. The judgment dealt with the contentious issue of recoverable ATE premiums and how they can be properly challenged.’

Full Story

No. 5 Chambers, 10th October 2019

Source: www.no5.com

Laura Nelson discusses Humayum Hussain v EUI Ltd (2019) – Park Square Barristers

Posted October 30th, 2019 in accidents, compensation, damages, news, proportionality, self-employment, taxis by sally

‘The court outlined the principles applying to self-employed drivers whom hire replacement vehicles whilst their own is off the road as a result of a road traffic accident. The true measure of loss is the loss of profit suffered whilst their own, damaged vehicle is reasonably off the road. Hire costs of replacement vehicles are prima facie recoverable, but where the cost of hire significantly exceeds the loss of profit, the court will ordinarily limit damages to the lost profit unless the claimant can establish that they had acted reasonably.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 24th October 2019

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

HMRC faces legal fight for handing Britons’ data to US tax officials – The Guardian

‘HMRC is facing a legal battle to block it from handing personal details about British citizens to US tax authorities. The case could have wide-ranging implications for tens of thousands of so-called accidental Americans who left the US when they were months or years old but risk having their British bank accounts frozen for failing to comply with the US tax requirements.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 12th September 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

Costs lawyers “see opportunities” in helping clients challenge bills – Litigation Futures

Posted September 3rd, 2019 in appeals, budgets, costs, news, proportionality, solicitors, statistics by sally

‘A majority of costs lawyers think there is a business opportunity in helping unhappy clients challenge their solicitors’ bills, a survey has found.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 3rd September 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Buffer zones around abortion clinic – judgment – Law & Religion UK

‘The BBC reports that pro-life protesters have lost their legal challenge against the UK’s first buffer zone around an abortion clinic. Ealing Council implemented a 100-metre exclusion zone at the Marie Stopes centre last year after women complained of being intimidated. The Good Counsel Network, which holds vigils outside the clinic in Ealing, west London, denied harassing women. Three Court of Appeal judges dismissed the bid to overturn the ban on protests directly outside the facility.’

Full Story

Law & Religion UK, 21st August 2019

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

Regulator looking at use of facial recognition at King’s Cross site – The Guardian

‘Information commissioner says use of the technology must be “necessary and proportionate.”‘

Full Story

The Guardian, 12th August 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

CA ruling on ATE and proportionality “a victory for access to justice” – Litigation Futures

Posted July 19th, 2019 in costs, insurance, news, proportionality by tracey

‘Yesterday’s Court of Appeal decision on proportionality and the recovery of after-the-event (ATE) insurance premiums was “a triumph for access to justice”, according to the insurer whose policy was under scrutiny.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 18th July 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Social housing and religion: R (Z & Anor) – Law & Religion UK

‘A non-Jewish woman, Z, had four children, including a son with autism. She was at the top of Hackney Council’s list for a four-bedroom home in the area. The co-defendant, the Agudas Israel Housing Association (AIHA), was founded in 1986 to provide social housing for Orthodox Jews in north London: it does not accept applications from anyone outside the Orthodox community. Six four-bedroom properties owned by AIHA became available but Ms Z was not allowed to apply for one of them. She sought judicial review of that refusal, arguing that it was unlawful and discriminatory for the AIHA to refuse her a home. As we noted, in R (Z & Ors) v Hackney London Borough Council & Anor [2019] EWHC 139 (Admin), a Divisional Court dismissed her claim, holding that a Jewish housing association might legitimately refuse to rent houses to those who were not Orthodox Jews. Z appealed.’

Full Story

Law & Religion UK, 5th July 2019

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

CPS cancels meeting on rape victims’ phone data due to legal action – The Guardian

‘Police chiefs and prosecutors have been accused of treating a coalition of women’s groups with contempt after cancelling a meeting to discuss concerns over requests to hand over mobile phone records in rape investigations.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 6th July 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

Court of Appeal rejects challenge to lawfulness of discriminatory allocation of housing on ground of religion – Local Government Lawyer

‘The Court of Appeal has rejected an appeal against a Divisional Court ruling that a charitable housing association’s arrangements for allocating housing, which amount to direct discrimination on the ground of religion, were lawful.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 27th June 2019

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Woman fined £150 for feeding pigeon sausage roll in Bath – BBC News

Posted June 20th, 2019 in birds, fines, litter, local government, news, proportionality by tracey

‘A woman has been fined £150 after feeding a bit of sausage roll to a pigeon.’

Full Story

BBC News, 19th June 2019

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

First High Court guidance on proportionality leads to huge costs cut – Litigation Futures

Posted June 10th, 2019 in appeals, costs, litigants in person, news, proportionality, shareholders by sally

‘The first High Court judge to give guidance on applying the proportionality test has overturned a costs master’s ruling and slashed the costs he allowed by more than two-thirds.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, June 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Possession and the PSED (again) – Nearly Legal

‘London and Quadrant HR v Patrick [2019] EWHC 1263 (QB) follows hard on the footsteps of Powell v Dacorum BC [2019] EWCA Civ 29 and Forward v Aldwyck Housing Group Ltd [2019] EWHC 24 (QB) (our note here), with Turner J making some fairly caustic observations about the use of the public sector equality duty in possession cases. He ended his substantive judgment with the observation that, “I note that the decision in Forward is under appeal to the Court of Appeal. It is to be hoped that, whatever the outcome, such guidance as may be given will significantly reduce the risk that, in future, possession applications are subject to protracted delays and uncertainty which are highly prejudicial to all of those affected”.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 28th May 2019

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Judge slashes solicitors’ trial costs saying: Leave the work to counsel – Law Society’s Gazette

‘A Court of Appeal judge has made clear that solicitors should not be paid for trial preparation that is capable of being dealt with by counsel.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 28th May 2019

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Man who ‘confessed’ to raping woman in Facebook message was not prosecuted – The Independent

‘A man who “confessed” on Facebook Messenger to raping a woman in her sleep will not be prosecuted because authorities think there is “no realistic prospect of conviction”, The Independent can reveal.’

Full Story

The Independent, 19th May 2019

Source: www.independent.co.uk

New Judgment: R (DA & Ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; R (DS & Ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] UKSC 21 – UKSC Blog

Posted May 15th, 2019 in appeals, benefits, children, equality, families, news, proportionality, Supreme Court by sally

‘This appeal considered whether the application of the revised benefit cap, introduced by the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, s 8, to lone parents with children under two years old (i) unlawfully discriminates against parents and/or the children, contrary to ECHR, art 14 with art 8, and/or art 2 of the First Protocol and in breach of the UK’s international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, art 3, and/or (ii) is irrelevant.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 15th May 2019

Source: ukscblog.com