‘Lee v. the United Kingdom (application no. 18860/19). The European Court of Human Rights has, by a majority, declared the application inadmissible. The decision is final.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 7th January 2022
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘ECHR says Gareth Lee’s case against bakery that refused to make cake with ‘support gay marriage’ message is inadmissible.’
The Guardian, 6th January 2022
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A gay rights activist has lost a seven-year discrimination dispute over a cake order as the European Court of Human Rights ruled his case inadmissible.’
BBC News, 6th January 2022
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Businesses will need to avoid scattergun approaches to registering trade marks following an eagerly awaited High Court ruling. In Sky plc v SkyKick UK Ltd, Lord Justice Arnold ruled that a software company had infringed a trade mark of broadcaster Sky – but strongly criticised Sky for filing trade mark applications as a weapon. IP experts said the ruling would significantly change trade mark practice.’
Law Society's Gazette, 30th April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The case concerned whether Zipvit, a trader selling vitamins and minerals by mail order, is entitled when accounting for VAT on its sales to make deductions of input VAT (the tax paid by the trader on goods and services purchased in connection with its business, as opposed to output VAT, which is the tax charged to the consumer by the trader on its goods or services) in respect of the price of postal services supplied to it by Royal Mail.’
UKSC Blog, 1 April 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘In X v Kuoni Travel Ltd [2019] UKSC 37, the claimant was on holiday with her husband in Sri Lanka on a package holiday purchased from the defendant. While on her way to the hotel reception, she came across a member of the hotel staff, who was employed as an electrician. He offered to show her a short cut to reception, but instead sexually assaulted her. She claimed damages against the defendant for breach of contract under the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992 …’
Law Society Gazette, 23rd September 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘An attempt to bring a private prosecution against Boris Johnson for allegedly telling lies during the 2016 referendum campaign appears to have been dealt a fatal blow with the rejection of an application to take the case to the supreme court.’
The Guardian, 14th August 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘This appeal considered whether the respondent is liable to the appellant for breach of contract and/or under the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations, reg 15.’
UKSC Blog, 24th July 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Significant budgetary restraints. A significant deficit in the public finances. Does that all sound familiar? It is a feature not only in the United Kingdom but also in the Republic of Ireland. It is the context of Case C-154/18, Horgan and Keegan v Minister for Education and Skills, in which the Second Chamber of the ECJ gave Judgment on 14 February 2019, on a reference from the Irish Labour Court.’
Employment Law Blog, 18th February 2019
Source: employment11kbw.com
‘Ending the jurisdiction of the CJEU over the UK is one of the highest-profile ‘red lines’ drawn by Theresa May and emphasised since the Brexit vote in June 2016, under the mantra of “taking back control of our laws”. Since the notion of a two-year transition period was introduced into negotiations between the UK and the EU, it became clear to most that this red line would be crossed for this period at the very least. It may be that the draft Withdrawal Agreement’s arbitration clause is the escape mechanism by which the UK can avoid the jurisdiction of the CJEU and gain a political win, but it might represent a red line crossed for the CJEU itself.’
4 New Square, 22nd November 2018
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘The UK can unilaterally stop the Brexit process, the European court of justice has said in a ruling that will boost demands for a second EU referendum.’
The Guardian, 10th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The UK should be able to unilaterally cancel its withdrawal from the EU, according to a top European law officer. The non-binding opinion was delivered by the European Court of Justice’s advocate general.’
BBC News, 4th December 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The supreme court has dismissed an attempt by the Brexit secretary to derail a European court hearing into whether article 50 – which triggered the UK’s departure from the EU – could be reversed.’
The Guardian, 20th November 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘On 26 June 2018, after nearly a year of deliberation by Parliament, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (the “Act”) received royal assent. It is a statute of profound importance to the legal systems of the UK. It will become familiar in just the same way as did the European Communities Act 1972 (“ECA 1972”) before it (which the Act will repeal). This article seeks briefly to summarise the purpose and architecture of the Act; to identify some key themes of change; and to outline ten key implications for UK law and lawyers. It then concludes with a brief observation about transitional arrangements and thereafter.’
Blackstone Chambers, 19th July 2018
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘Copyright is defined by s.1 (1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (“the CDPA”) as “a property right” which subsists in accordance with Part I of the Act in original artistic, dramatic, literary and musical work, broadcasts, films and sound recordings and typography. A work in which copyright subsists is known as “a copyright work” pursuant to s.1 (2). The owner of a copyright in a copyright work has the exclusive right to do certain acts that are restricted to the copyright owner (see s.2 (1) CDPA). More importantly, the copyright owner has the exclusive right to prevent others from doing those acts which are often referred to as “restricted acts”.’
NIPC Law, 28th July 2017
Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
‘EU judges may be asked to decide whether the intelligence services’ bulk collection of email data in order to prevent terrorist attacks is legal.’
The Guardian, 5th June 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘After Brexit, the public face of criminal justice will look much the same as it does now. The UK has resisted many of the European Union’s moves towards harmonisation of substantive criminal law and procedure, and it is unlikely to use its new-found freedom from the restraints of EU law to decriminalise things like child pornography, cybercrime and people trafficking. The EU’s greatest impact on criminal justice has been through the multiple agreements and instruments that facilitate the detection, investigation and prosecution of such crimes as terrorism, people trafficking, child pornography, drug-smuggling, cybercrime and fraud across the EU. The best known of these is the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), implemented in 2004.’
London Review of Books, 18th May 2017
Source: www.lrb.co.uk
‘“General and indiscriminate retention” of emails and electronic communications by governments is illegal, the EU’s highest court has ruled, in a judgment that could trigger challenges against the UK’s new Investigatory Powers Act – the so-called snooper’s charter.’
The Guardian, 21st December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘I’m glad if it was the Lord Chief Justice’s concern about the reversibility or otherwise of the Article 50 procedure which catalyzed the current debate on whether the Article 50 litigation needs a reference to the Court of Justice, as has been rumoured, but on the face of last week’s judgment it seems that the parties at least were in agreement on the point after all: it is not (they say) reversible: R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, para 10 (hereinafter “Miller”). However, I believe that there is a far simpler, and so far as I can see compulsory, route from the Supreme Court to Luxembourg in this matter, assuming that the Crown does indeed appeal today’s ruling to that court, and that is that (a) the case turns on the interpretation of the phrase “in accordance with its own constitutional requirements” from Article 50(1) of the Treaty on European Union (“Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements”), and (b) interpretation of the Treaty, or indeed any EU Law, is the exclusive competence of the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”).’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 8th November 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The case of a 68-year-old transgender woman who was refused the female state pension at the age of 60 because she chose to stay married has been referred by the supreme court to judges in Europe “for their guidance”.’
The Guardian, 10th August 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2022