‘In this post, Neal Chandru, an Associate in the Tax team at CMS, comments on the case of DCM (Optical Holdings) Ltd (“DCM”) v Commissioners for his Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”) [2022] UKSC 26 – handed down on 12 October 2022.’
UKSC Blog, 23rd January 2023
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Scottish government’s chances of winning a legal challenge over the gender reform row are “very low”, a former Supreme Court judge has said.’
BBC News, 18th January 2023
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Rishi Sunak’s government has blocked legislation passed by the Scottish parliament that would make Scotland the first part of the UK to introduce a self-identification system for people who want to change gender.’
The Guardian, 16th January 2023
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘This appeal is concerned with the provision of community care services to disabled persons pursuant to the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 (the “1968 Act”) and the charges made for such provision.’
UKSC Blog, 11th January 2023
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Rishi Sunak has been told he risks “re-toxifying” his government’s record on LGBTQ+ rights and introducing “an effective trans travel ban” after the equalities minister announced a review of countries whose process for changing gender on legal documents is recognised by the UK.’
The Guardian, 10th January 2023
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The UK Supreme Court (UKSC) recently issued its unanimous judgment which found the draft Scottish Independence Referendum Bill to be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. While the facts of this case are distinctively different from previous Scottish cases, a common theme remains in the Court’s insistence on ‘ordinary meaning of words’ as its ‘general approach to the interpretation of the Scotland Act’. According to such an approach, the Court prioritises ‘the language carefully chosen by the Parliamentary drafter and enacted by Parliament’ as ‘[t]he best way of ensuring a coherent, stable and workable outcome’. The purpose of this blog post is not to explore the facts of this particular case. Rather, it focuses on the UKSC’s repeated stress of textualism. A similarity is found in the Court’s textual interpretation of Section 28(7), which was understood to affirm the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and served as the crux of its previous cases on devolution. The aim of the post is to show the questionable nature of the Court’s textual fidelity and highlight that it runs counter to foundational canons of interpretation. For space constraints, my argument focuses mainly on Section 21 from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill Reference (UNCRC Incorporation Bill case) after briefly discussing section 17 of the Scottish Legal Continuity Bill.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 20th December 2022
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘At paras 56-57 of their judgment, the court in Reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues ([2022] UKSC 31) declared: “The central issue is whether legislation for a referendum on Scottish independence would relate to a reserved matter…. The critical question is accordingly whether the proposed Bill would relate to the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England or the Parliament of the United Kingdom”.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 29th November 2022
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
Footballer Rico Quitongo has described losing his race discrimination claim against his former club as a “bitter blow”.
The Independent, 24th November 2022
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Scottish Government drafted a Scottish Independence Referendum Bill which makes provision for a referendum on the question, “Should Scotland be an independent country?”. Under the Scotland Act 1998 (“the Scotland Act”), the power of the Scottish Parliament to make legislation (or its “legislative competence”) is limited. A provision of a Bill will be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and therefore not law if it relates to the matters which have been reserved to the United Kingdom Parliament in Westminster (sections 29(1) and (2)(b)). These reserved matters include “the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England” and “the Parliament of the United Kingdom” (Schedule 5, paragraphs 1(b) and (c)).’
UKSC Blog, 23rd November 2022
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Scottish parliament cannot hold a second independence referendum without Westminster approval, the UK supreme court has ruled, in a unanimous judgment likely to anger Scottish nationalists who say the country’s future is for Scottish voters to decide.’
The Guardian, 23rd November 2022
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘All you need to know about decision on whether Scotland can hold new referendum without Westminster approval.’
The Guardian, 23rd November 2022
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Supreme Court will deliver its judgement next Wednesday on whether the Scottish Parliament can hold a second independence referendum without Westminster’s approval.’
BBC News, 16th November 2022
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This appeal concerns the correct approach to evidence and the burden and standard of proof in the context of historic claims for the recovery of input Value Added Tax (“VAT”). Input tax is the VAT incurred when the taxpayer buys in supplies which it uses for the purpose of a business activity.’
UKSC Blog, 19th October 2022
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Supreme Court’s judgment on the legality of a Scottish independence referendum could be provided within six to eight weeks, its former deputy president has said.’
The Independent, 9th October 2022
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Section 29(1) of the 1998 Act provides that an Act of the Scottish Parliament is not law so far as any provision of the Act is outside the legislative competence of the Parliament. A provision is outside that competence so far as it “relates to reserved matters” (s.29(2)(b)), and whether or not it relates to a reserved matter is to be determined by “reference to the purpose of the provision, having regard (among other things) to its effect in all the circumstances” (s.29(3)).’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 4th October 2022
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘On 28 June 2022, the Lord Advocate referred to the UK Supreme Court (“UKSC”) the question of whether the Scottish Parliament has the power to legislate for a second independence referendum (“Indyref 2”) without an Order enabling it do so under section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 (a “section 30 Order”). Assuming the UKSC will accept the reference, we argue that it should rule that the Scottish Parliament has no legal power to pass legislation facilitating an independence referendum without a section 30 Order. However, we propose that this does not prevent the UKSC from attempting to break the deadlock by declaring that the UK Government is acting unconstitutionally in a political sense if it does not make a section 30 Order. Of course, there is no guarantee that a section 30 Order would be issued – we consider alternative pathways to an Indyref 2, including possible invocations of constituent power, in a forthcoming article – but we argue that this would be a constitutionally proper and desirable approach for the UKSC to take.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 3rd October 2022
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Scotland has made public health history by making it the law for public settings to provide period products.’
BBC News, 15th August 2022
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The UK government has submitted its argument in a case that could allow the Scottish Parliament to legislate for another independence referendum.’
BBC News, 9th August 2022
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In this post, Sophie Malley, a trainee solicitor at CMS, comments on the decision in Hastings v Finsbury Orthopaedics Ltd and Anor [2022] UKSC 19, the first product liability case to reach the UK Supreme Court.’
UKSC Blog, 1st August 2022
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A briefing paper on the legal issues surrounding a Scottish independence referendum.’
House of Commons Library, 2nd August 2022
Source: commonslibrary.parliament.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2023