‘An assessment of the court’s performance in decision-making delivered over its first ten years; and what bearing, if any, the Article 50 and Prorogation cases have on the big picture.’
Counsel, November 2019
Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk
‘In Gilham v MOJ the Supreme Court considered the novel question whether judges are workers for the purposes of the protection against whistle blowing detriment in the Employment Rights Act 1996.’
Old Square Chambers, 16th October 2019
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘In an important decision, the Court of Appeal in Bath Hill Court v Coletta has held that, in an unauthorised deduction of wages claim for non payment of the national minimum wage in the ET, there is no backstop on the recovery of deductions, enabling Mr Coletta to claim 15 years’ worth of losses.’
Old Square Chambers, 17th October 2019
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘Last year, I wrote a post on this blog discussing a High Court judgment which held that qualified one-way costs shifting (‘QOCS’) protection does not apply automatically in proceedings where a claimant is advancing both a claim for damages for personal injury and a claim other than a claim for damages for personal injury (a “mixed claim”). The claimant’s appeal in in Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2019] EWCA Civ 1724 has now been unanimously dismissed by the Court of Appeal.’
UK Police Law Blog, 22nd October 2019
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘Ms Gilham appealed on all three grounds. She also appears to raise the distinct but related question whether she can bring her claim as a ‘Crown employee’ within the meaning of the ERA, s191.’
UKSC Blog, 9th October 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Claire Gilham is a district judge. She claims that she was subjected to various detriments as a result of making complaints about her judicial workload and the poor management of the courts.’
UKSC Blog, 9th October 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Boris Johnson seems caught in an impossible bind. The European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act – the Benn Act for short – obliges him to seek an extension of Article 50 on 19 October. He can extend, honour the law, but break his promises. He can refuse to extend, honour his promises, but break the law. Or he can resign. The Benn Act appears to trap the Prime Minister between these unpalatable options. Nevertheless, he may be able to escape. For the Act may ask the impossible.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 1st October 2019
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘A person who undergoes the physical and biological process of carrying a pregnancy and giving birth, irrespective of gender? This was the ruling of the Rt. Hon. Sir Andrew McFarlane P, President of the Family Division, on 25th September in TT, R(on the application of) v The Registrar General for England and Wales [2019] EWHC 2384 (Fam) . He decided that the Claimant, (known as “TT”), who was legally recognised as male at the time of giving birth to his child, (“YY”), is correctly registered as “mother” on YY’s birth certificate.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th September 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Welcome to the second issue of the Quarterly Medical Law Review, brought to you by barristers at 1 Crown Office Row. This quarterly publication aims to provide summaries and comment on recent cases in medical law, including clinical negligence, regulatory, and inquests.’
1COR, 7th August 2019
Source: www.1cor.com
‘On 31st July 2019 Lady Justice Thirlwall DBE and Mr Justice Goss handed down the judgment of the High Court on what amounts to “using a hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held interactive communication device” whilst driving in DPP v Barreto [2019] EWHC 2044 (Admin).’
Park Square Barristers, 12th August 2019
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘A campaign group has failed to obtain permission to appeal a High Court ruling that a decision by the Cabinet at Buckinghamshire County Council to close 19 out of its 35 children’s centres was lawful.’
Local Government Lawyer, 29th August 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘On 29 July 2019, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Akçil and others v Koza Ltd and another [2019] UKSC 40 (see Supreme Court judgment) unanimously overturning the decision of the Court of Appeal ([2017] EWCA Civ 1609) regarding the interpretation of the the exclusive company law jurisdictional provisions in Article 24(2) of the Brussels I (Recast) Regulation (1215/2012).’
39 Essex Chambers, 2nd August 2019
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Adesotu v Lewisham London Borough Council (2019) EWCA Civ 1405. We first saw this case as a county court appeal where the central issue was whether Equality Act 2010 issues could be raised and decided within a section 204 Housing Act 1996 homelessness appeal. HHJ Luba QC held that they could not, and the matter went to the Court of Appeal.’
Nearly Legal, 11th August 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘When it is a plant thermally treating waste. Or is it still a power plant? This was the question that Mr Jonathan Acton Davis QC had to grapple with in Engie Fabricom UK Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd. As is often the case when it comes to the exclusions under section 105(2) of the Construction Act 1996, the answer was as clear as mud!’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 30th July 2019
‘Motorists could challenge their convictions for driving while using their phone after a man has had his case overturned after he filmed a road collision.’
Daily Telegraph, 31st July 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Sophie Crampton, barrister of 4 Brick Court, considers what purpose the provision might serve in determining care proceedings.’
Family Law Week, 26th July 2019
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Brexit activist Darren Grimes has won an appeal against a £20,000 fine imposed by the Electoral Commission for his activity during the 2016 Brexit referendum.’
Daily Telegraph, 19th July 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Lord Carnwath at the Statute Law Society.’
Supreme Court, 10th July 2019
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘The claimant brought an action against the defendant for personal injury following a tripping incident on a path in Abram Park, Wigan. At trial the judge found that the path was in a dangerous and defective state but also found that the path was not a highway “maintainable at public expense” for the purposes of section 36 of the Highways Act 1980 and as such the defendant did not owe a duty under section 41 of the Act.’
Zenith PI Blog, 28th June 2019
Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘The case of R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal is the latest in a series of high profile judicial engagements with the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. The case concerned the legal status of s.68(7) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and in particular, whether this provision constituted a successful attempt to oust the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear challenges to the decisions of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal by judicial review.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 26th June 2019
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2024