New Judgment: Commissioners for HMRC v Parry & Ors [2020] UKSC 35 – UKSC Blog

Posted August 20th, 2020 in inheritance tax, news, pensions, statutory interpretation, Supreme Court by sally

‘This appeal was about whether the pension scheme transfer by the late Mrs Staveley, and her omission to take income benefits which were then payable, constituted, or are to be treated as constituting, for the purposes of the Inheritance Tax 1984 a “disposition” which is a “transfer of value” in favour of her sons, who were to be the beneficiaries of the death benefit.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 19th August 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

The public/private divide in the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 – Monckton Chambers

‘In a judgment that will be of interest to a number of entities, particularly in the transport and utilities sectors, the Upper Tribunal in IC v Poplar Housing Association [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC) has provided a boost to this analysis, upholding a narrow definition of “public authority” under Regulation 2(2)(c) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“EIR”) that will exclude many organisations from the scope of the regime.’

Full Story

Monckton Chambers, 24th July 2020

Source: www.monckton.com

Uber BV v Aslam – Old Square Chambers

‘In this case the drivers argue Uber is a transportation company for whom they provide services as “workers”. Uber disagrees, arguing it is a technology services provider acting as an agent for drivers in their business relationship with passengers. The question for the Court is whether the drivers are “workers” for the purposes of s.230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, s.54(3)(b) of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 and reg.2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. If this threshold is passed, a further issue is when the drivers are workers. Possible options include: (1) from the collection of the passenger until the driver reaches the passenger’s destination, (2) from the moment a booking is accepted until the passenger is dropped off, (3) any time when the driver is in the relevant territory with the Uber app switched on. This case is important as it provides an opportunity for the Supreme Court to provide guidance on the interpretation of Autoclenz v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41 and the correct approach to when it is permissible to disregard written contractual terms in an employment context.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 21st July 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

‘Reading down’ the statute: The case of Re: A (Surrogacy: s.54 Criteria) [2020] – Garden Court Chambers

Posted July 30th, 2020 in news, statutory interpretation, surrogacy, time limits by sally

‘In Re: A (Surrogacy: s.54 Criteria) [2020] EWHC 1426 (Fam) Mr Justice Keehan granted an application for a parental order in a case where a child had been conceived using surrogacy. The case was notable as it required the court to ‘read down’ a number of the statutory criteria contained in section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008.’

Full Story

Garden Court Chambers, 23rd July 2020

Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk

UK search warrants following an International Letter of Request (R (on the application of Terra Services Ltd) v NCA): Lexis Nexis Analysis – 5SAH

‘Corporate Crime analysis: This judgment is the latest in an application for judicial review brought by Terra Services Ltd against the National Crime Agency (NCA), Secretary of State and Inner London Crown Court. The challenges centre around a search warrant applied for by the NCA on the basis of a direction under section 13 of the Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003 (C(IC)A 2003) from the UK Central Authority (UKCA)—a direction made following a Letter of Request (LOR) from the US Department of Justice (DOJ) seeking assistance with a search of a storage unit. All challenges were dismissed by the court. It was held that C(IC)A 2003, ss 13 and 16 did not require the UKCA to decide for itself which statutory search power should be the subject of a direction; it was for the relevant authority to carry out a PACE-compliant inquiry.’

Full Story

5SAH, 27th July 2020

Source: www.5sah.co.uk

English judges rule lying about fertility to sexual partner is not rape – The Guardian

Posted July 24th, 2020 in appeals, consent, deceit, news, rape, sexual offences, statutory interpretation by sally

‘A convicted rapist could make a bid for early release after winning an appeal in which judges ruled that lying to a sexual partner about being infertile is not rape.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd July 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

OHL v Qatar Foundation and tribunal’s powers to correct awards and scope of permissible challenges – Atkin Chambers

‘Challenges were brought by a contractor (JV) under sections 67 and 68(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) in respect of an addendum award (the Addendum) issued by an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) tribunal. The Addendum was issued following an application by the employer to correct a fourth partial award. JV’s challenges were dismissed and the judge gave helpful guidance as to the scope of AA 1996, ss 67 and 68 and the scope of a tribunal’s power to correct and/or interpret its award. Written by Simon Lofthouse QC and Zulfikar Khayum, barristers, at Atkin Chambers, and counsel for Qatar Foundation.’

Full Story

Atkin Chambers, 6th July 2020

Source: www.atkinchambers.com

Attending a court to give evidence for the employer is not ‘‘work’’ for the purposes of the ‘furlough’ scheme – 3PB

‘According to a report in the Nottinghamshire Law Society Civil Court User Bulletin No 5. HHJ Godsmark QC, on an application to vacate a trial on account of the Defendant’s witnesses being “furloughed”, stated that, “attending a court to give evidence for the employer is not ‘work’ and certainly not work within the meaning of the furlough scheme”.’

Full Story

3PB, 3rd July 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

The Digitisation of Welfare and Irrationality Review: SSWP v Johnson – Oxford Human Rights Hub

‘In Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Johnson & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 778, the England & Wales Court of Appeal took the uncommon step of holding an executive decision unlawful for Wednesbury irrationality. Johnson highlights that irrationality is not merely a desperate ground of last resort for judicial review applicants. The case is also an important illustration of how substantive review may be relied upon by those affected by the digitisation of welfare.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 30th June 2020

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

Penalised for parking on your own land – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Funny thing, the law. You would not, for instance, think you could get a ticket for parking on your own land. But you can. Who says? The Court of Appeal, for one. On 27 November 2009 in Dawood v Parking & Traffic Appeals Service & Another [2009] EWCA Civ 1411, in refusing permission to appeal against a penalty charge notice, Sedley LJ said that: “One might have thought that nobody could commit a criminal offence by parking a motor scooter on his own land. But the adjudicator took the law to be otherwise and HHJ Oliver‑Jones held that the contrary was not arguable.” As did Sedley LJ.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 6th July 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Travel between England and Wales – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The position in relation to cross-border travel between England and Wales has caused confusion in recent weeks. It has been subject to posts from UKHR readers and there have been news articles showing that many people have been entering Wales from England to access beauty spots, unaware that there are different regulations governing the two countries. This post will attempt to clarify the current position.’

Full Story

UK Human Right Blog, 26th June 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Mesothelioma compensation scheme considered at appellate level for the first time – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The Upper Tribunal has handed down judgment in DP v Topmark Claims Management Ltd [2020] UKUT 0106 (AAC), which is the first time the Diffuse Mesothelioma Payment Scheme (“DMPS”) has been considered at an appellate level. It gave guidance on the scope of the scheme, as well as wider points on the nature of an appeal before the First Tier Tribunal (“FTT”) and on statutory interpretation.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd June 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Safe workplaces and the commute to work – how far does section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 go? – Six Pump Court

‘On 11 May 2020, the Government published practical Guidance[1] in a bid to encourage workplaces to be made as safe as possible for returning employees during the Covid-19 pandemic. Whilst the Guidance has been developed in consultation with unions and industry bodies, there still exists the very real possibility that employees do not have sufficient confidence that their workplaces are, in fact, ‘Covid-19 secure’ and consider that by returning, they have been subjected to a detriment by their employer.’

Full Story

Six Pump Court, 9th June 2020

Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk

Just a walk in the Park – No. 5 Chambers

‘The interplay of cases and statutes including some from the last century hardly makes for exciting bedtime reading but Barlow v Wigan MBC is an important decision for those who suffer injury as a result of a highway defect particularly if they are walking on a path in a park established many years ago. It is also a tribute to solicitors and counsel who pursue such claims with dogged determination, and in the case of those acting for Claimants, at a risk if the claim is unsuccessful of receiving no payment in return.’

Full Story

No. 5 Chambers, 8th June 2020

Source: www.no5.com

Jake Hinks: The Coronavirus Act 2020: An Example of ‘Excessive Executive Dominance’ – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘The concept of executive dominance should be split into two: natural and excessive executive dominance. Executive dominance is the executive’s power to control, impede or perform the role of another branch of the constitution. The UK constitution lacks a clear-cut distinction between the three organs of the state and has evolved to achieve a balance between the three branches. The relationship between and the responsibilities of the executive and legislature are overlapping. In this evolved constitutional setup, natural executive dominance is necessary for the executive to carry out its constitutional role and the UK’s constitution to operate efficiently. Natural dominance is a consequence of the working of the UK constitution.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 9th June 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

R (Flores) v Southwark LBC [2020] EWHC 1279 (Admin) – 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square

‘The Administrative Court dismissed a challenge to the local authority’s decision as to the level of priority to be awarded under their housing allocation scheme to a family living in accommodation which had become statutorily overcrowded as a result of children growing older. The Court interpreted the meaning of the applicant’s “deliberate act” under the scheme.’

Full Story

4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 29th May 2020

Source: www.4-5.co.uk

Court of Appeal deals blow to libel tourists – Law Society’s Gazette

‘England and Wales’ courts may be less open to international libel litigation following a Court of Appeal ruling which interprets legislation against ’libel tourism’. In Craig Wright v Roger Ver, the court upheld a decision by the High Court that England and Wales was not the appropriate place to hear a defamation action against claims published on social media by a US-born citizen of St Kitts & Nevis now resident in Japan.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 2nd June 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill: The Struggle to Balance Legislative Protection With Civil Liberties By Paul Canfield – Broadway House Chambers

‘As the Government unveils a new Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill, this article briefly looks at the struggle to balance legislative protection with civil liberties in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in R v Adams (Appellant) (Northern Ireland) [2020] UKSC 19.’

Full Story

Broadway House Chambers, 29th May 2020

Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk

Coronavirus Act 2020: Does it permit mandatory vaccinations? – Garden Court Chambers

‘There are multiple human rights and civil liberties implications both globally and domestically arising from the response to COVID-19 and the current crisis. Some of them are very real and concerning. Others are scaremongering and simply not true.’

Full Story

Garden Court Chambers, 1st May 2020

Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk

Case Comment: Aspen Underwriting Ltd and others v Credit Europe Bank NV [2020] UKSC 11 – UKSC Blog

‘In this post, Alaina Wadsworth and Sophie Newman, who both work within the insurance and reinsurance group at CMS, comment on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court last month in the matter of Aspen Underwriting Ltd and others v Credit Europe Bank NV [2020] UKSC 11.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 5th May 2020

Source: ukscblog.com