‘Ten senior judicial appointments were announced yesterday, with Lady Justice Arden becoming the third woman to sit on the Supreme Court.’
Litigation Futures, 28th June 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Five Supreme Court Justices have ruled in favour of a heterosexual couple whose three and a half year legal campaign challenged legislation preventing opposite-sex couples from entering into a civil partnership. The court unanimously agreed that the Civil Partnership Act 2004 is ‘incompatible’ with the European Convention on Human Rights as it applies only to same-sex couples and therefore amounted to discrimination.
This judgment will likely put the Government under significant pressure to change the law and allow heterosexual couples to become civil partners. Currently, opposite-sex couples may only marry, whilst same-sex couples may opt to marry or enter into a civil partnership.’
Family Law, 28th June 2018
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Often, the road to equality is long and arduous, just ask the same-sex couples who had to wait until the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 for recognition of the right to marry or those whose right to legal recognition will still feel a long way off. On any view, the road to equality in civil partnerships will be shorter. But that route has had its own difficulties and the significance of the success of this appeal should not be underestimated.’
Supreme Court Blog, 28th June 2018
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that lack of provision in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 for opposite-sex couples to enter into a civil partnership is incompatible with human rights law.’
Family Law, 27th June 2018
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court will hand down Judgment on Wednesday 27th June 2018 in R (on the application of Steinfeld and another) v Secretary of State for the International Development (in substitution for the Home Secretary and the Education Secretary).’
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th June 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A heterosexual couple who were denied the right to enter into a civil partnership have won their claim at the UK’s highest court that they have suffered discrimination.’
The Guardian, 27th June 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Supreme Court judgment in the Pimlico Plumbers case has been hailed as a victory for workers in the gig economy – and a blow for organisations that rely on large numbers of ‘self-employed’ contractors. In fact, the judgment largely confirms what we already knew – that employment status must be considered on the individual facts of each case and what happens on the ground is more important than the wording of the contract.’
Law Society's Gazette, 25th June 2018
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘On 17 May, the Supreme Court heard the case of Owens v Owens. It is the first time that the ‘fault based’ divorce provisions in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) have been considered by the highest court.’
Family Law, 21st June 2018
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Pimlico Plumbers Ltd’s appeal and upheld the Employment Tribunal’s ruling that the Respondent – Mr Smith – a plumbing and heating engineer had been:
(a) a “worker” within the meaning of section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996;
(b) a “worker” within the meaning of regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833)
(c) in Pimlico’s “employment” within the meaning of section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On 17 May, the Supreme Court heard the case of Owens v Owens . It is the first time that the ‘fault based’ divorce provisions in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) have been considered by the highest court.’
New Law Journal, 15th June 2018
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘In a landmark decision this week, the UK’s Supreme Court held that a plumber was entitled to employment rights during his time working for Pimlico Plumbers – despite the company saying he was only a freelance contractor. RightsInfo takes a look at what impact this ruling might have on others working in the so-called ‘gig-economy’?’
Rights Info, 15th June 2018
Source: rightsinfo.org
‘The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom concluded on the 7th June 2018 that Northern Ireland’s laws on termination of pregnancy are incompatible with human rights. More specifically, in situations of rape, incest and fatal foetal abnormality a majority of the judges concluded that the law breaches the right to private life protected by article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court highlighted the disproportionate nature of the interference, which stresses and humiliates women and girls experiencing a time of crisis. It further recognised the possibility that individual cases, in the three circumstances, may fall within the scope of article 3 and reach the threshold of severity required to be considered inhuman and degrading.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 14th June 2018
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘A stamp duty land tax (SDLT) claim by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in connection with the purchase of the former Chelsea Barracks in London, worth a potential £50 million, has been restored by the UK Supreme Court.’
OUT-LAW.com, 14th June 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Internet service providers (ISPs) will not generally be responsible for picking up the costs of implementing court orders to block customers’ access to websites that infringe intellectual property (IP) rights, according to the UK’s highest court.’
OUT-LAW.com, 13th June 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The Supreme Court has ruled that a plumber classed as self-employed was in fact a worker in a landmark case for the gig economy.’
The Independent, 13th June 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘All eyes were on the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) last week as it gave judgment in In Re Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s Application for Judicial Review [2018] UKSC 27, the case challenging the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) compatibility of Northern Ireland’s abortion legislation. Such a case is always bound to be headline-grabbing and controversial. But even more heat than usual was generated by this case. For starters, it followed swiftly after the Republic of Ireland’s referendum vote to repeal the Eighth Amendment of its Constitution, which acknowledges the equal right to life of the unborn child. That led to public and political pressure for change on the other side of the border too. But the Northern Ireland Assembly has been suspended since January 2017 and Westminster legislating in this area in its absence – particularly if prompted by the UKSC – would provoke controversy. The Conservative Government’s Confidence and Supply Agreement with the traditionally pro-life Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) further complicates the possibility of reform on this side of the Irish Sea. The outcome of a challenge to the compatibility of the Northern Ireland legislation was therefore keenly anticipated by many. In the event, a Court of seven declined (by a majority) to make the declaration of incompatibility due to a lack of standing. Given the Court’s conclusions, however, the judgment may effectively be a declaration in all but name.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 12th June 2018
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Supreme Court judges have said Northern Ireland’s abortion law violates human rights, but rejected a challenge brought by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIIHRC) on technical grounds.’
The Independent, 7th June 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court will look again this week at a case that split the Court of Appeal and was widely felt to have serious implications for clinical negligence law. Justices will hear the appeal in Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust after a challenge from the paralysed claimant was dismissed by majority in the Court of Appeal last year.’
Law Society's Gazette, 6th June 2018
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘It has been a busy nine months since Lady Hale assumed formal leadership of the UK Supreme Court. During this time she has sworn-in three new colleagues, lead the court on a historic sitting in Northern Ireland, delivered or contributed to judgments in relation to police investigations of violent crime, cohabitee’s pension rights, the treatment of Alfie Evans and smoking bans, spoken to university students, school pupils and west London law clinic volunteers, travelled overseas, delivered speeches on marriage reform, legal aid, religious dress, and the upcoming anniversary of women’s entry into the legal profession, overseen a senior appointments round, and – of course – made an appearance on BBC’s Masterchef.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 30th May 2018
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Mitchell Abbott, trainee in the dispute resolution team at CMS, offers comment on the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Rock Advertising Limited v MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited [2018] UKSC 24.’
Supreme Court Blog, 18th May 2018
Source: ukscblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024