Category: Supreme Court

Four Reasons for Retaining the Charter: Part 2 – Remedies – Oxford Human Rights Hub

Posted February 5th, 2018 in appeals, brexit, constitutional reform, EC law, human rights, news, Supreme Court, treaties, working time by sally

‘The previous blog post drew attention to the way in which the scope of rights protected in the UK may be diminished post Brexit if the Charter is not retained as part of domestic law. The second reason for retaining the Charter draws attention to the remedy provided when rights are breached. Individuals relying on the Charter at the moment can use the Charter to disapply legislation which breaches Charter rights. This is a legally binding remedy which invalidates the relevant legislation. This is not the case for those relying on common law rights, or their Convention rights under the Human Rights Act.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 4th February 2018

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

Supreme Court begins to hear arguments regarding website blocking for trade mark infringements – OUT-LAW.com

Posted January 31st, 2018 in internet, news, Supreme Court, trade marks by sally

‘A case before the UK’s Supreme Court is set to provide guidance on whether and to what extent internet service providers (ISPs) will be expected to pick up the cost of blocking customers’ access to websites that facilitate the sale of fake goods, an intellectual property law expert has said.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 30th January 2018

Source: www.out-law.com

New judgment: R (Gibson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2018] UKSC 2 – UKSC Blog

Posted January 30th, 2018 in confiscation, interest, magistrates, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The issue in the appeal is whether interest is included in the starting point under the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, s 79(2) for the giving of proportionate credit for part payment of a confiscation order.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 24th January 2018

Source: ukscblog.com

‘Someone has to make a stand’: widow’s battle for cohabiting couples – The Guardian

Posted January 29th, 2018 in appeals, benefits, bereavement, cohabitation, news, Northern Ireland, social security, Supreme Court, widows by sally

‘Siobhan McLaughlin’s case goes before supreme court as pressure grows to end legal inequality.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 27th January 2018

Source: www.theguardian.com

Joanna Bell: Dover DC v CPRE Kent: Legal Complexity and Reason-Giving in Planning Law – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted January 23rd, 2018 in appeals, local government, news, planning, Supreme Court by sally

‘Where a public authority determines an application for planning permission in what form, and in what level of detail, must the authority set out the reasons for their decision? What, furthermore, are the consequences of failing to provide reasons which meet the requisite standard? The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dover DC v Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), Kent is a clear reminder that there is no singular, straightforward answer to these questions. Thus reason-giving requirements vary in planning law according to, at least, the decision-maker under review (local authority, officer exercising delegated powers or the Secretary of State), whether planning permission is refused or granted, the nature of the development for which permission is sought and the type of land to which the application relates.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 22nd January 2018

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Smoking ban cannot be enforced in jails, UK supreme court rules – The Guardian

Posted December 20th, 2017 in Crown, health & safety, news, prisons, smoking, Supreme Court by sally

‘A prisoner suffering from poor health has lost his attempt to enforce the smoking ban in English and Welsh jails after the supreme court ruled that crown premises are effectively exempt from the enforcement of health regulations.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 19th December 2017

Source: www.theguardian.com

Supreme court vacancies lead to hopes for greater diversity – The Guardian

Posted December 14th, 2017 in diversity, judiciary, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The supreme court has advertised for several more justices in a recruitment process that could boost diversity on the UK’s highest court.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 14th December 2017

Source: www.theguardian.com

Exclusive: “The impact has been devastating but I have to stand up to discrimination,” says barrister suing BSB – Legal Futures

Posted December 13th, 2017 in barristers, limitations, news, professional conduct, race discrimination, Supreme Court by sally

‘The barrister who won the first stage of her battle with the Bar Standards Board (BSB) at the Supreme Court last week said the impact of almost five years of litigation had been “completely devastating” for her law firm.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 13th December 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Tiuta International Limited (in liquidation) v De Villiers Surveyor s Limited [2017] UKSC 77 – Hailsham Chambers

Posted December 8th, 2017 in loans, negligence, news, Supreme Court, valuation by sally

‘The decision in Tiuta continues the series of recent Supreme Court decisions that make for essential reading among professional liability practitioners.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, 29th November 2017

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

Reinforcing the Veil – Defending Cases Where the Corporate Veil is Threatened – Drystone Chambers

Posted December 8th, 2017 in company directors, company law, confiscation, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘“The corporate veil” is a much discussed, but much misunderstood phrase. When Lord Halsbury LC stated in Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd [1897] AC 22 that a limited liability company was to be viewed ‘like any other independent person with its rights and liabilities appropriate to itself’ he imbedded in law the idea of corporations having a separate legal identity from their directors. That principle is agreed. What has been in dispute, and is still uncertain to a degree, is when that separation can be made. ‘

Full Story

Drystone Chambers, 4th December 2017

Source: drystone.com

Time Limits under the Human Rights Act 1998: what is a “course of conduct”? – Cloisters

Posted December 8th, 2017 in barristers, disciplinary procedures, human rights, limitations, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘Anna Beale discusses the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the time limit provisions contained in the Human Rights Act 1998 in O’Connor v Bar Standards Board [2017] UKSC 78.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 7th December 2017

Source: www.cloisters.com

Essop & Naeem in the Supreme Court: giving answers and provoking new questions in indirect discrimination – Cloisters

Posted December 8th, 2017 in age discrimination, employment tribunals, news, race discrimination, reasons, religious discrimination, Supreme Court by sally

‘This summer’s Supreme Court decision in Essop reinstated the established postition in indirect discrimination cases – that there is no requirement for a claimant to establish the reason for disadvantage arising from the provision, criterion or practice in question.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 6th December 2017

Source: www.cloisters.com

Supreme Court go-ahead for barrister’s race claim against regulator – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted December 7th, 2017 in appeals, barristers, disciplinary procedures, human rights, news, professional conduct, race discrimination, Supreme Court by sally

‘A practising barrister who alleges that her regulator discriminated against her on grounds of her race in bringing disciplinary proceedings has won the backing of the UK’s highest court. In O’Connor v Bar Standards Board, five Supreme Court justices unanimously granted Daphne Evadney Portia O’Connor’s appeal against a Bar Standards Board decision to strike out a claim that the BSB had acted unlawfully in charging her with professional misconduct.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 6th December 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Supreme Court rejects appeal by council over reasons for planning decision – Local Government Lawyer

Posted December 7th, 2017 in appeals, areas of outstanding natural beauty, local government, news, planning, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court has unanimously rejected a council’s appeal over the quashing of the grant of planning permission for a controversial residential development in an area of outstanding natural beauty.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 6th December 2017

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Supreme Court rules on time limitation for claims under the Human Rights Act – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted December 7th, 2017 in appeals, barristers, disciplinary procedures, human rights, limitations, news, Supreme Court, time limits by sally

‘The Supreme Court has ruled that a barrister’s claim against the Bar Standards Board for discrimination should not be time barred under the one year limit prescribed by the Human Rights Act. In her case, the Court said, the time limit for bringing proceedings only started running when she successfully appealed against disciplinary action taken against her. The decision to bring disciplinary proceedings and the subsequent hearings were part of a single process, not a series of disparate acts which set the time limitation period running.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 6th December 2017

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Uber request to take drivers’ rights case directly to top UK court rejected – Daily Telegraph

Posted December 5th, 2017 in appeals, courts, employment, news, Supreme Court, taxis by tracey

‘Uber’s request to take its appeal to overturn a ruling over drivers’ rights directly to the UK’s highest court, skipping the Court of Appeal, has been rejected.’

Full Story

Daily Telegraph, 4th December 2017

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Thomas Fairclough: Privacy International: Constitutional Substance over Semantics in Reading Ouster Clauses – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted December 4th, 2017 in investigatory powers, judicial review, legal language, news, parliament, rule of law, statutory interpretation, Supreme Court, tribunals, warrants by sally

‘I have previously written on this blog and elsewhere about statutory interpretation and the rule of law. In the previous blog post I stated that the idea “that the courts will not allow the executive to escape their jurisdiction is well established as part of the rule of law” and referenced, inter alia, Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147 (HL) to support this view.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 4th December 2017

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

The expansion of Vicarious Liability: Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council [2017] UKSC 60 – Park Square Barristers

Posted November 23rd, 2017 in appeals, fostering, local government, news, Supreme Court, vicarious liability by sally

‘In determining whether to impose vicarious liability the court has to consider what sort of relationship has to exist between an individual and a defendant before the defendant can be made vicariously liable in tort for the conduct of that individual? (The first requirement) A classic example of a relationship which gives rise to vicarious liability is that of employer and employee.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 9th November 2017

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Michalak v General Medical Council – Blackstone Chambers

Posted November 23rd, 2017 in appeals, disability discrimination, doctors, employment tribunals, news, race discrimination, sex discrimination, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court has decided that a doctor is not prevented from suing the GMC in the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) under the Equality Act 2010 (“2010 Act”) by the availability of judicial review.’

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 1st November 2017

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

A Case of Little Interest? The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Littlewoods – Blackstone Chambers

Posted November 23rd, 2017 in appeals, HM Revenue & Customs, interest, news, Supreme Court, time limits, VAT by sally

‘The Supreme Court (‘SC’) on 1 November 2017 handed down judgment in Littlewoods Ltd and others v. HMRC [2017] UKSC 70. In a judgment of Lords Reed and Hodge (with whom Lords Neuberger, Clarke and Carnwath) agreed, the SC has unanimously allowed HMRC’s appeal against the decisions below of both Henderson J and the Court of Appeal (Arden, Patten and Floyd LJJ). The headline grabbing outcome is that approximately £17 billion of compound interest does not have to be paid by the Revenue to taxpayers who overpaid VAT and made Fleming claims for recovery. But the SC’s reasoning is of much wider interest.’

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 2nd November 2017

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com