‘Widespread relief that the panel tasked with conducting an independent review of administrative law did not recommend wholesale reform of judicial review proved short-lived when the lord chancellor revealed that the report was just a “starting point”. It quickly became apparent that the government wants to go much further than Lord Faulks’ recommendations.’
Law Society's Gazette, 26th April 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘There was nothing in the CPR that could make good a mistake by a trainee solicitor in not serving a claim form in time, even though it was down to the disruption of Covid, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 21st April 2021
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor (2021) EWCA Civ 492. This was the second appeal, to the Court of Appeal, of a relief from forfeiture matter for commercial property that we have previously seen in the High Court (our report here). The issue was whether a relief from forfeiture application made just within 6 months of the date of forfeiture was brought with ‘reasonable promptitude’ for the purposes of the equitable relief from from forfeiture.’
Nearly Legal, 18th April 2021
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Honourable Mrs Justice Ellenbogen, sitting in the EAT, held that a tribunal had erred in extending time under s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 (“EqA 2010”), by failing to determine whether a claimant’s ignorance of his right to claim direct race discrimination was reasonable.’
3PB, 2nd March 2021
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘Some breaches of contract do not become apparent until many years have passed. This is especially true where the result is a defect. Recently, our colleague Charlotte Mears blogged on limitation periods under contract. But what happens after the limitation period under a contract has expired? This blog explores the extent to which an answer lies in tort focusing on the tort of negligence.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog , 7th April 2021
‘On the face of it, the law of limitation seems fairly straightforward. The law in England and Wales specifies that anyone bringing a breach of contract claim has six years from the date of the breach in which to do so. This period is extended to 12 years from the breach of contract if the contract has been executed as a deed. But what happens when a provision such as the one below is added into the mix? Does this work to extend the limitation period? If not, what exactly does this provision, which I’ll refer to as the Proposed Clause, mean?’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 23rd March 2021
‘A year since the Coronavirus Act 2020 received Royal Assent, Parliament will today (25 March 2021) once more debate the Coronavirus Act 2020 and its effects, effectiveness, and continuation. The Coronavirus Act 2020 is a touchpoint in the legal and regulatory response to the pandemic.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 25th March 2021
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘In Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses v BXB [2021] EWCA Civ 356, Mrs B and her husband had attended the Kingdom Hall in Barry and in 1986 Mrs B was baptised as a Jehovah’s Witness. They became friendly with another couple, Mark and Mary Sewell. Mark Sewell was a ministerial servant and subsequently became an elder. On 30 April 1990, Sewell raped Mrs B in a room in his house – and that fact was undisputed. In 2014, Sewell was convicted of raping Mrs B and of indecently assaulting a girl aged under 14, CXC, and another individual and sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment. Mrs B sued the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania and the Trustees of the Barry Congregation and, at first instance, Chamberlain J held them vicariously liable for her rape. (He also determined that it was equitable to extend the time to allow the claims to proceed, pursuant to s.33 Limitation Act 1980). He awarded Mrs B £62,000 for psychiatric injuries attributable to the rape. On appeal, the defendants disputed.’
Law & Religion UK, 24th March 2021
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
‘Councils in England are to be given more freedom on how they spend the money received from homes sold through Right to Buy, Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick has said.’
Local Government Lawyer, 22nd March 2021
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Ngnoguem v Milton Keynes Council (2020] EWCA Civ 396, We’ve seen this prefigured in Stanley v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (2020) EWCA Civ 1458 (our note), but the relevant parts of that judgment on late reviews were strictly obiter, as the court had found that there was an agreement to extend time. Now the Court of Appeal has confirmed the position.’
Nearly Legal, 21st March 2021
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Karl Maroni, 33, has spent all his adult life in jail.’
BBC News, 19th March 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘More than 3,600 people – almost a third of England’s remand prison population – have been held beyond the legal time limit awaiting trials as the pandemic wreaks havoc on the legal process.’
The Guardian, 17th March 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Few would have thought back on 1 March 2020 that we would, some 12 months later, be facing the first birthday of the strictest restrictions on personal freedoms in living memory. As we approach the anniversary of the first lockdown on 23 March 2020, it seems appropriate that we reconsider one of key questions of family lawyers back in Spring 2020, that of whether the pandemic was likely to satisfy the principles set down in the 1987 case of Barder v Barder [1987] 2 FLR 480. Unprecedented times, there is no doubt, but unprecedented enough to constitute a Barder event?’
Family Law, 12th March 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Government has extended the ban on bailiff-enforced evictions in all but the most serious circumstances and the requirement for landlords to provide six-month notice periods to residential tenants before they evict until at least 31 May.’
Local Government Lawyer, 10th March 2021
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A couple of Upper Tribunal decisions on rent repayment order appeals, with broader significance.’
Nearly Legal, 6th March 2021
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Companies that fail to meet the gender pay gap reporting deadline of 4 April will be given a six-month reprieve before any enforcement action is taken against them. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said companies should report by the deadline if possible, but confirmed it would not begin enforcement proceedings until 4 October.’
The Guardian, 22nd February 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘An allegation of an offence in an information or charge must describe the offence in ordinary language and make it clear what the prosecutor alleges. Amendments to section 179 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) mean that it is no longer necessary, when prosecuting a defendant for non-compliance with an enforcement notice, to aver within the information the date upon which the period of compliance expired. The court held that the exact moment at which the compliance period expired was no longer of critical or defining importance. It is a necessary inference within an information that the date upon which the offence is said to have been committed, occurred after the period of compliance had expired. The prosecutor would still need to prove as a fact that the date for compliance had expired, but this fact was not essential to enable the defendant to understand what the prosecutor was alleging.’
5SAH, 16th February 2021
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
‘The Food Standards Agency (“FSA”) made three applications for the issue of a summons to commence proceedings against Bakers of Nailsea Ltd (“BNL”), the food business operator for an abattoir in Nailsea, near Bristol, for offences contrary to the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013 (“the 2013 Regulations”).’
St Philips Barristers, 9th February 2021
Source: st-philips.com
‘An automatic entitlement to costs under part 36 only arises if the offer is accepted within the “relevant period”, the High Court has ruled.’
Legal Futures, 21st January 2021
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘An important Judgment on the validity of an overseas marriage, and compliance with the significant procedural rules which apply if one wishes to defend divorce petitions, has recently been handed down in the case of N v N (Afghanistan: Validity of an overseas marriage: Procedure) [2020]. Jennifer Lee of Pump Court Chambers acted for the successful petitioner, who was seeking a divorce from the respondent. The parties disagreed over whether a marriage ceremony (held by proxy) in the 1980s had taken place, and whether it should be recognised as a valid marriage in this jurisdiction. There were procedural difficulties stemming from a marriage certificate not having been attached to the petition and non-compliance with the FPR and court orders by the respondent. The Court noted that there were many reasons why a valid marriage certificate might not be available, and the FPR clearly contemplated such a situation and provided for it. There was nothing in the FPR or the authorities cited which provided for there being no requirement to file an acknowledgement of service or an answer where a petitioner had not filed a valid marriage certificate.’
Pump Court Chambers, 8th January 2021
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024