Sannie and another v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] WLR (D) 419
“A European Economic Area residence card did not exist in perpetuity once granted and the Secretary of State for the Home Department could revoke a residence card if a lack of entitlement was established.”
WLR Daily, 30th October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Law in Action speaks exclusively to Mr Justice Burton, president of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal – a judicial body, independent of the government, which considers complaints brought against the intelligence services, the police, military and local authorities. It specifically investigates whether surveillance has been conducted in a lawful manner.”
BBC Law in Action, 5th November 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“One of proposals in the Ministry of Justice’s paper on Judicial Review: Proposals for Further Reform is the creation of a new specialist planning chamber as part of the Upper Tribunal. While planning tends to be thought of as a niche area of public law (and a technically dense one at that) the way in which the paper frames discussion should give public lawyers pause for thought. This is particularly when planning judicial reviews have often been cited by government representatives as examples of why reform is needed to judicial review. The Further Reforms paper is no exception – the only two ‘case studies’ (albeit no case names) given in the paper are of judicial review of planning decisions (p 5 and 6).”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 1st November 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“There was no presumption that the eligibility guidelines issued by the UNHCR in relation to Iraq should be followed unless there were cogent reasons for not doing so.”
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Upper Tribunal has issued two decisions on information rights matters this week. Both are by Upper Tribunal Judge David Williams, and both include substantive treatments of some of the issues that arise most commonly in information rights litigation.”
Panopticon, 25th October 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“A woman who claimed £100,000 in disability benefits because of a shoe allergy must return to work, officials say.”
Daily Telegraph, 24th October 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Niebel v Information Commissioner is the first Tribunal decision about penalties under the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (‘PECR’). Mr.Niebel successfully appealed against a penalty of £300,000.”
Panopticon, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“As part of a recent EU project, Marc Willers has produced this rough guide to the Civil Appeal System in England and Wales.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 22nd October 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“The union is bringing a legal challenge over the introduction of fees for employment tribunals to the High Court tomorrow.”
Daily Telegraph, 21st October 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Two devoutly religious beekeepers who reject modern technology have won the right not to fill in their VAT returns online after claiming it breached their human rights.”
The Independent, 21st October 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The new president of the court that examines complaints about the intelligence services and government surveillance has indicated he may publish advance notice of its public hearings for the first time.”
The Guardian, 14th October 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Arbitration is increasingly sport’s forum of choice for determining disputes. But the widespread adoption of this private and confidential process brings problems of its own. For example, how can parties ensure consistency of decision-making if they are unable to access decisions that have gone before? And what is to be done if different parties have the same dispute with a governing body, but there is no consent that the disputes be heard together?”
Sports Law Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 10th October 2013
Source: www.sportslawbulletin.org
“Dealing with confidential information in competition cases can be tricky. The CAT’s recent judgment in BMI Healthcare and others v Competition Commission [2013] CAT 241 provides some help.”
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 11th October 2013
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
“MF (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1192. In what circumstances can a foreign criminal resist deportation on the basis of his right to family life under Article 8 of the Convention? Until 2012 this question was governed entirely by judge-made case law. Then rules 398, 399 and 399A were introduced into the Immigration Rules HC 395.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th October 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Lord Sugar’s bid to recover costs from the winner of TV’s The Apprentice after she lost a constructive dismissal claim against him has failed.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The bedroom tax First Tier Tribunal decisions are coming in now. And they are intriguing. In some ways, not a surprise, in others somewhat opaque. As well as the first Fife decision, there are another four Fife decisions that I’ve now seen, and a rather frustrating one from Westminster.”
NearlyLegal, 24th September 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Law can be expensive.
This is particularly so in relation to the process of law, i.e. the costs of going to the law. By this I mean things such as the court or tribunal fees, but particularly the costs of the lawyers. If you lose in civil litigation, the normal rule is that you’ve got to pay not just for your own lawyers, but for the other side’s too. Due to the way that costs are assessed and recovered, even the winner often has to foot the bill for some their own lawyers’ fees. It is fair to say that the general public doesn’t think too highly of the fees charged by lawyers. Now, a lot of the criticism is unfair (‘If you think a professional is expensive, wait ’til you try an amateur’) and based on misinformation and misunderstanding. Nonetheless, there is force in some of the criticism.”
NearlyLegal, 24th September 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“Charles Crow considers how Claimants can move their cases between the Tribunal and the Court without getting caught by the doctrine of estoppel.”
No. 5 Chambers, 16th September 2013
Source: www.no5.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024