“Only two of almost 150 race claims made against the country’s largest police force in the past four years have been upheld at tribunals, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.”
Daily Telegraph, 20th February 2010
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The catering trade and retailers won their court battle today over the charges they pay for playing recorded music. High Court judge Mr Justice Arnold upheld a ruling from a Copyright Tribunal which the Institute of Licensing said will mean pubs, hotels and restaurants across Britain will now receive up to £20 million in refunds.”
The Independent, 12th February 2010
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The government’s equalities watchdog, set up to promote human rights and tackle discrimination, has been the subject of 15 employment tribunals in which it has been accused of sexism, racism and discriminating against pregnant women, according to the latest figures.”
The Guardian, 12th February 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The new body which has taken over the power to rule on appeals from decisions of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has issued guidance on how to conduct an appeal.”
OUT-LAW.com, 1st February 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
“Motorists who fall victim to rogue clampers will be entitled to claim compensation, under new powers brought in by the Government.”
Daily Telegraph, 29th January 2010
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A cellarman at one of Britain’s most prestigious barristers’ inns claimed he was sacked for trying to prevent his colleagues from stealing bottles of wine, a tribunal heard.”
Daily Telegraph, 20th January 2010
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The appeals process for freedom of information and data protection cases changes from today as the previous structure is absorbed into a wider tribunals service.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th January 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
“Judges rule battle to publish book must be pursued in secretive investigatory powers tribunal.”
The Guardian, 9th December 2009
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
R (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service [2009] UKSC 12; [2009] WLR (D) 356
“Jurisdiction to hear a claim against the intelligence services for a violation of the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by art 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was granted exclusively to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (“IPT”) by s 65(2)(a) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Therefore the High Court had no jurisdiction to hear an application for judicial review brought by a former member of the Security Service in respect of a refusal of permission to publish a book about his work with the service.”
WLR Daily, 9th December 2009
Source; www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“A consultation on increases to fees for the Lands Tribunal (the Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal).”
Ministry of Justice, 1st December 2009
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
Oxfam v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2009] EWHC 3078 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 348
“The VAT & Duties Tribunal had jurisdiction under s 83(1)(c) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 to determine an appeal concerning recovery of input value added tax where the claim was based upon public law principles and the doctrine of legitimate expectation.”
WLR Daily, 1st December 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Hundreds of Afghans living in Britain face being deported after immigration judges ruled that their home country’s bloody conflict did not make the region an unsafe place to return failed asylum-seekers.”
The Independent, 23rd October 2009
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The Information Tribunal misunderstood part of a Freedom of Information (FOI) Act request and failed to properly adjudicate other parts of it, the High Court has said. The case must be re-considered by the Tribunal.”
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd July 2009
Source: www.out-law.com
Her Majesty’s Treasury v Information Commissioner [2009] EWHC 1811 (Admin); [2009] WLR (D) 251
“The convention that law officers’ advice to ministerial departments should not be disclosed without their consent continued to operate after the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, but was subject to the principles of that Act.”
WLR Daily, 22nd July 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Enron Coal Services Ltd (in liquidation) v English Welsh and Scottish Railway Ltd
Court of Appeal
“A challenge to a finding by a regulator of infringement of a prohibition, including the prohibition on the abuse of a dominant position, should be made to the Competition Appeal Tribunal under section 46 of the Competition Act 1998. A claim for damages based on a definitive finding of infringement by a regulator was to be made under section 47A of the 1998 Act, as inserted by section 18(1) of the Enterprise Act 2002.”
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“The jurisdiction of the Competition Appeal Tribunal under s 47A of the Competition Act 1998 was limited to the determination of follow-on claims for damages based on a finding by a regulator of infringement of a relevant prohibition. Such a finding was not only a pre-condition to the making of a s 47A(1) claim, it also determined and defined the claim’s limits and the tribunal’s jurisdiction in respect of it. The Court of Appeal had jurisdiction under s 49 of the 1998 Act to hear an appeal against a strike-out decision of the tribunal under r 40 of the Competition Appeal Tribunal Rules 2003, whether that decision was to strike out or not to strike out a claim.”
WLR Daily, 2nd July 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The phrase ‘further submissions’, in the context of the Secretary of State’s obligation under r 353 of the Immigration Rules to consider whether any such submissions amounted to a fresh claim for asylum, merely meant representations, whether new or not, and those representations could be short or long, advanced on either asylum or human rights grounds, and reasoned or unreasoned. Where further submissions had in fact been found to have been made, and the question of whether they had already been considered was being asked for the purposes of ascertaining whether they were ‘significantly different’, within the meaning of r 353, and therefore might amount to a fresh claim, it was clear that no particular form was required in which new material to be put before the Secretary of State had to be cast, and that such new material might assert a human rights or asylum claim in a different category from what had been claimed the first time and that, alternatively, the same category of claim may be persisted in, but new facts asserted to support it. Where such previously unconsidered further submissions were found to have been made and the question was being asked whether, taken together with previously considered material, they enjoyed a realistic prospect of success within the meaning of r 353, and amounted thereby to a fresh claim, ‘realistic prospect of success’ meant ‘more than a fanciful such prospect’ and was not the same as a case which was clearly unfounded, the latter being a case with no prospect of success.”
WLR Daily, 19th June 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Tough new measures to improve the payment of employment tribunal awards and reduce the costs of enforcing unpaid ones were announced today by Justice Secretary Jack Straw.”
Ministry of Justice, 19th May 2009
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
Regina (G) v Governors of X School
Queen’s Bench Division
“An employee of a school facing a disciplinary committee for allegations of sexual misconduct was entitled to an enhanced measure of procedural protection afforded by article 6.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, guaranteeing the right to a fair hearing, which included the right to legal representation at the disciplinary hearing.”
Times Law Reports, 24th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
H (a Child) v East Sussex County Council
Court of Appeal
“Special educational needs tribunals were required to give only summary reasons for their decisions.”
The Times, 22nd April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024