‘Criterion Group – the landlord of c. £4bn of property in central London – has been required by Mr Justice Richards to repay hundreds of thousands of pounds of overcharged insurance rent to one of its tenants, Picturehouse Cinemas.’
Wiberforce Chambers, 29th May 2025
Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk
‘Thousands of criminal cases – including some of the most serious violent and sexual offences – are collapsing every year because of lost, damaged or missing evidence, the BBC has found.’
BBC News, 6th June 2025
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘It’s the return of our popular Remind Me About series, summarising particular areas of pensions law for newly-qualified practitioners or those wanting to brush up on the subject. This week, Daniel Jukes of Wilberforce Chambers considers the topical issue of winding up DB schemes.’
Pensions Barrister, 5th June 2025
Source: www.pensionsbarrister.com
‘It’s late evening, and your phone vibrates with some banter from colleagues. You join the conversation and go to bed feeling part of the work community. You then wake up and have a feeling of apprehension as to how the messages will be perceived.’
The Independent, 4th June 2025
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Victims of rape and serious sexual assault who face their cases being dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service will be given the right to request a review under a government pilot.’
The Guardian, 5th June 2025
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The decision of the UK Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] is one that has generated a rapid response, from the photos of those celebrating the decision on the steps of the UKSC, to the massive wave of protest from trans people and allies. Within the legal world, it has unleashed a flurry of commentary, the excellent analysis by Crash Wigley being a notable example. As such, this post will not replicate Wigley’s analysis, but will instead draw upon and develop the point that she makes in her work: that there are a series of silences in the judgment. This is interesting when considered with the work of Louis Althusser, for whom silences are not accidental but reveal important tensions about the text.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 5th June 2025
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The high-profile founder of a private animal sanctuary has won an appeal against a decision by Uttlesford District Council to refuse her application to keep ring-tailed Lemurs.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th June 2025
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A toddler who was starved by his parents and buried in their garden was “invisible and lost” to child services, a review has said.’
The Guardian, 4th June 2025
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The new interim chairwoman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has told the BBC she will do “whatever it takes” to reform the embattled legal appeals body.’
BBC News, 4th June 2025
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This Consultation Paper is about new funerary methods in England and Wales. It is part of the Law Commission’s wider project on Burial, Cremation and New Funerary Methods. New funerary methods are ways of dealing with the bodies of deceased people that are potential alternatives to burial, cremation and burial at sea.’
Law Commission, 4th June 2025
Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk/
‘A scheme aiming to turn children arrested for violence away from crime has claimed staggering success, with up to nine out of 10 diverted from further offending, according to a report.’
The Guardian, 4th June 2025
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In limited circumstances solicitors have a duty to advise their client that they may have been negligent. Allegations of breach of that duty normally arise in the context of claims which are brought after the normal six-year limitation period, and after three years from the date of knowledge. One may think that such claims would be rare, but in my experience they are not that unusual. There are, though, limited reported cases on the issue, and the recent case of Evans v Hughes Fowler Carruthers [2025] EWHC 481 (Ch) is therefore of some interest.’
4 New Square, 22nd 22nd May 2025
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘This week we cover:
– Thames Water – OfWat imposes its largest ever penalty;
– OfWat’s attack on Thames Water’s dividends.
– Climate protest – the 4 appeal cases about sentencing.
– Get ready for the Infrastructure Strategy: “NISTA” and Beyond.’
Six Pump Court, 29th May 2025
Source: 6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘In Part 1 of this two-part blog series on recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, Alex Cornelius outlines the recent decision of Kerr J in Olsen v Finansiel Stabilitet A/S [2025] EWHC 42 (KB). Part 2 will provide a helpful practical guide to the main avenues for enforcing foreign judgments in England and Wales.’
12 King's Bench Walk, 2nd June 2025
Source: 12kbw.co.uk
‘In a far-ranging Judgment (XY v AB [2025] EAT 66), Mr Justice Cavanagh has reviewed the law relating to derogations from open justice in the Employment Tribunal as it relates to privacy orders under Rule 50 in Schedule 1 to The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (“Rule 50”), the substance of which is now to be found in Rule 49 of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.’
Devereux Chambers, 28th May 2025
Source: www.devereuxchambers.co.uk
‘The Crime and Policing Bill 2025 creates a raft of new criminal offences from possession of blades, points, offensive blades weapons with intent, offences of child criminal exploitation, encouraging or assisting serious self -harm, concealing one’s identity at a protest, climbing on war memorials, child sexual abuse and online facilitation of child sexual exploitation (Clause 38). It also makes provision for the liability of bodies corporate for online facilitation of child sexual exploitation. Much of this is understandable, but in a less prominent part of the bill the proposed extension of corporate criminal liability arguably goes too far.’
25 Bedford Row, 2nd June 2025
Source: www.25bedfordrow.com
‘Having previously written an Article on this website (May 2023) drawing attention to the little used Thwaite Jurisdiction and having alighted upon a very recent decision on appeal (March 2025) on the equally little used and somewhat similar Barrell Jurisdiction, it seemed apposite to draw attention to that too.’
Becket Chambers, 2nd June 2025
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Family Law Newsletter – May 2025; Articles, news, legislation updates and case updates from Care Proceedings, Private Law and Financial Remedy matters.’
Spire Barristers, 23rd May 2025
Source: www.spirebarristers.co.uk
‘There are key differences in how expert evidence is approached between arbitration and litigation. Focusing on the appointment of experts and the subsequent duties, this article will analyse the differing approaches of the level of codification of an expert’s duties in English litigation and arbitration.’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, May 2025
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
‘Sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“AA 1996”) have long been the main escape valves for aggrieved parties in English-seated arbitrations. Section 67 permits challenges to awards based on substantive jurisdiction. Section 68 permits challenges based on serious irregularity affecting the tribunal, the proceedings or the award. These applications are notoriously difficult and have a very low success rate in the English Commercial Court. This is widely considered to reinforce the finality and efficiency of English-seated arbitrations and awards. By the Arbitration Act 2025 (“AA 2025”), section 67 has been amended as far as the scope of admissible evidence and the remedial powers of the court are concerned. These are significant amendments which are consistent with the strict approach of the English courts. There are also amendments affecting Section 68, but these are less far-reaching. Parties must be careful to avoid the impression that they are simply re-running merits arguments on which they lost in the arbitration. Dressing up merits arguments under the guise of jurisdiction or procedure will not do. Any credible section 67 or section 68 must be carefully tailored and focused. In the majority of cases, there will, on proper analysis, be no viable challenge.’
39 Essex Chambers, 29th May 2025
Source: www.39essex.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025