‘The Supreme Court’s treatment of the devolution issues in Miller is troubling, argues Aidan O’Neill QC, who examines the UK’s complex multi-national constitutional history and potential impact on the devolved political constitution.’
Counsel, March 2017
Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk
‘Private prosecutions of crimes such as fraud and trademark or copyright infringement have become an increasingly important tool of litigation in the UK in recent years. A number of us at 2 Hare Court are currently acting in such cases, defending and prosecuting. Whilst much has been written of late about how to bring a private prosecution, relatively little has made its way into print about defending such cases. Whilst doing so will of course involve many of the same considerations as defending a prosecution brought by the CPS, there is an additional array of options that should be borne in mind.’
2 Hare Court, 5th January 2017
Source: www.2harecourt.com
‘Sue Brookes, and Rose-Marie Drury, both Senior Associates with Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the news and case law relating to financial remedies and divorce during January 2017.’
Family Law Week, 10th February 2017
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Self referral, co-operation and a balance of mitigating factors were thought to be essential ingredients before a DPA could be considered by a prosecutor. It seems only one existed in this case yet the UK’s largest DPA to date followed.’
Fulcrum Chambers, 20th January 2017
Source: www.fulcrumchambers.com
‘New government guidelines will stop senior fire officers from being re-employed in the same or similar roles after they have retired.’
Home Office, 21st February 2017
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
‘The bill authorising the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50, enabling the UK to leave the EU, has cleared the Commons. It begins its consideration in the Lords today. In this post Lords expert Meg Russell discusses how the second chamber is likely to treat the bill. She suggests that this illustrates important dynamics between Lords and Commons, which are often disappointingly misunderstood both in the media and inside government.’
UCL Constitution Unit, 20th February 2017
Source: www.constitution-unit.com
‘Repairing obligations are almost universally incorporated in commercial and residential leases and licences. In the general sense an obligation to repair is to carry out such repairs and maintenance as might be required from time to time (although much can depend upon the precise wording of the covenant/obligation). Where there is a breach by a tenant or licensee, the covenant is broken everyday the property is out of repair: the breach, therefore, is of a continuing nature. ‘
Full story (PDF)
The 36 Group, 6th February 2017
Source: www.36group.co.uk
‘The appeal in Oakley v South Cambridgeshire District Council (2017) EWCA Civ 71 raised the issue whether, in the particular circumstances of the case, the Planning Committee of the South Cambridgeshire District Council ought to have given reasons for granting planning permission for the development by Cambridge City Football Club, a semi-professional club, of a football stadium capable of seating three thousand people. The proposed construction is in the outskirts of Sawston in Cambridgeshire, on land which is part of the Green Belt. The application for planning permission was not only for the erection of the ground, together with associated training and parking facilities, but also for the creation of a partially floodlit recreational ground which would be gifted to the Sawston Parish Council for community use.’
Local Government Law, 17th February 2017
‘The Court of Appeal has held that whether service charge costs are reasonably incurred, for the purposes of Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s.19, is to be determined by reference to an objective standard of reasonableness rather than applying public law principles of rationality. A tribunal should not, however, impose its own decision where a landlord has adopted a course of action which led to a reasonable outcome, even if there was a cheaper outcome which was also reasonable.’
Arden Chambers, 2nd February 2017
Source: www.ardenchambers.com
‘In the last six months there have been lectures, seminars, evidence-givingsand-takings, reports issued, all over town, in which the future of commercial litigation in England has been discussed. It may not be completely true that these have as their object the utter immiseration of everyone within earshot, but that does appear to be the principal effect. Those who, like me, do not seem to be invited to such gatherings are at liberty to see things rather differently. We have a once-in-a generation opportunity to compare the rules of private international law which we currently have with what we might instead have, and to take stock. When that is done, the path ahead will be seen to be rather clearer and brighter than some others would tell you it is. One certainly hears people suggesting that secession from the European Union is going to have a damaging effect, but for our private international law the truth may well be otherwise. And while the need to deal with these tasks may be an un-looked-for interruption to normal work, for some of us the chance to ask questions challenges us to think about what we would like our rules of private international law to say. My conclusion will be that less will change than most seem to suppose (or, in some cases, seem to hope for). There will be minor changes, certainly, but need be nothing major; and if anything major does change, it will not be a change for the worse. In short, though I am very fearful of sounding like the Daily Mail in human form, private international law has no cause for alarm. I should perhaps say that a fuller and footnoted version of this paper will be available from the Combar website if anyone is interested.’
Full story (PDF)
Blackstone Chambers, 24th January 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘Akua Reindorf analyses Pimlico Plumbers v Smith in the Court of Appeal and provides a round-up of employment status reports and inquiries.’
Cloisters, 10th February 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Radical change to the Proceeds of Crime Act is coming. Below I summarise four of the areas of key changes to POCA 2002.’
Full story (PDF)
Dystone Chambers, 26th January 2017
Source: www.drystone.com
‘Businesses risk the disclosure of damaging IT forensics reports if they fail to take advantage of legal professional privilege in light of a cyber attack.’
OUT-LAW.com, 17th February 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘What happens if a registrant is registered with two or more professional bodies and is then disciplined by one and is later disciplined by his or her other professional body? I recently appeared for the NMC, in the case of NMC v Benyu, where this situation arose. Ms Benyu was both a practising solicitor and nurse. She was struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) for the mishandling of client funds. The client had mental health issues and originally was referred to her through her work as a nurse. Following the decision of the SDT, Ms Benyu was referred to the NMC.’
Full story (PDF)
Drystone Chambers, 30th January 2017
Source: www.drystone.com
‘On 29th September 2004 the Trustees of the Ashtead United Charity allocated Mrs Janet Watts accommodation in an almshouse, in fact one of 14 residential flats the Charity owned at Ashstead in Surrey. In May 2015 they issued proceedings for possession based on the allegations that Mrs Watts had acted in an anti-social manner, swearing, spitting, and aggression. This was a breach of the terms of the Appointments Letter under which she was allocated the property. At the first directions hearing the District Judge ordered a trial of the issue of whether Mrs Watts occupied as a licensee of the Charity or a tenant. If the former of course it would be relatively easy for the Charity to evict her; if the latter, much less so.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 18th January 2017
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Litigant in Person Network is an online platform which aims to connect a wide range of people with a common goal of improving access to justice. Coordinated by the Litigant in Person Support Strategy, and supported by The Legal Education Foundation, the network is a place for interested professionals to share, discussion and collaborate across sectors on issues relating to both actual and potential Litigants in Person (LiPs).’
Legal Voice, 20th February 2017
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
‘And indeed never authorised the co-purchaser to enter into a contract on her behalf without her consent, did not know that he was entering into a contract, or consent to his doing so on her behalf. That was the remarkable situation in the case of Rabiu v. Marlbray Ltd [2016] 1 WLR 5147. At first blush one might have thought, in line with the decision in Suleman v. Shahsavari [1998] 1 WLR 1181, that in the absence of the signature of one of the co-purchasers, there was no binding contract and that that would be the end of the matter. So the trial judge concluded, but the Court of Appeal held that on the facts of the case the purchaser who had signed had rendered himself liable as between himself and the vendor of the property, notwithstanding the absence of the signature of his co-purchaser. In so doing it distinguished Suleman. The decision of the Court of Appeal, which runs to 111 paragraphs, considers a number of issues and repays careful study. This casenote will consider the questions of the validity of the contract between the vendor and the copurchaser and the formalities required by s.2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. A second casenote (to follow) will consider whether, on the assumption that there was no valid contract as between the vendor and the co-purchaser (either because the contract had not been signed by the other co-purchaser, or because of want of the formalities required by s.2), the vendor was required to return the co-purchaser’s deposit or could retain it.’
Radcliffe Chambers, February 2017
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘Practitioners involved in a high-profile Court of Protection case have spoken out after it emerged that a 71-year-old woman jailed for contempt had been fighting to let her brother spend his remaining months in his country of birth.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 20th February 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The new agreements come into force for accidents occurring after 1 March 2017. They were published on 13 January 2017 with the following statement:
MIB paying a claim for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car when it has been caused by another uninsured or a ‘hit and run’ driver seems counter-intuitive. However, from 1 March 2017 that is what MIB will be required to do.
Paul Ryman-Tubb, Chief Technical Officer at MIB said: “Whilst we will deal with these claims in a professional manner, the principle of using honest premium paying motorists money to pay for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car seems crazy.”’
Zenith PI Blog, 21st February 2017
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025