‘Lord Kerr, the Supreme Court justice, is leading an initiative to improve the use of technology at the court and cut down on paper, it has emerged.’
Litigation Futures, 7th March 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013 sets out the process for establishing, altering and discontinuing schools in Wales. R (Edwards) v Flintshire County Council [2016] EWHC 459 (Admin) was an unsuccessful judicial review challenge of a decision by the Defendant LEA to issue statutory notices under Section 48 of that Act to close a High School. The ground of challenge was that the Council failed, in its consultation process, to comply with its obligation under Section 38(4) of the Act to act in accordance with the Welsh Ministers’ Code of School Organisation. The Act requires the Welsh Ministers to issue a code on school organisation. It may contain requirements and/or guidelines. By Section 38(4), those who exercise functions in relation to school organisation in Wales, including local education authorities, must, when exercising those functions, act in accordance with any relevant requirements contained in the Code, and have regard to any relevant guidelines contained in it. Section 48 requires a proposer for change to publish the proposals, consult and publish a report on the consultation, all in accordance with the published code. In April 2013, the Welsh Ministers published a Code on School Organisation. It came into force on 1 October 2013.’
Education Law Blog, 8th March 2016
Source: www.education11kbw.com
‘Family Drug and Alcohol Courts (FDACs) save the state money, with the London FDAC alone generating estimated gross savings of £1.29m to public sector bodies over five years, research has suggested.’
Local Government Lawyer, 8th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A woman who regularly beat her newly-wed husband has been convicted of his murder by stabbing him through the heart.’
BBC News, 8th March 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A compulsory, immediate ban on smoking in prisons has been overturned by the court of appeal, allowing the Ministry of Justice to introduce its own voluntary, phased controls.’
The Guardian, 8th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Female victims left in fear for their lives speak out about the failure of the justice system to punish abusers with long prison sentences.’
The Guardian, 8th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The first trial of online dispute resolution (ODR) in the UK’s courts and tribunals will introduce a concept known as the “online continuous hearing”, it has emerged, with the Senior President of Tribunals urging a change in perception of litigation from an adversarial dispute to “a problem to be solved”.’
Legal Futures, 8th March 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A woman who stored improvised hand grenades, other explosive materials and 2,000 rounds of ammunition in her house has been jailed for three years.’
The Guardian, 7th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Independent Police Complaints Commission to be overhauled and renamed the ‘Office for Police Conduct’, Theresa May says.’
Daily Telegraph, 7th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Cases are taking up to 19 months to reach trial in the court of appeal because of increasing courtroom backlogs, according to the judge in charge of introducing online justice.’
The Guardian, 7th March
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Two men acquitted after judge decides pair have no case to answer following ruling that courts have been wrongly interpreting law for 30 years’
Daily Telegraph, 7th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘More than 2m bottles of poppers are sold legally every year – and Yorkshire is the centre of the trade. How is one factory preparing for the ban?’
The Guardian, 7th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch). Quite a lot of councils have agreements with water suppliers under which the council will collect water charges from their tenants, effectively as an addition to the rent. This case concerned a challenge to the nature and validity of Southwark’s agreement, at least before 2013.’
Nearly Legal, 5th March 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘Lafferty v Newark & Sherwood District Council [2016] EWHC 320 (QB). Does section 4(4) of the Defective Premises Act 1972 create a strict liability on the landlord for any defect, such that it covers latent or undetectable defects? The short answer is no. This appeal sets out why.’
Nearly Legal, 6th March 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘Six months ago I discussed at some length the issues arising from the decision of the Supreme Court in Jackson v Murray [2015] PIQR P249. More recently in Sabir v Osei-Kwabena [2016] PIQR Q56, the problem cropped up again, this time in the Court of Appeal.’
Zenith PI, 7th March 2016
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘A London borough has overcharged approximately 37,000 tenants for water and sewerage services, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption): [2016] EWHC 440 (Fam)
‘In two cases babies, JL and AO, were born in England to mothers from Eastern Europe but relinquished at birth for adoption. In the case of JL the child, whose Estonian mother worked in England and whose putative father lived in Estonia, was accommodated by the local authority with the mother’s consent pursuant to an agreement under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and was placed with foster carers. The mother gave her written consent to his adoption and the putative father, maternal family and the Estonian authorities all supported his adoption in this country. The local authority sought a placement order under section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. In the case of AO, the Hungarian parents working in England wished the child to be adopted in this country. AO had been removed at birth and placed with foster carers and had been made a ward of court. The local authority, children’s guardian and Hungarian authorities sought the child’s return to Hungary so that she could be placed for adoption there. Common issues arose as to what jurisdiction the court had to make orders facilitating such placements, (ii) the factors which had to be taken into account when making decisions about relinquished babies, the possible outcomes and the procedures to be followed and (iii) where a child born to nationals of a foreign country had been placed voluntarily in the care of a local authority, with a view to adoption or otherwise, whether the authority was under an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 to inform the consular officials of that country about the placement. In the case of JL, the further issues arose whether the court had jurisdiction to make a placement order and what order, if any, should be made. In the case of AO, the further issues arose whether it was open to the court either to transfer jurisdiction to Hungary under Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels IIA”) or to make an order permitting the local authority to send AO to Hungary; and what order, if any, the court should make.’
WLR Daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The claimant suffered a head injury and was taken to a hospital managed by the defendant. A CT scan was performed some six hours after his admission and he was transferred to another hospital where he underwent surgery. He was left with cognitive and neuropsychological deficits. He claimed damages in negligence against the defendant contending, inter alia, that the defendant’s negligent delay in undertaking the CT scan had resulted in a period of raised intra-cranial pressure which had caused or materially contributed to his brain damage. The defendant contended that only if the claimant could establish that damaging raised intra-cranial pressure caused by the defendant’s negligence had caused his brain injury that, applying the classic “but for” test of causation, he could recover as against the defendant, and that it was insufficient to establish “material contribution”.’
WLR Daily, 16th March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council: [2016] EWHC 448 (Admin)
‘The claimant submitted two separate planning applications to the defendant: one for the installation of a mezzanine floor at its property; and the other for external works to the property, which created no additional floor space. The defendant granted planning permission for both applications, informing the claimant that the mezzanine installation was development liable to a community infrastructure levy (“CIL”). The defendant’s view was that the development proposals fell within the scope of the meaning of development for CIL purposes due to the direct link between the two applications for the mezzanine and external alterations. The defendant, as the relevant CIL collecting authority, subsequently issued a CIL liability notice under regulation 65 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 in relation to the installation of a mezzanine floor and external alterations at the claimant’s property, and a demand notice under regulation 69 of the 2010 Regulations in respect of the same development. By a judicial review claim the claimant challenged the lawfulness of the defendant’s act in issuing the two notices on the grounds that the mezzanine planning permission fell within the exemption created by regulation 6(1)(c) and that the external planning permission created no floor space and so was not liable to a CIL.’
WLR daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025