Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2015] EWHC 1276 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 206
‘A judgment could be set aside for fraud even if the new evidence could reasonably have been obtained for the original trial.’
WLR Daily, 6th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In extradition proceedings under Part I of the Extradition Act 2003 an appellate court, in answering the question whether a district judge had been wrong to decide that extradition was or was not proportionate with the requested person’s rights under article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, had to focus on whether the decision on proportionality itself was wrong.’
WLR Daily, 6th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A proclamation signed by the Governor General authorising alteration of the constituency boundaries in the territories of St Christopher and Nevis was made, under section 119 of the Constitution, when it was published in the Official Gazette; and it came into force, pursuant to section 50(6) of the Constitution, on the next dissolution of Parliament after it was made. Therefore, where the Governor General had dissolved Parliament with effect from 16 January 2015 and fixed the election date for 16 February 2015, and, by proclamation published in the Official Gazette on 20 January, authorised alteration of the constituency boundaries, the proclamation, having been made after the dissolution of Parliament, if valid only came into force on the dissolution of the Parliament elected in February 2015 and did not govern the 2015 election.’
WLR Daily, 11th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Where a person’s detention by the Home Secretary, purportedly made pursuant to paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971 as amended, pending deportation was unlawful, or where a person not currently in detention could not lawfully be detained under that provision, bail could not be granted pursuant to paragraphs 22 and 29 of Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act, as amended.’
WLR Daily, 6th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Insurers liable to pay compensation to mesothelioma victims have rights to pro rata contributions from other insurers and/or employers covering some of the time of exposure, the Supreme Court has ruled.’
Full story
Litigation Futures, 20th May 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.co.uk
‘Police across the country are investigating more than 1,400 men – including 261 high-profile individuals – over allegations of child abuse in the past, a senior officer running the national operation has revealed.’
The Guardian, 20th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The self-styled ‘Lord’ Davenport’s fine is over criminal profits he made selling London mansion used for sex parties.’
Daily Telegraph, 21st May 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘In short, in 2007 the claimant’s father (‘F’) shot and killed the claimant’s mother. He was convicted of manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility and detained at a hospital run by the second defendant. In 2009 St George’s Hospital diagnosed him as suffering from Huntington’s disease.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th May 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘In cases where the hirer of a car on credit terms is not impecunious, we thought we knew where we stood after Dimond v Lovell [2001] 1AC 384. The Claimant was entitled to recover the ‘spot rate’ or, as the Court of Appeal in Pattni v First Leicester Buses Ltd [2012] RTR 17 insisted, ‘basic hire rate’ or BHR. In Burdis v Livsey [2003] QB 36, three possible ways of calculating the basic hire rate were considered and indeed that consideration was repeated by Aikens LJ in Pattni. Both the Court of Appeal in Burdis and the Court of Appeal in Pattni rejected the mode of calculation of applying a reasonable discount to the credit hire rate charged. That left two methods of calculation. The first, which was not favoured by the Court of Appeal in Burdis, was to break down the charge made by the credit hire company and remove the additional elements from the claim in respect of credit, claim handling and delivery &c. The Court of Appeal in Burdis thought that the cost of working all that out might well be disproportionate. The court in Pattni, however, considered that where the actual credit hire company which had hired the replacement car to the Claimant, disclosed the BHR for that type of car in that area at that time, that might well be the best mode of calculation.’
Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘A police officer who knocked part of a man’s tooth out with his riot shield during a student protest in 2010 has been sentenced to eight months in prison.’
The Guardian, 20th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Local authorities have been advised to review urgently their intentional homelessness decision making after the Supreme Court – by a 4-1 majority – today upheld an appellant’s challenge.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st May 2015
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Anecdotal evidence suggests that Defendants in failed personal injury claims are increasingly making use of the Court’s wasted costs powers in an attempt to recover costs from Claimants’ legal representatives. Often this is in cases where the Defence is either explicitly or implicitly one of fraud. In such cases the terms of the ATE insurance (if indeed any is held by the Claimant) are often such that the policy does not pay out. Thus, Defendants are sometimes left in the position of holding a costs order against a ‘man of straw’. To circumvent this problem it seems some Defendants are making costs applications against legal representatives directly, using the wasted costs jurisdiction. The recent case of Kagalovsky v Balmore Invest Ltd [2015] EWHC 1337 (QB)[1] provides a salutary reminder of the difficulties a party faces when seeking to persuade a Court to make a wasted costs order.’
Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Homeless people face being criminalised in a east London borough due to a ban on anti-social behaviour, a charity has warned.’
The Independent, 21st May 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A former midwife whose actions were said to have contributed to the deaths of two babies is to be struck off, a misconduct tribunal has ruled.’
The Guardian, 20th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Care officers at a secure detention centre for young offenders were found to be taking drugs at work, smuggling in “inappropriate” DVDs as Ofsted rates them inadequate.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th May 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘There is a striking difference between CPR part 16.4, which deals with the Particulars of Claim and 16.5, which deals with the defence. Whereas there is a clear instruction that the Particulars of Claim has to include only a concise statement of the facts on which the Claimant replies, there is no corresponding provision so far as the Defence is concerned.’
Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Victims of disability hate crimes are being failed by police, prosecutors and the probation service, according to a report by inspectors.’
The Guardian, 21st May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Clive Anderson and a panel of senior legal experts discuss the apparent failure of the 1970 Equal Pay Act to bridge the gender pay gap.’
Listen
BBC Unreliable Evidence, 13th May 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has called for clarity over ‘disgracefully complex’ legal aid legislation after an elderly man was committed to prison in the absence of publicly funded legal representation to which he was entitled.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 19th May 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025