‘A teacher who put his arm around a pupil’s neck while holding a knife and jokingly threatened to kill him for giving a wrong answer has been banned from the classroom for two years.’
The Guardian, 17th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Electoral Commission is refusing to apologise after a watchdog ruled it had failed to properly investigate a Lib Dem donor later convicted of fraud.’
BBC news, 17th July 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Footballer Nile Ranger has been fined for repeatedly kicking a jammed door at his penthouse flat in Swindon.’
BBC News, 17th July 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘David Anderson says privacy and civil liberties board that is planned to replace his job must have unfettered access.’
The Guardian, 17th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A separated couple have been convicted of sexually and physically abusing their children. The man and his former wife were convicted of sexual and physical assaults on children in the Merthyr Tydfil and Caerphilly areas but cleared of rape. A second man was acquitted.’
BBC News, 17th July 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘An inquiry into 25 schools in Birmingham investigated over the alleged “Trojan Horse” plot is due to publish its findings later. Sir Ian Kershaw’s report was ordered by Birmingham City Council after claims some Muslim groups were attempting to take control of a number of schools.’
BBC News, 18th July 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This week, the role of Lady Butler-Sloss in the forthcoming inquiry into child abuse is challenged, while the government pushes for emergency legislation to monitor phone and internet records. Meanwhile, the European Court of Human Right upholds France’s niqab ban and the Tories get closer to announcing their plans for human rights reform.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 17th July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘In a blog post on Monday I expressed concerns about the lack of time for proper scrutiny of the changes to be brought in by the DRIP Bill. Towards the end of that blog I expressed puzzlement at a change to be made to the definition of “telecommunications system” in RIPA. This definition is central to the scheme of RIPA and is the basis for many of the powers therein.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 16th July 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog
‘In a judgment released yesterday a Divisional Court unanimously struck down the government’s attempt to introduce a residence test for eligibility for legal aid, finding it incompatible with the objective of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (“LASPO”). The ratio of the judgment was that the residence test had been introduced via an amendment to the schedule in the Act (that is, via subsidiary legislation) that was not compatible with the objective of the primary legislation. While that sounds like a rather technical decision, it has important ramifications for democratic accountability. It means, in essence, that if the government wants to make such a drastic change as this, it will need to do so via an amendment to the Act itself, with the full Parliamentary debate that that would entail. The case is also interesting because of the two rights-based grounds that were argued before it. The first, that the introduction of a residence requirement violated the fundamental right of access to a court, the court declined to engage with. The second was that residence was not a lawful ground for discriminating in the provision of legal aid between equally meritorious claims. The court accepted this claim, but apparently in obiter dicta, since only the statutory construction point was strictly required to reach the outcome.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th July 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog
‘The question of whether information is ‘held’ by a public authority for FOIA or EIR purposes can raise difficulties. This is especially so where the boundaries between public and private service provision are blurred: consider outsourcing, privatisation of services, public/private partnerships, joint ventures, the use of external consultants and so on. Legal separation and practical day-to-day realities can often point in different directions in terms of who holds information on whose behalf.’
Panopticon, 16th July 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘A property fund group face a near £600,000 business rates bill in Birmingham after the council in the area won a High Court ruling relating to liability for business rates due following liquidation of the tenants of a property in the city.’
OUT-LAW.com, 16th July 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘In years to come, we may all wonder what all the fuss was about, but Tuesday’s judgement in R (Public Law Project) v the Secretary of State for Justice has provided some relief and not a little amusement to legal aid practitioners girding themselves for yet another grim landmark in the legal aid story: the residence test.’
NearlyLegal, 17th July 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘The Administrative Court has declared that the proposed residence test for civil legal aid is discriminatory and unlawful, following a successful judicial review challenge against the Secretary of State for Justice. The case was brought by the Public Law Project, a national legal charity that promotes access to justice, on the basis that the residence test would, if implemented, violate fundamental constitutional rights guaranteed by the common law and the European Convention on Human Rights, as incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998.’
LegalVoice, 16th July 2014
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
‘The cuts in legal aid for professional advice wrought by Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) may be seen to have increased the opportunities – and workload – for volunteers and charities. Indeed, there are reports that the government intends to fill the gap regarding divorce by setting up law centres run by students. However, the cuts, often portrayed as affecting “fat cat” lawyers, can harm charitable and volunteer services as can be seen through the example of Citizens Advice Bureaux up and down the country.’
Halsbury’s Law Exhchange, 15th July 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘In Wrotham Park v Parkside Homes [1974] 1 WLR 798, the Court declined to order a land-owner to destroy a property he had built on his land in breach of a covenant in favour of his neighbour. Instead, it awarded the neighbour damages in lieu of an injunction under Lord Cairns’ Act, in such sum “as might reasonably have been demanded by the [covenantee] … as the quid pro quo for relaxing the covenant” (815). The Court assessed the damages as a modest percentage of the profit anticipated (“with the benefit of foresight”) by the contract breaker. Employment lawyers have sought to exploit Wrotham Park for some time now, particularly following the seminal judgments of the House of Lords in AG v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268, where it was held that in exceptional circumstances (where conventional remedies had no value) the contract breacher could be required to account for the fruits of his breach of contract.’
Employment Law Blog, 15th July 2014
Source: www.employment11kbw.com
The Food Information Regulations 2014
The Business Rate Supplements Act 2009 (Commencement No.2) (England) Order 2014
The Immigration (Designation of Travel Bans) (Amendment) Order 2014
The Forest Reproductive Material (Great Britain) (Amendment) (England and Scotland) Regulations 2014
The Housing Renewal Grants (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2014
Source: www.legislation.gov.uk
‘The proposed statutory instrument, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2014, amending Schedule 1 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 by introducing a residence test, was unlawful as it was ultra vires and discriminatory.’
WLR Daily, 15th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
FHR European Ventures LLP and others v Cedar Capital Partners LLC; [2014] UKSC ; [2014] WLR (D) 317
‘Where an agent obtained a benefit, including a bribe or a secret commission, which was, or resulted from, a breach of his fiduciary duty to his principal, he held the benefit on trust for his principal.’
WLR Daily, 16th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Yiacoub v The Queen; [2014] UKPC 22; [2014] WLR (D) 314
‘Justice was not seen to be done when a judge who had sat on the original trial was responsible for overseeing the constitution of the panel of judges which formed the court which heard the appeal.’
WLR Daily, 10th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Premier Telecom Communications Group Ltd & Anor v Webb [2014] EWCA Civ 994 (16 July 2014)
Ahmad v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 988 (16 July 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Lilley v Euromoney Institutional Investor Plc & Anor [2014] EWHC 2364 (Ch) (16 July 2014)
High Court (Patents Court)
Rovi Solutions Corporation & Anor v Virgin Media Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 2301 (Pat) (14 July 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Yates v Revenue and Customs & Anor [2014] EWHC 2311 (QB) (17 July 2014)
Kadir & Anor v Channel S Television Ltd [2014] EWHC 2305 (QB) (15 July 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
© Inner Temple Library 2025