Lord Chief Justice steps into Strasbourg row – Daily Telegraph
‘Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd urges European Court of Human Rights to leave terror extradition decisions to British courts.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd urges European Court of Human Rights to leave terror extradition decisions to British courts.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The most senior judge in England and Wales has called on magistrates to impose tougher sentences for youths who carry knives.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Solicitors organisation warns that too much valuable, intellectual property is in danger of being lost when we die.’
The Guardian, 16th April 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Home Secretary Theresa May has been given two months to seek assurances from the US about how a terror suspect will be treated if he is extradited.’
BBC News, 16th April 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Patents, trade marks and design rights are valuable intellectual property (IP) rights and vital to economic growth. They ensure that research and innovation is encouraged and rewarded. And, for some small businesses, they can represent their most significant assets. The law provides effective ways to enforce IP rights but these can be misused to drive competitors from the market. In a report published today, the Law Commission is recommending reforms that will allow individuals and businesses to protect their IP rights but not at the expense of new ideas and inventions.’
Law Commission, 15th April 2014
Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission
‘Consultation on changes made to Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.’
Home Office, 15th April 2014
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
‘ Tchenguiz v. Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2014] EWCA Civ 472, 15 April 2014. This judgment is a neat illustration of how important it is to keep the concepts of public law and private law unlawfulness separate – they do not necessarily have the same legal consequences.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th April 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Blake and others v LB Waltham Forest [2014] EWHC 1027 (Admin) is a judicial review challenge to the local authority’s decision to terminate a licence held by Christian Kitchen (the 3rd Claimant) to operate its soup kitchen out of the Mission Grove Car Park, Walthamstow, London, E17.’
NearlyLegal, 13th April 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Home Secretary had acted unlawfully in failing to identify and take account of certain essential living needs for which provision had to be made in setting the level of cash support under section 96(1)(b) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.’
WLR Daily, 9th April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Any order made by any court under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 prohibiting the identification of (among others) a defendant under the age of 18 years could not extend to reports of the proceedings after the subject of the order had reached the age of majority at 18.’
WLR Daily, 8th April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Tchenguiz v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2014] EWCA Civ 472 (15 April 2014)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Gary Hyde v The Queen [2014] EWCA Crim 713 (15 April 2014)
High Court (Administrative Court)
E v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 1030 (Admin) (15 April 2014)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Kaneria v Kaneria & Ors [2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch) (15 April 2014)
Christophorus 3 Ltd & Anor, Re [2014] EWHC 1162 (Ch) (15 April 2014)
Balevents Ltd & Anor v Sartori [2014] EWHC 1164 (Ch) (15 April 2014)
Briggs & Ors v Gleeds (Head Office) & Ors [2014] EWHC 1178 (Ch) (15 April 2014)
Gaydamak v Leviev [2014] EWHC 1167 (Ch) (15 April 2014)
High Court (Family Division)
P (A Child), Re [2014] EWHC 1146 (Fam) (15 April 2014)
London Borough of Haringey v Musa [2014] EWHC 1200 (Fam) (11 April 2014)
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Ashworth & Ors v The Royal National Theatre [2014] EWHC 1176 (QB) (15 April 2014)
Murray v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2014] EWHC 1170 (QB) (15 April 2014)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
MT Højgaard A/s v E.ON Climate And Renewables & Ors [2014] EWHC 1088 (TCC) (15 April 2014)
Source: www.bailii.org
‘More than 85% of people injured or made ill at work do not recover any compensation, a new report has stated.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 16th April 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A mother convicted of beating her 11-month-old son to death has had her “unduly lenient” sentence increased.’
BBC News, 15th April 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A woman with Crohn’s disease has lost a legal challenge against a decision to refuse NHS funding to freeze her eggs.’
BBC News, 15th April 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Five musicians who performed as a live band for four years in the West End production of the National Theatre’s hugely successful War Horse, but were then replaced by a recorded soundtrack, have lost their bid to be reinstated. But Mr Justice Cranston told Neyire Ashworth, Andrew Callard, Jonathan Eddie, David Holt and Colin Rae that their prospects at trial for a breach of contract by the National Theatre were “strong”.’
The Guardian, 15th April 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A woman who woke up on the operating table as surgeons prepared to remove her appendix but was unable to scream out, has won damages from the hospital responsible for the anaesthetic error.’
Daily Telegraph, 15th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘John Curtin, one of five conspirators convicted for their roles in a £4 million boiler room scam, was jailed for three years yesterday. The 38 year old was the last of the five conspirators to be jailed. Brian James O’Brien, Lynne Jane D’Albertson, James Py and Damien Rodney Smith were sentenced in 2012.’
Daily Telegraph, 15th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Weber v Weber: (Case C-438/12); [2014] WLR (D) 165
‘There fell within the category of proceedings which had as their object “rights in rem in immovable property”, within the meaning of article 22(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, an action brought before the courts of another member state, seeking a declaration of invalidity of the exercise of a right of pre-emption attaching to that property and which produced effects with respect to all the parties. Before staying its proceedings in accordance with article 27(1) of Regulation No 44/2001, the court second seised was required to examine whether, by reason of a failure to take into consideration the exclusive jurisdiction laid down in article 22(1) thereof, the decision of the court first seised would be recognised in the other member states in accordance with article 35(1) of that Regulation.’
WLR Daily, 3rd April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk