‘An 88% rise in the number of workers in the financial services sector ‘blowing the whistle’ on white collar crime could lead to an increase in prosecutions in 2014, an expert has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 20th January 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Tony Nicklinson lost his legal battle in 2012 for a judicial ruling that, were his wife to administer life-ending drugs to him at his express request, she would not be liable to prosecution for murder.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 20th January 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘The replacement of Directive 95/26/EC – the bedrock of data protection in Europe – with a new Regulation is intended as a radical overhaul, making protections for personal data fit for the digital world. It has now been over two years since the first substantive draft of that Regulation was made public.’
Panopticon, 20th January 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘Chantelle McCluney, 23, watched on as her boyfriend and another lover tortured and humiliated their victim’
Daily Telegraph, 20th January 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The justice secretary, Chris Grayling, has announced a two-month delay in the timetable for privatising 70% of the probation service after his most senior officials advised there would be public safety issues if he pressed full steam ahead.’
The Guardian, 20th January 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Proposed EU laws could render £50 million NHS database illegal, senior officials warn.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th January 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is to investigate whether officers mishandled the case of a four-year-old boy whose mummified remains were found in his cot almost two years after he died.’
The Guardian, 20th January 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Secretary of State for the Home Department v MG (Case C-400/12); [2014] WLR (D) 4
‘The ten-year period of residence in article 28(3)(a) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states (OJ 2004 L158, p 77) had to be continuous and calculated by counting back from the date of the decision ordering the expulsion of the person concerned. A period of imprisonment was, in principle, capable both of interrupting the continuity of the period of residence for the purposes of that provision and of affecting the decision regarding the grant of the enhanced protection provided for thereunder, even where the person concerned resided in the host member state for the ten years prior to imprisonment. However, the fact that that person resided in the host member state for the ten years prior to imprisonment could be taken into consideration as part of the overall assessment required in order to determine whether the integrating links previously forged with the host member state had been broken.’
WLR Daily, 16th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
In re E (A Child) [2014] EWHC 6 (Fam); [2014] WLR (D) 10
‘In any care or other public law case with a European dimension good practice would now require the court to set out explicitly the basis upon which it had either accepted or rejected jurisdiction and to identify the precise basis upon which it had proceeded. Furthermore, in cases involving foreign nationals there had to be transparency and openness as between the English family courts and the consular and other authorities of the relevant foreign state.’
WLR Daily, 14th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Onuekwere v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-378/12); [2014] WLR (D) 7
‘Under article 16(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states, periods of imprisonment in the host member state of a third-country national, who was a family member of a Union citizen who had acquired the right of permanent residence in that member state during those periods, could not be taken into consideration in the context of the acquisition by that national of the right of permanent residence for the purposes of that provision. The continuity of residence was interrupted by periods of imprisonment in the host member state of a third country national who was a family member of a Union citizen who had acquired the right of permanent residence in that member state during those periods for the purposes of article 16(2) and (3).’
WLR Daily, 16th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Reyes v Migrationsverket (Case C-423/12); [2014] WLR (D) 6
‘Under article 2(2)(c) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states (OJ 2004 L158, p 77), a member state could not require a direct descendant who was 21 years old or older to have tried unsuccessfully to obtain employment or to obtain subsistence support from the authorities of his country of origin and/or otherwise to support himself in order to be regarded as dependent and thus come within the definition of a “family member”. The fact that a relative—due to personal circumstances such as age, education and health—was deemed to be well placed to obtain employment and in addition intended to start work in the member state did not affect the interpretation of “dependent”.’
WLR Daily, 16th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mitte v Ibero Tours GmbH (Case C-300/12); [2014] WLR (D) 8
‘Under the provisions of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the member states relating to turnover taxes—common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, the principles laid down by the Court of Justice in Elida Gibbs v Customs and Excise Comrs (Case C-317/94) [1997] QB 499 concerning the determination of the taxable amount of the VAT did not apply when a travel agent, acting as an intermediary, granted to the final consumer, on the travel agent’s own initiative and at his own expense, a price reduction on the principal service provided by the tour operator.’
WLR Daily, 16th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Schmid v Hertel (Case C-328/12); [2014] WLR (D) 5
‘Under article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings, the courts of the member state within the territory of which insolvency proceedings had been opened had jurisdiction to hear and determine an action to set a transaction aside by virtue of insolvency that was brought against a person whose place of residence was not within the territory of a member state.’
WLR Daily, 16th January 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘CPR r 81.4(3), which gave the court power to order that a company director or officer be imprisoned for a company’s contempt, applied to a director who was outside the jurisdiction.’
WLR Daily, 20th December 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Katy Chokowry, barrister of 1 King’s Bench Walk, considers the Supreme Court’s judgment in LC (Children).’
Family Law Week, 19th January 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Drivers who would have been prosecuted over the Sheppey crossing crash that injured more than 200 people are being offered a course instead, police said.’
BBC News, 20th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Marc Willers analyses the impact of a High Court ruling which gave an important judgment on the provision of care for nomadic Gypsy and Traveller children.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 17th January 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.com
‘Google is to face a claim for damages before the High Court from three individuals who claim the company breached UK data protection laws by circumventing privacy settings deployed on their web browsers to serve them with personalised adverts.’
OUT-LAW.com, 17th January 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A former worker at the high-security Broadmoor hospital has been given a suspended prison sentence after passing information to tabloid newspapers.’
BBC News, 20th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘When an identifiable individual has been the subject of a formal complaint about their competence or conduct, that fact constitutes their personal data. In terms of privacy/publicity decisions, such situations are often approached in this way: where the complaint is well founded or at least merits serious consideration, publication is warranted, but otherwise confidentiality is maintained, lest unjustified aspersions be cast against that person.’
Panopticon, 17th January 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025