“A businessman sentenced to life imprisonment for the murders of his wife and daughter in New Zealand had his conviction quashed by a British court today following the emergence of new evidence.”
The Independent, 7th October 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The UK has launched a new National Crime Agency. What is it and what does it do?”
BBC News, 6th October 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Six protesters who broke into RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire, home of Britain’s first unmanned drones base, were described by a judge at their trial on Monday as ‘dutiful people’. He said it was only with a ‘heavy heart’ that he found them guilty of criminal damage to the base.”
The Guardian, 7th October 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A paedophile who received a suspended jail term after the prosecution branded his 13-year-old victim ‘predatory’ is having his sentence reviewed.”
The Independent, 8th October 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“A commuter’s court victory could see hundreds of passengers demanding cheaper season tickets as train operators move to plug a ‘loophole’ which he exploited.”
Daily Telegraph, 8th October 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“It would be impossible to prove that two doctors authorised abortions solely on the basis of the baby’s gender, the director of public prosecutions has said in an explanation of why charges were not brought against them.”
The Guardian, 7th October 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“In early 2012, the Daily Telegraph carried out an undercover investigation at various abortion clinics in England. As a result, a police investigation was conducted and, in due course, the police asked the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for advice about possible criminal charges. This note relates to the decision to take no further action in relation to two doctors: Dr S and Dr R.”
Crown Prosecution Service, 7th October 2013
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
Pinckney v KDG Mediatech AG (Case C-170/12); [2013] WLR (D) 367
“In the event of alleged infringement of copyrights protected by the member state of the court seised, the latter had jurisdiction to hear an action to establish liability brought by the author of a work against a company established in another member state and which had, in the latter state, reproduced that work on a material support which was subsequently sold by companies established in a third member state through an Internet site also accessible with the jurisdiction of the court seised. That court had jurisdiction only to determine the damage caused in the member state within which it was situated.”
WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Proceedings brought by Schneider (Case C-386/12); [2013] WLR (D) 366
“Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, and, in particular article 22(1) thereof in relation to jurisdiction in proceedings concerning rights in rem in immoveable property, did not apply to non-contentious proceedings by which a national of a member state who had been declared to be lacking full capacity and placed under guardianship in that member state had applied to a court in another member state for authorisation to sell his share of a property situated in that other member state.”
WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Where the period of time allowed for commencing proceedings against a measure adopted by an European Union institution ran from the publication of that measure, the provisions of rule 102(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court whereby that period was to be calculated from the end of the 14th day after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, applied to any published measure irrespective of the means of publication.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
French Republic v Commission of the European Union (Case C-115/12P); [2013] WLR (D) 364
“The calculation of whether a member state had ‘subsided directly’ by more than 50% a works contract awarded by an entity other than themselves within the meaning of article 2(1) of Council Directive 93/37/EEC which triggered the public procurement procedures under that Directive, included sums arising from tax reductions to the members of commercial partnerships, who were natural persons, investing in a works contract.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
The Dow Chemical Co v Commission of the European Union (Case C-179/12P); [2013] WLR (D) 363
“For the purposes of establishing liability for participation in an infringement of article 101FEU of the FEU Treaty, where two parent companies each had a 50% shareholding in a joint venture company which had committed an infringement, and only in so far as the commission had demonstrated that both parent companies did in fact exercise decisive influence over the joint venture, those three entities could be considered to form a single economic unit and therefore form a single undertaking for the purposes of article 101FEU.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Jessica Craigs, senior solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the financial remedies and divorce news and cases published in September.”
Family Law Week, 3rd October 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“Noël Sweeney calls for a watchdog for the underdog.”
Criminal Law and Justice Weekly, 4th October 2013
Source: www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk
“One of the most senior High Court judges assigned to the Family Division, Peter Jackson will answer your questions sent via Twitter to @LSELaw using #LSEJackson.”
Date: Thursday 12 December 2013, 6.30-8.00pm
Location: Hong Kong Theatre, Clement House
Charge: Free
More information can be found here.
“The colour purple (or rather pantone 2685C) is only slightly less gripping. It is the subject of a tussle between two of the world’s largest confectionery companies the latest stage of which has just ended in the Court of Appeal ( Société Des Produits Nestlé S.A. v Cadbury UK Ltd. [2013] EWCA Civ 1174 (4 Oct 2013)).”
NIPC Law, 4th October 2013
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
“Is the Niqab (face veil) a human right, a security concern or a symbol of oppression? Given the most recent events, this debate will shed some light on this controversial topic.”
Date: Tuesday 15 October 2013 , 6.30-8.00pm
Location: CLM4.02, Clement House
Charge: Free
More information can be found here.
“One of Britain’s most notorious drugs barons could be banned from using phone boxes as part of restrictions to prevent the relaunch of his multimillion-pound international smuggling operations on his release.”
The Independent, 4th October 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025