“A Government-backed efficiency report seeks to answer some of the criticisms of national infrastructure policy, while highlighting some important new initiatives, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th June 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“A bankrupt businessman who shot a solicitor dead in an attack motivated by revenge will most likely die in prison.”
The Independent, 18th June 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The NHS is in the middle of the transition from a publicly funded and publicly provided health service towards a publicly funded but increasingly privately provided service. It is thus following the course adopted in social care, with the closure of local authority owned care homes and the contracting out of service provision to commercial, charity, and other voluntary sector providers.”
No. 5 Chambers, 17th June 2013
Source: www.no5chambers.com
“Onu v Akwiwu and others, UKEAT/0283/12/RN, UKEAT/0022/12/RN raises some interesting legal issues in a context where the need for justice may lead to an extension of the concept of race discrimination.”
No. 5 Chambers, 6th June 2013
Source: www.no5.com
“Although usually sought by employers, either party may apply to a tribunal for an order that the other party pay a deposit as a condition of continuing to argue a particular matter if the tribunal is satisfied that the contentions put forward by that party have ‘little reasonable prospects of success’: Rule 20(1) of Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004.”
No. 5 Chambers, 6th June 2013
Source: www.no5.com
“Only 9.4% of equity partners in law firms are women, despite equal numbers of men and women entering the profession.”
The Guardian, 18th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Should employees – or employers – be able to use secretly taped recordings as evidence when bringing or defending claims in the Employment Tribunal? In the recent case of Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham & Others [2013] UKEAT 0534_12_0102 the Employment Appeal Tribunal confirmed the long established position that the method in which the evidence has been obtained does not affect its relevance; and relevance is the guiding principle when determining whether evidence is admissible.”
No. 5 Chambers, 6th June 2013
Source: www.no5.com
“In this note Marcia Shekerdemian takes a closer look at the statutory codification of directors’ duties under the Companies Act 2006 (‘CA’) by reference to key case law, making this a highly practical guide for IPs who are considering bringing misfeasance claims under section 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (‘IA’).”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, June 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
“The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 [‘ERRA’] received Royal Assent on 25 April 2013, bringing some significant changes to employment law and tribunal procedure. Gemma Roberts highlights the main reforms affecting employment tribunal, ACAS procedure and the changes to whistleblowing; Mugni Islam-Choudhury considers the amendments introduced to the Equality Act 2010.”
No. 5 Chambers, 6th June 2013
Source: www.no5.com
“In summary, the Supreme Court (comprising Lords Neuberger, Walker, Mance, Clarke, Wilson, Sumption and Lady Hale) has unanimously upheld the wife’s appeal and found that the Respondent group of companies held the assets on trust for the Husband. The assets therefore constitute property to which the husband is ‘entitled, either in possession or reversion’ for the purposes of section 24(1)(a) MCA.”
Zenith Chambers, 12th June 2013
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“Counsel for the defendant in this recent case, heard at Clerkenwell & Shoreditch County Court, provided a skeleton argument on the morning of the hearing, ignoring the set aside (it being conceded there was no merit in this) but rather arguing that the Court’s lack of discretion to delay execution of a possession order by over six weeks was incompatible with Article 8. It followed that he was seeking a transfer to the High Court for declaration purposes (CPR 30.3(2)(g)).”
Hardwicke Chambers, 3rd June 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Police officers who took the personal details of a woman ‘kettled’ during a trade union rally in 2011 acted unlawfully, the High Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 18th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Arguments concerning the indexation of periodical payments orders triggered many more cases than usual being tried out on numerous heads of damage. Further cases have followed after the issue of indexation was decided. James Rowley QC brings together the judgments so that trends in awards in the most serious litigation can be identified.”
Full story (PDF)
Byrom Street Chambers, 30th May 2013
Source: www.byromstreet.com
“On 12th June 2013, the Supreme Court delivered judgment in the eagerly anticipated appeal in Prest v Petrodel Resources Limited [2013] UKSC 34. For the second time this year, the Supreme Court has had to grapple with the circumstances in which it is appropriate to pierce the corporate veil, the previous decision being that of VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp [2013] 2 WLR 398 (a case in which a number of 11 SB members were involved). Unlike in VTB Capital, however, this time the Supreme Court grasped the nettle and gave some practical guidance as to the reach and limitations of the doctrine.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, June 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
The Care Quality Commission (Additional Functions) Amendment Regulations 2013
The Wireless Telegraphy (Automotive Short Range Radar) (Exemption) Regulations 2013
The Cancellation of Student Loans for Living Costs Liability (Wales) Regulations 2013
The Accession of Croatia (Immigration and Worker Authorisation) Regulations 2013
The Family Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2013
Source: www.legislation.gov.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Kohli v Lit & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 667 (17 June 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Avon Estates Ltd v Evans & Anor [2013] EWHC 1635 (Ch) (13 June 2013)
Derek Hodd Ltd v Climate Change Capital Ltd [2013] EWHC 1665 (Ch) (14 June 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
L and M (Children), Re [2013] EWHC 1569 (Fam) (04 June 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Bate v Aviva Insurance UK Ltd [2013] EWHC 1687 (Comm) (17 June 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Hills Contractors & Construction Ltd v Struth & Anor [2013] EWHC 1693 (TCC) (17 June 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
“The court had an inherent jurisdiction to give such directions as would enable the administrators of a regulated investment firm, holding client money under rules imposing a statutory trust, to put in place a client money distribution procedure for dealing with rejected claims and unknown claims which could provide a degree of certainty and protection and ensure a timely return of client money.”
WLR Daily, 14th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues [2013] EWCA Civ 669; [2013] WLR (D) 235
“Where a tenant had paid a deposit under an assured shorthold tenancy for a fixed term which began before, but ended after, the commencement of section 213 of the Housing Act 2004, the landlord was obliged to deal with the deposit in accordance with an authorised scheme within 14 days of the coming into being of a new statutory periodic tenancy upon expiry of the fixed term; and by virtue of section 215(1) of the 2004 Act, non-compliance with that obligation precluded service by the landlord of a valid notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988.”
WLR Daily, 14th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The provision in section 15(4) of the Commons Act 2006, allowing an application for registration of land as a town or village green to be made up to five years after a cessation of qualifying user predating the commencement of section 15, was not incompatible with the landowner’s right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”
WLR Daily, 14th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A contract whereby (without establishing co-operation between the contracting public entities with a view to carrying out a public service task that both of them had to perform)—one public entity had assigned to another the task of cleaning certain public buildings, while reserving a supervisory power, in return for payment for the costs incurred, the second entity being authorised to use the services of third parties which might be capable of competing on the market for the accomplishment of that task—constituted a public service contract within the meaning of article 1(2)(d) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC.”
WLR Daily, 13th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025