LexisNexis asked David Nicholls to consider the court’s discretion to make a vesting order in light of the recent case Hunt and another v Conwy County Borough Council [2013] All ER (D) 101 (May) in the Chancery Division.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, 15th May 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
“Paul Mosley, jailed for his part in the deaths of six children in a house fire, is to appeal against the length of his jail term, his legal team has said.”
BBC News, 20th May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A pregnant woman suffering from ‘severe’ mental health problems has made an impassioned plea to a High Court judge, asking that she be granted an abortion.”
The Independent, 20th May 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“An order made in family proceedings for the payment of money can be enforced by judgement summons, and, if the statutory criteria are satisfied, an order made committing the judgement debtor to prison for up to 6 weeks. Given that in all likelihood only half of this time will be served, and that the time served doesn’t actually produce any cash for the creditor, the obvious question for the person seeking to
enforce the order is ‘what is the point?’. In fact, the Court of Appeal said as much in the case of Mubarak in 2000; ‘I doubt whether experienced specialist practitioners will think that it has sufficient value for money to be worth its initiation.'”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 16th May 2013
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“More than 70% of the public fear that further cuts to legal aid could result in innocent people being convicted of crimes they did not commit, according to an opinion poll released by the Bar Council.”
The Guardian, 21st May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill is back before Parliament today for the ‘Report Stage’. The latest version of the Bill is here, updated explanatory notes here, and the full list of proposed amendments here. Predictably, the amendments are the focus of much controversy.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th May 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of ‘care and attention’ in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.”
NearlyLegal, 20th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“This conference deals with recent, controversial issues at the intersection of patent, copyright and competition law. It features a diverse range of international and UK speakers, from academia and practice, whose expertise is in intellectual property and/or competition law. The conference will be of interest to scholars, lawyers, those in industry and Ph D students.”
Date: 20th June 2013
Location: River Room – Strand Campus, King’s College London
Charge: £50
More information can be found here.
“Leanne Buckley-Thomson, barrister at 12 College Place, provides an overview of wardship and considers its usefulness in modern family proceedings.”
Family Law Week, 18th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“The Bar Council, the Law Society, and the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) are proud to announce this year’s Minority Lawyers’ Conference (MLC) will be held as a series of evening seminars throughout the year. The seminars will cover some of the challenges around career development, and will focus on helping lawyers from minority communities.”
Date: 18th June 2013, 6.00-8.00pm
Location: The Law Society’s Hall, 113 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1PL
Charge: £10 + VAT
More information can be found here.
“Sheila Hamilton Macdonald, barrister, examines the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment in Thompson v Hurst; a cohabitee property dispute in which the property had been registered in the name of only one of the cohabitees.”
Family Law Week, 16th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“The government has today launched calls for evidence on the balance of powers between the UK and the European Union on asylum and immigration, and on the Free Movement of Persons.”
Home Office, 16th May 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
“Last month saw the launch of the judicial review of the ‘Taser Roll-out Programme’. The landmark challenge comes after the Metropolitan Police Service and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) began the roll-out of Tasers across all 32 boroughs of London without holding a public consultation or providing the public with information about the Programme. Forty officers in each borough will be trained to use the Taser; eight officers per shift and two Emergency Response Teams will have Tasers with them at any one time. The judicial review also raises the issue that there was a legitimate expectation that the ‘Taser Policy’ across London would remain in force and that there is an arguable breach of art.2 and 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights in continuing with the implementation of the Programme.”
Criminal Law and Justice Weekly, 18th May 2013
Source: www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk
Joyce v O’Brien and another [2013] EWCA Civ 546; [2013] WLR (D) 182
“Where the character of a joint criminal enterprise was such that it was foreseeable that a party or parties might be subject to unusual or increased risks of harm as a consequence of the activities of the parties in pursuance of their criminal objectives, and the risk materialised, the harm could properly be said to have been caused by the criminal act of the party suffering it even if it resulted from the negligent or intentional act of another party to the criminal enterprise. Therefore, in such circumstances the principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio would provide the negligent party with a defence to a claim for negligence by the injured party.”
WLR Daily, 17th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK and others [2013] EWCA Civ 544; [2013] WLR (D) 181
“In order for a party to be liable as a joint tortfeasor by virtue of doing acts in furtherance of a common design to do acts that were tortious, it was not a requirement that the party’s acts had been an essential part of or of real significance to the commission of the tort.”
WLR Daily, 16th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 515; [2013] WLR (D) 180
“When assessing an applicant’s priority need for accommodation under section 189(1)(c) of the Housing Act 1996 the local housing authority was entitled to consider evidence of personal support and assistance provided by a family member which would continue should the applicant become street homeless. The weight to be given to the evidence was a separate and important consideration. The reviewing officer was required to assess the vulnerability of the applicant as it would be when he was made homeless.”
WLR Daily, 15th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Willock & Ors v Corus UK Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 519 (17 May 2013)
Birmingham City Council v James & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 552 (17 May 2013)
Joyce v O’Brien & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 546 (17 May 2013)
A (a child), Re (a child) [2013] EWCA Civ 543 (16 May 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
MR (A Child) [2013] EWHC 1156 (Fam) (07 May 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
UK Uncut Legal Action Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2013] EWHC 1283 (Admin) (16 May 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
© Inner Temple Library 2025