Hot 100: James Dingemans QC, 3 Hare Court – The Lawyer
“Inner Temple became a trailblazer on diversity issues at the bar when in March 2012 it launched the Pegasus Access Scheme.”
The Lawyer, 28th January 2013
Source: www.thelawyer.com
“A man has been convicted of supplying a gun to Mark Duggan, whose shooting by police triggered the 2011 riots across England.”
The Guardian, 31st January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“New measures have been introduced to ensure child care cases are dealt with more quickly and effectively in family courts. This is so children and families are spared unnecessary delays and the cost to taxpayers is reduced.”
Ministry of Justice, 31st January 2013
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“The Ministry of Justice is not that interested in research-based policy at the moment, writes Roger Smith. Better in the current environment to stick to prejudice; the elevation of austerity as the sole goal; and stagger through to tomorrow. Hence, no one, least of all Lord Chancellor Chris Grayling, is interested in what anyone has actually ever found out about telephone legal advice hotlines. We are two months away from LASPO Day when face to face advice begins to disappear from the High Street, at least for poor people, just as surely as Woolies and Comet. There is no time left for reflection, let alone reconsideration.”
LegalVoice, 31st January 2013
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
“The government’s failure to provide an ‘adequate’ lawyer to represent a British woman sentenced to death in Indonesia for drug smuggling is a breach of her rights, the high court has been told.”
The Guardian, 31st January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The mother of a four-month-old boy who died when a television fell on his head has been jailed.”
BBC News, 31st January 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Was challenging the decision for prisoners having the right to vote a step too far?”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 31st January 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“Naomi Campbell has received an apology and ‘substantial’ libel damages from the Daily Telegraph over an article that wrongly claimed she organised an elephant polo tournament in India.”
The Guardian, 31st January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“In October 2009, Bank Mellat, an Iranian bank, was effectively excluded from the UK financial market by an Order made by the Treasury, on the basis that it had or might provide banking services to those involved in Iran’s nuclear effort. The Bank challenged the Order, and the challenge failed in the Court of Appeal, albeit with a dissent from Elias LJ: see Rosalind English’s post and read judgment. The Bank’s appeal to the Supreme Court is due to be heard in March 2013; it raises some fascinating issues about common law unfairness, Article 6, and the right to property under A1P1 , given that the Bank was not told of the intention to make the Order prior to its making.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th January 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Supreme Court
B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] UKSC 4 (30 January 2013)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Dlugosz, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 2 (30 January 2013)
Kenny v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 1 (30 January 2013)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Ibrahim v London Borough of Wandsworth [2013] EWCA Civ 20 (30 January 2013)
FHR European Ventures LLP & Ors v Mankarious & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 17 (29 January 2013)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Isis Investments Ltd v Oscatello Investments Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 7 (Ch) (30 January 2013)
Ridgewood Properties Group Ltd & Ors v Valero Energy Ltd [2013] EWHC 98 (Ch) (30 January 2013)
MF Global UK Ltd, Re [2013] EWHC 92 (Ch) (29 January 2013)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Polish Judicial Authority v Wolkowicz [2013] EWHC 102 (Admin) (30 January 2013)
Cakani v Secretary of State for Home Department [2013] EWHC 16 (Admin) (31 January 2013)
High Court (Family Division)
AI v MT [2013] EWHC 100 (Fam) (30 January 2013)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Arcadis UK Ltd v May and Baker Ltd (t/a Sanofi) [2013] EWHC 87 (TCC) (29 January 2013)
Source: www.bailii.org
“The Court of Appeal has ruled that the statutory requirement that criminal convictions and cautions must be disclosed in an enhanced criminal record check (‘ECRC’) in the context of particular types of employment interfered with the appellants’ right to respect for private life under Article 8.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th January 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“TV cameras will be allowed into the court of appeal for the first time from October and senior judges will be offered training before appearing on camera, the lord chief justice has revealed.”
The Guardian, 30th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“UK laws that set out a ‘blanket’ requirement that job applicants disclose to employers all of the ‘recordable’ criminal convictions and police warnings they have been given are incompatible with individuals’ right to privacy, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 31st January 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The statutory regime requiring the blanket disclosure of all convictions and cautions relating to recordable offences against an individual was disproportionate to (i) the general aim of protecting employers and, in particular, children and vulnerable adults who were in their care, and (ii) the particular aim of enabling employers to make an assessment as to whether the individual was suitable for a particular kind of work.”
WLR Daily, 29th Janaury 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
O’Cathail v Transport for London [2013] EWCA Civ 21; [2013] WLR (D) 31
“An employment tribunal’s decision to refuse a claimant’s application to adjourn a hearing could not be set aside by the Employment Appeal Tribunal unless the tribunal had erred in law.”
WLR Daily, 29th January 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The hindsight principle was not applicable to the determination of claims to client money for the purposes of a distribution under Chapter 7A of the Client Assets Sourcebook (‘CASS 7A’) issued by the Financial Services Authority in accordance with its powers under Part X of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.”
WLR Daily, 29th January 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] UKSC 4; [2013] WLR (D) 29
“Where a person held by a civil court or tribunal to be in contempt of court appealed against a sentence of imprisonment imposed for the contempt and the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) found that the lower court’s factual findings had been flawed but that nevertheless, on the basis of the true facts, there had still been contempt requiring imprisonment, it could decide for itself what the appropriate sentence should be by asking whether the lower court’s sentence had been manifestly excessive, provided that the lower court’s decision had not been influenced by its flawed findings of fact.”
WLR Daily, 30th January 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk