EDL leader suspended sentence for headbutt – BBC News
“The leader and founder of the English Defence League (EDL) has received a suspended jail sentence for assaulting a fellow-member of the group.”
BBC News, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The leader and founder of the English Defence League (EDL) has received a suspended jail sentence for assaulting a fellow-member of the group.”
BBC News, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Cricket’s anti-corruption chief insists illegal betting is not endemic in the game, in the wake of three Pakistan players being jailed for spot-fixing. Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir have been given prison terms for conspiring to bowl deliberate no-balls in a 2010 Test match against England.”
BBC News, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Although the General Medical Council recommended that Gideon Lauffer be permanently struck off, a fitness to practice panel suspended him for six months following the deaths of two patients. The suspension has now expired and the former consultant has taken up a post in the A&E department at St Thomas’s hospital in London, it has been disclosed.”
Daily Telegraph, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Lady Hale’s right, diversity is a constitutional issue but a more representative bench would make for better decisions.”
The Guardian, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The owner of Canary Wharf, home to some of Britain’s biggest banks, has taken out injunctions to stop camps being set up by protesters targeting the City of London.”
The Guardian, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“In this new major report, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, JUSTICE calls for a fundamental overhaul of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act in order to protect the right of individual privacy from unnecessary, unwarranted and unchecked state intrusion.”
Justice, 4th Novemver 2011
Source: www.justice.org.uk
“Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act fails to protect individuals from illegal surveillance, according to Justice.”
The Guardian, 4th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co,uk
“A young actor who joined in the London riots has been spared jail because he faced losing his university place.”
Daily Telegraph, 4th November 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A 72-year-old ‘toy boy’ faces losing his home after a judge ruled that he must pay back money given to him by his long-term partner before she died, plus a hefty legal bill, because they were not married.”
Daily Telegraph, 4th November 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A group of villagers who claimed they were testing the government’s commitment to ‘localism’ by challenging a waste company’s right to dump radioactive materials in a nearby landfill site have failed in a high court challenge.”
The Guardian, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Commercial broadcasters will not be able to ‘unduly discriminate’ between advertisers when setting the fees they charge for carrying commercials under proposed new rules set out by the UK’s media regulator.”
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“Plans for sweeping new Henry VIII-style powers would enable ministers to rewrite the statute book without consulting Parliament, a report warned today.”
The Independent, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Parties in complex court cases who are forced to take out loans at a high rate of interest to pay their legal costs can recover the full amount of that interest from the other party in certain circumstances, a court has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“Despite seeing the long hours and hard work their parents put in, many offspring are not put off from following them into the legal profession, writes Georgina Stanley.”
Legal Week, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.legalweek.com
Supreme Court
Rainy Sky SA & Orsd v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50 (2 November 2011)
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company [2011] UKSC 51 (2 November 2011)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Smith & Anor v Jafton Properties Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1251 (02 November 2011)
Shiva Ltd v Transport for London [2011] EWCA Civ 1189 (02 November 2011)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Business Dream Ltd, Re Insolvency Act 1986 [2011] EWHC 2860 (Ch) (02 November 2011)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [2011] EWHC 2849 (Admin) (02 November 2011)
Source: www.bailii.org
Rainy Sky SA and others v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50; [2011] WLR (D) 311
“When the term of a contract was capable of having two possible meanings which were both arguable, it was appropriate for the court to have regard to considerations of commercial common sense and to adopt the construction which was more, rather than less, commercial.”
WLR Daily, 2nd November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Mitu v Camden London Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1249; [2011] WLR (D) 310
“Where a local authority, having decided that an applicant was intentionally homeless and not in priority need, decided on review of the application that the applicant’s homelessness was not intentional, it had a duty by section 192(2) of the Housing Act 1996 to provide or arrange for the provision of advice and assistance, and a discretion by section 192(3) of the 1996 Act to provide accommodation. Failure to consider the exercise of that discretionary power, if it affected the fairness of the decision, was a procedural deficiency requiring the local authority to give the applicant notice of its intended decision and allow him to make further representations either orally or in writing.”
WLR Daily, 1st November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to hear a proposed appeal from a decision of a court conducting extradition proceedings (which were criminal in nature), where that decision related to a matter which was wholly collateral to the extradition proceedings themselves, which was instigated by someone not a party to the proceedings and did not involve the lower court invoking its criminal jurisdiction or making an order which had any bearing on those proceedings.”
WLR Daily, 25th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A worker had been subjected to a detriment “on the ground that” he had made a protected disclosure, for the purposes of section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996, if the protected disclosure was a material factor in the employer’s decision to subject the employee to a detrimental act.”
WLR Daily, 25th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk