Pontypridd: £37m school shake-up scrapped by judicial review – BBC News
‘A £37m schools reorganisation in the south Wales valleys has been quashed after a judicial review.’
BBC News, 30th July 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Prosecution service under fire over record low rape convictions – The Guardian
‘The Crown Prosecution Service has faced a barrage of criticism after rape convictions in England and Wales fell to a record low, with police publicly censuring its charging policies and a judge paving the way for a landmark legal challenge.’
The Guardian, 30th July 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
Equal Pay, Parental Rights, Personal Beliefs and Protest Movements – a review of recent developments in the areas of sport and employment law – Littleton Chambers
‘Across the board people have been reassessing how the traditional views of what it means to be an “employee” fit within our modern world.’
Littleton Chambers, 21st July 2020
Source: littletonchambers.com
Reining in the rule against reflective loss: Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd – Hardwicke Chambers
‘In a much-anticipated judgment, the Supreme Court in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd unanimously allowed an appeal against a decision which, if it had been allowed to stand, would have denuded the intentional economic torts of much of their practical utility.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th July 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
“Stay” no more: the future for possession claims. Practice Direction 55C (and Christmas?) – Falcon Chambers
‘First it was CPR PD 51Z. Then CPR 55.29. Not to mention Arkin v Marshall [2020] EWCA Civ 620; Hackney LBC v Okoro [2020] EWCA Civ 681; TFS Stores Ltd v Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 833. Has any other element of civil procedure law, not least one with a mere 5 month lifespan, ever received consideration no fewer than three times by the Court of Appeal? Such is the significance of the coronavirus-related general stay of possession claims.’
Falcon Chambers, 20th July 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
A right to cross-examine? The current position – No. 5 Chambers
‘There is, generally, a right to cross-examine. It was established in the 1992 rules, and is present in the same form in r 16(5) of the 2000 Rules:
“A person entitled to appear at an inquiry shall be entitled to call evidence and the appellant, the local planning authority and any statutory party shall be entitled to cross-examine persons giving evidence, but, subject to the foregoing and paragraphs (6) and (9), the calling of evidence and the cross-examination of persons giving evidence shall otherwise be at the discretion of the inspector.” ’
No. 5 Chambers, 21st July 2020
Source: www.no5.com
McKenzie v Leeds Crown Court – Exchange Chambers
‘The Claimant was due to have his 4 day trial commence in Leeds Crown Court on 27th April 2020. On 23rd March the Lord Chief Justice pronounced that no new trials would commence until further notice. This was categorised during the claim as a “listing decision”; one that affected every single criminal case in the jurisdiction that was pending trial before the Crown Court. The application to extend the Claimant’s CTL was made the same day the decision was made on the recent pro-forma application which states that each application is “made due to the current public health crisis”. The application was heard on what would have been the first day of trial and in a written judgement of the Claimant’s CTL was extended. These applications have been made up and down the country on the same basis and so the claim was of wide public importance.’
Exchange Chambers, 23rd July 2020
Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk
Reflecting on “reflective loss”: Case note on Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 – Hailsham Chambers
‘The appeal to the Supreme Court in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 re-states the principle that a company’s shareholders cannot recover damages against a wrongdoer for loss which is “reflective” of a loss caused by the wrongdoer to the company itself.’
Hailsham Chambers, July 2020
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
Arbitration Claims Under CPR Part 62: Is Forum Non Conveniens Relevant? – Hardwicke Chambers
‘This article reviews the recent case of Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO “Insurance Company Chubb” & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWCA Civ 574.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 23rd July 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
BAILII: Recent Deisions
Supreme Court
Lehtimaki & Ors v Cooper [2020] UKSC 33 (29 July 2020)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) LLC v Brownlie [2020] EWCA Civ 996 (29 July 2020)
Houldsworth Village Management Company Ltd v Barton [2020] EWCA Civ 980 (29 July 2020)
Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor v RH [2020] EWCA Civ 1001 (29 July 2020)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Welsh Ministers [2020] EWHC 1993 (Admin) (30 July 2020)
Klisins v Regional Court of Dobele, Latvia [2020] EWHC 2076 (Admin) (29 July 2020)
Pommell v Crown Prosecution Service [2020] EWHC 2074 (Admin) (29 July 2020)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Eric Wright Group Ltd v Council of the City of Manchester [2020] EWHC 2089 (Ch) (30 July 2020)
Celgard, LLC v Shenzhen Senior Technology Material Co Ltd [2020] EWHC 2072 (Ch) (30 July 2020)
Telnic Ltd v Knipp Medien Und Kommunikation GmbH [2020] EWHC 2075 (Ch) (29 July 2020)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Serious Fraud Office & Anor v LCL & Ors (Ruling) [2020] EWHC 2077 (Comm) (28 July 2020)
Serious Fraud Office & Anor v LCL & Ors (Ruling) [2020] EWHC 2079 (Comm) (28 July 2020)
Apache North Sea Ltd v Ineos FPS Ltd [2020] EWHC 2081 (Comm) (30 July 2020)
Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2021 (Comm) (30 July 2020)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Source: www.bailii.org
Family Law Newsletter – Spire Barristers
‘Issue #35 of Spire Barristers’ Family Law Newsletter: edited by Connie Purdy and Taz Irshad; news and Case Reviews by Georgina Dalton.’
Spire Barristers, 22nd July 2020
Source: spirebarristers.co.uk
No recourse to public funds; no recourse to dignity – 1MCB
‘Geeta Koska recently published a blog on the future impact on the protection of children’s welfare of the High Court’s decision in R (W, A Child By His Litigation Friend J) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department & Another [2020] EWHC 1299 (Admin). The blog was published in “Children and Young People Now”.’
1MCB, July 2020
Source: 1mcb.com
No duty to exercise option reasonably or in good faith in engine maintenance agreement (Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd v Lufthansa Technik AG) – 3PB
‘The High Court found that there was no duty of good faith or duty to act reasonably in respect of an option to withdraw engines from a maintenance agreement. The judgment provides a helpful discussion of the case law concerning the principles of contractual interpretation and implied terms (including on the basis of the Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and Socimer International Bank v Standard Bank London line of cases and relational contracts). The judgment also serves as a reminder to practitioners that evidence of statements made in precontractual negotiations, including mutual understanding (subject to limited exceptions) are generally inadmissible to assist with the interpretation of a concluded contract. Written by Rebecca Farrell, counsel, at 3 Paper Buildings.’
3PB, July 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
Local Authority Powers: Coronavirus Update ‘Part 2A’ Public Health Orders – 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square
‘As the UK emerges from lockdown, and as local spikes start to emerge, it is increasingly important that new cases of coronavirus are identified quickly and that anyone who may be infectious complies with guidelines on quarantine, self-isolation and contact tracing. This article considers the potential of Part 2A Public Health Orders as a tool for local authorities to enforce testing and quarantine requirements where infectious individuals refuse to comply voluntarily and pose a threat to public health.’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 20th July 2020
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
New Judgment: Lehtimaki & Ors v Cooper [2020] UKSC 33 – UKSC Blog
‘The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation is a charitable company with more than $4bn in assets helping children in developing countries. It was founded by Sir Christopher Hohn and Ms Jamie Cooper in 2002, but it became difficult to manage when their marriage broke down. These proceedings stem from the steps they took to resolve those difficulties. Specifically, they agreed that in exchange for a grant of $360 million to Big Win Philanthropy, a charity founded by Ms Cooper, she would resign as a member and trustee of CIFF.’
UKSC Blog, 29th July 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
Grounds for Setting Aside a Will: Undue Influence – Pallant Chambers
‘The loss of a loved one is already an incredibly difficult and emotional time. Sometimes the situation is made worse by the discovery of suspicious circumstances surrounding the making of the will. This series of posts will examine some of the ways in which a will can be challenged.’
Pallant Chambers, 22nd July 2020
Source: www.pallantchambers.co.uk
Upper Tribunal dismisses bid to claim adverse possession over land owned by city council – Local Government Lawyer
‘Two applicants have been told they cannot claim adverse possession of council-owned land which is not adjacent to their own.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th July 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
