‘The Institute of Licensing has published a Protocol designed to assist licensing authorities in complying with their obligations and duties under the Licensing Act 2003 during this emergency period.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘This appeal concerns the circumstances in which an employer is vicariously liable for wrongs committed by its employees, and also whether vicarious liability may arise for breaches by an employee of duties imposed by the Data Protection Act 1998.’
UKSC Blog, 1st April 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A former detective constable who admitted inappropriate contact with women he met in the course of his duties has been given a suspended sentence after a judge heard that no one else could care for his one-year-old child during the coronavirus lockdown.’
The Guardian, 6th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has taken the unusual step of rejecting an agreement between the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and a solicitor who broke the rules through his involvement with flight delay compensation claims.’
Legal Futures, 7th April 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A claimant who issued proceedings after the defendant accepted a part 36 offer for £0 – which he said had been made by mistake – has had his claim struck out for abuse of process.’
Litigation Futures, 7th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Liverpool City Council has launched a judicial review challenge of the government’s decision not to renew its landlord licensing scheme.’
Local Government Lawyer, 6th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘On 3 April 2020, the government issued the guidance ‘Applying for a domestic violence (Family Law Act) injunction for unrepresented applicants’.’
Legal Aid Handbook, 6th April 2020
Source: legalaidhandbook.com
‘Sir Keir Starmer has been elected leader of the Labour Party and has assembled his shadow cabinet.’
Each Other, 6th April 2020
Source: eachother.org.uk
‘The UK government must ensure pupils from poor backgrounds have computers and internet connections during the coronavirus lockdown or face legal action for depriving children of their education, according to a group of legal activists.’
The Guardian, 6th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The High Court has rejected a “fanciful” £600,000 conveyancing negligence claim against the law firm Gateley, based on an error admitted by the firm.’
Legal Futures, 6th April 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Thousands of UK motorists have won the first stage of a High Court action against Volkswagen over the installation of emissions cheating devices in its diesel vehicles.’
BBC News, 6th April 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The claimant in this case had a number of cervical smear tests carried out. Each test was negligently reported to the effect that the hospital failed to detect her cervical cancer, leaving her infertile. Before having chemo-radiotheraphy, the claimant had 8 eggs collected and frozen. She sought to have four children and her preference was for surrogacy arrangements in California on a commercial basis. The present appeal concerned the damages payable for the loss of her ability to have her own child. The High Court had dismissed the claimant’s claim for commercial surrogacy in California as contrary to public policy, and held that surrogacy using donor eggs was not restorative of the claimant’s fertility but allowed damags for own-egg surrogacies in the UK. The Court of Appeal found in favour of the claimant. The hospital appealed to the Supreme Court.’
UKSC Blog, 1st April 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘On 19 March, screened by the draft Corona: Defence of the Realm Bill, the long awaited Windrush: Lessons Learned Report (hereafter Lessons Learned) was published. For those who have missed out on the considerable publicity generated by the Windrush Generation scandal, a short account is in order. The Windrush Generation broadly comprises Commonwealth citizens who have indefinite leave to remain in the UK or “settled status” on the basis of having settled in the UK before 1973 when the Commonwealth Immigration Act 1971 came into force, and not since 1988 having left the UK for more than two years. Many of these elderly British citizens were unable to prove their right to live here to the satisfaction of the Home Office (perhaps because they entered the country on a parent’s passport or had lost their papers in the ensuing forty-odd years since their arrival). These unfortunate “surprised Brits” were denied healthcare, welfare benefits, pensions, lost their settled housing and long-term jobs, were taken into detention and even deported. They had become victims of the so-called “hostile environment” policy, a set of measures introduced in 2012 by Theresa May when Home Secretary with a view to making life as difficult as possible in the UK for people with no legal status to encourage them to leave. The measures were defended at the time by Theresa May, then Home Secretary, and incorporated into the Immigration Act 2014.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 6th April 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The First-Tier Tribunal General Regulatory Chamber (Information Rights) has – with immediate effect – stayed for a period of 28 days all proceedings under section 48 of the Data Protection Act 1998, section 162 of the Data Protection Act 2018 and section 57 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (‘CCA’) represents a legal landmark. It updated and consolidated laws which enabled public authorities to prepare for, and respond effectively to, emergencies, replacing the Emergency Powers Act 1920 with a more comprehensive and consensual design. While it was motivated by domestic and global crises, it was not enacted in haste but benefited from a prolonged consultation period led by a special parliamentary joint committee. The final draft systematically furnished the executive with all conceivable powers, yet contained vital legal and parliamentary oversight to avert disproportionate action. The CCA addressed the widest range of possible eventualities: terrorist attacks, protests, environmental events – and human and animal disease pandemics. In other words, there already existed legislation designed to tackle the circumstances of coronavirus which indubitably qualifies as an emergency. Yet, rather than utilise this framework, the government has resorted to fresh legislation in the Coronavirus Act 2020. Why?’
Law Society's Gazette, 2nd April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘At this point, it is almost trite to say that we are living through unprecedented events. The global spread of the Coronavirus pandemic poses serious challenges to society. So far, the global death-toll has exceeded 21,000 and life as we know it in the UK has changed dramatically. In response to this crisis the Government has announced drastic measures in order to curb the spread of the virus and to support those who may be affected. Indeed, it seems that Cicero’s famous injunction to let the welfare of the people be the highest law has gained a new relevance in the age of COVID-19.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 2nd April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A conman funded a “lavish lifestyle” that included trips to Las Vegas by scamming rail delay compensation schemes out of £40,000.’
BBC News, 3rd April 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In this appeal, the Supreme Court is asked to decide whether Barclays Bank is vicariously liable for sexual assaults allegedly committed between 1968 and about 1984 by the late Dr Gordon Bates. Dr Bates was a self-employed medical practitioner with a portfolio practice. His work included conducting medical assessments and examinations of prospective Barclays employees. Barclays required job applicants to pass a pre-employment medical examination as part of its recruitment and employment procedures.’
UKSC Blog, 1st April 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘In R (DN – Rwanda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 7, the Supreme Court held that the Claimant was entitled to purse a claim for unlawful detention on the basis that the decision to detain for the purposes of deportation could not be separated from the decision to deport. Accordingly, if the decision to deport was unlawful, then so inevitably was the decision to detain.
UK Human Rights Blog, 3rd April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025