Guy Delph: ‘Manipulative’ child rapist jailed for life – BBC News
‘A “manipulative” child rapist who shared his abuse images with his uncle has been given a life sentence.’
BBC News, 7th May 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
BAILII: Recent Decisions
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Devani [2020] EWCA Civ 612 (07 May 2020)
Glencairn IP Holdings Ltd & Anor v Product Specialities Inc & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 609 (07 May 2020)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Lomax, Re [2020] EWHC 1124 (Admin) (07 May 2020)
Thomas, Re [2020] EWHC 1121 (Admin) (07 May 2020)
Bangura, Re [2020] EWHC 1122 (Admin) (07 May 2020)
Dias, Re [2020] EWHC 1123 (Admin) (07 May 2020)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Boston Trust Company Ltd v Szerelmey Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 1136 (Ch) (07 May 2020)
Jones v The Sky Wheels Group Ltd [2020] EWHC 1112 (Ch) (07 May 2020)
Gregory & Ors v A.R.G. (Mansfield) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1133 (Ch) (07 May 2020)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Yoo Design Services Ltd v ILIV Reality Pte Ltd [2020] EWHC 1077 (Comm) (07 May 2020)
High Court (Family Division)
H (Deceased), Re [2020] EWHC 1134 (Fam) (07 May 2020)
A City Council v M & Ors [2020] EWHC 947 (Fam) (07 May 2020)
High Court (Patents Court)
Rockwool International A/S v Knauf Insulation Ltd [2020] EWHC 1068 (Pat) (07 May 2020)
Court (Queen’s Bench Division)
Lunat & Anor v Lunat & Anor [2020] EWHC 1128 (QB) (07 May 2020)
Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1125 (QB) (07 May 2020)
Hankin v Barrington & Ors [2020] EWHC 1131 (QB) (07 May 2020)
Source: www.bailii.org
Police urged to justify use of stun guns against black men – The Guardian
‘The Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester force have been urged to make clear whether or not the use of stun guns against black men by officers this week was proportionate and reasonable.’
The Guardian, 10th May 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
Homelessness Law and Practice: Coronavirus Update – 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square
‘Though there is little firm evidence of the extent of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the homeless population or the effectiveness of measures adopted by the government to mitigate that impact, it is clear that the crisis poses unique and urgent risks to this part of society. The Housing, Communities, and Local Government Committee has launched an inquiry into this issue which will meet for the first time next week, and it is more than likely that we will see more changes to this fast-developing area in the weeks and months to come.’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 6th May 2020
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
Children in prison during the COVID-19 pandemic – practitioners guides – Garden Court Chambers
‘Kate Aubrey-Johnson of the Garden Court Criminal Defence Team and Dr Laura Janes of The Howard League for Penal Reform, have prepared a practitioner’s guide on ending the detention of children during the COVID-19 lockdown period.’
Garden Court Chambers, 1st May 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
New judgment: Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd [2020 UKSC 18] – UKSC Blog
‘Two of the leases of 11-13 Randolph Crescent are held by the respondent, Dr Duval and a third lease Is held by Ms Martha Winfield. Each lease contains a covenant, clause 2.6, which prevents the lessee from making any alteration or improvement in, or addition to, the premises demised by the lease without the prior consent of the landlord. Each lease contains an absolute covenant, clause 2.7, which prevents the lessee from cutting into any roofs, walls, ceilings or service media. Clause 3.19 requires the landlord to enforce, at the request and cost of the lessee, certain covenants in the leases held by other lessees, including any covenant of a similar nature to clause 2.7. Mrs Winfield sought a licence from the landlord to carry out works to her flat which the landlord granted, subject to Mrs Winfield securing adequate insurance. Dr Duval then issued proceedings against the landlord seeking a declaration that the landlord did not possess the power to permit Mrs Winfield to act in breach of clause 2.7 of her lease. The landlord appealed to the Supreme Court.’
UKSC Blog, 6th May 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
Jurisdiction of the court as well as the adjudicator under scrutiny – Hardwicke Chambers
‘Waksman J was asked by a contractor, Flexidig, to enforce an adjudicator’s decision ordering payment against its employer, M&M. Flexidig had been appointed by M&M to carry out civil works associated with the installation of new Virgin Media underground infrastructure in Lough, Lincolnshire.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th April 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
Patents – Akebia Therapeutics Inc v Fibrogen, Inc – NIPC Law
‘This was a claim by Akebia Therapeutics Inc.(“Akebia”) and Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“Otsuka”) to revoke 6 patents held by FibroGen Inc. (“FibroGen”). The reason why they sought the revocation of those patents is that they wished to market their own product vadadustat. FibroGen’s exclusive licensee, Astellas Pharma Inc (“Astellas”) brought quia timet infringement proceedings against Akebia, Otsuka and FibroGen. The proceedings came on before Lord Justice Arnold between 2 and 19 March 2020. His lordship delivered judgment on 20 April 2020.’
NIPC Law, 5th May 2020
Source: nipclaw.blogspot.com
Claims by clubs in the event of a cancelled season – Littleton Chambers
‘In this short piece, Andrew Nixon and Alex Harvey of Sheridans Sports Group, and David Reade QC and Nick Siddall QC of the Littleton Sports Group consider some of the potential claims which may arise from league seasons being cancelled, with a particular focus on the Premier League. The authors also look at how any losses may be assessed.’
Littleton Chambers, 7th May 2020
Source: littletonchambers.com
Benefits of ADR (and risks of refusing) – Park Square Barristers
‘Most litigators will have seen the standard directions order requiring parties to consider alternative dispute resolution as a means of resolving their case. Most will also appreciate the potential cost consequences of unreasonably refusing to engage in ADR. Despite this, it is not uncommon for one party to refuse to engage in any form of ADR due to the perception that it has a strong case.’
Park Square Barristers, 6th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
FINDINGS OF FACT………’Failure to protect’. – Becket Chambers
‘It is always good to return to basics and remind ourselves of the fundamental principle that ‘findings of fact’ must be based on evidence, and this can include inferences that can properly be drawn from the evidence’. A reminder that it is not on suspicion or simply speculation. (RE A (Fact Finding: Disputed Findings) [2011] EWCA Civ 12 [2011] 1 FLR 1817.’
Becket Chambers, 5th May 2020
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
The Coronavirus and Employers’ Liability for PPE – Ropewalk Chambers
‘The Coronavirus pandemic is likely to lead to litigation in various forms1; indeed, two doctors are reported to have already intimated a public law challenge to the lawfulness of the personal protective equipment (PPE) guidance published by the Department of Health and Social Care, and Public Health England.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 4th May 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
Enfranchisement Under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967: An overview and case law update – St Ives Chambers
‘This article is intended to provide a brief overview on the law of enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (‘LRA’), with an update on recent case law.’
St Ives Chambers, 4th May 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
Unexplained Wealth Orders: The Weapon Against Dirty Money – Pump Court Chambers
‘Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWO’s) were introduced into law through section 1 of the Criminal Finances Act 2017 by inserting section 362A to I into Part 8 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (“POCA”) They require a person who is reasonably suspected of involvement in, or being connected with persons involved in serious crime, to explain the nature and extent of their interest in property and how that interest was obtained.[1] If the person cannot provide an adequate explanation or satisfactory evidence, the property becomes recoverable property, subject to the POCA 2002.’
Pump Court Chambers, 28th April 2020
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
Judge was wrong not to adjourn trial involving injured litigant – Litigation Futures
‘A judge was wrong to refuse adjourning a trial where one of the litigants injured his back just before the hearing and needed an emergency operation, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 5th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
When Remote Justice Works – Transparency Project
‘During the current public health emergency, remote justice – hearings conducted wholly via audio/visual conferencing platforms – is the default position for all court cases. After early enthusiasm at the fact that the courts were able to acquire the technical skills and software to actually deliver remote hearings at all, there has been increasing concern about their efficacy, fairness and transparency and – in particular – about the loss of human connection and personal engagement they can entail, as described in these accounts from a judge, a journalist, and a lawyer). There has been less feedback from lay participants involved in remote justice, either as parties, or as observing members of the public.’
Transparency Project, 4th May 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
Health and Safety Claims Under The Employment Rights Act 1996 – Thomas More Chambers
‘At the present time, the issue of health and safety at work has never been more important. Employees on the frontline are, in many cases, being cajoled, threatened and bullied to attend work in circumstances where they have very legitimate concerns about the potential of being infected by Covid-19. Further, employees are often being forced to work in circumstances where their employers have failed to implement adequate health and safety measures. The continuing failure by the Government to provide adequate PPE to healthcare professionals is the most prominent example of such failures.’
Thomas More Chambers, 4th May 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
Weinstein director “must comply” with disclosure order – Litigation Futures
‘A former member of the board of the Weinstein Company does have to comply with a disclosure order in a sexual harassment case despite not living in the UK, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 7th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
The COVID-19 Self-Employment Income Support Scheme – Thomas More Chambers
‘On 26 March 2020 the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a package of support for Britain’s self-employed workers to help them through the COVID-19 crisis. It became immediately clear that higher earners making profits above £50,000 would lose out. The Chancellor, however, highlighted that it would benefit 95% of people who receive the majority of their income from self-employment and that it was “reasonable, proportionate and fair” to exclude those higher earners. The Treasury estimated that this approximately 3.8 million people would benefit.’
Thomas More Chambers, 29th April 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
Section 22 applications in light of the current crisis and the subsequent economic downturn – Drystone Chambers
‘The rise in applications under section 22 of the Proceeds of Crime Act have been clear over the last four years. It is now at a level where the Court of Appeal are hearing on average two matters a year and the case law has clearly established that the test of “just” under s.22 (4) is wide ranging.’
Drystone Chambers, 28th April 2020
Source: drystone.com
