‘Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch). Quite a lot of councils have agreements with water suppliers under which the council will collect water charges from their tenants, effectively as an addition to the rent. This case concerned a challenge to the nature and validity of Southwark’s agreement, at least before 2013.’
Nearly Legal, 5th March 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘Lafferty v Newark & Sherwood District Council [2016] EWHC 320 (QB). Does section 4(4) of the Defective Premises Act 1972 create a strict liability on the landlord for any defect, such that it covers latent or undetectable defects? The short answer is no. This appeal sets out why.’
Nearly Legal, 6th March 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘Six months ago I discussed at some length the issues arising from the decision of the Supreme Court in Jackson v Murray [2015] PIQR P249. More recently in Sabir v Osei-Kwabena [2016] PIQR Q56, the problem cropped up again, this time in the Court of Appeal.’
Zenith PI, 7th March 2016
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘A London borough has overcharged approximately 37,000 tenants for water and sewerage services, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption): [2016] EWHC 440 (Fam)
‘In two cases babies, JL and AO, were born in England to mothers from Eastern Europe but relinquished at birth for adoption. In the case of JL the child, whose Estonian mother worked in England and whose putative father lived in Estonia, was accommodated by the local authority with the mother’s consent pursuant to an agreement under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and was placed with foster carers. The mother gave her written consent to his adoption and the putative father, maternal family and the Estonian authorities all supported his adoption in this country. The local authority sought a placement order under section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. In the case of AO, the Hungarian parents working in England wished the child to be adopted in this country. AO had been removed at birth and placed with foster carers and had been made a ward of court. The local authority, children’s guardian and Hungarian authorities sought the child’s return to Hungary so that she could be placed for adoption there. Common issues arose as to what jurisdiction the court had to make orders facilitating such placements, (ii) the factors which had to be taken into account when making decisions about relinquished babies, the possible outcomes and the procedures to be followed and (iii) where a child born to nationals of a foreign country had been placed voluntarily in the care of a local authority, with a view to adoption or otherwise, whether the authority was under an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 to inform the consular officials of that country about the placement. In the case of JL, the further issues arose whether the court had jurisdiction to make a placement order and what order, if any, should be made. In the case of AO, the further issues arose whether it was open to the court either to transfer jurisdiction to Hungary under Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels IIA”) or to make an order permitting the local authority to send AO to Hungary; and what order, if any, the court should make.’
WLR Daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The claimant suffered a head injury and was taken to a hospital managed by the defendant. A CT scan was performed some six hours after his admission and he was transferred to another hospital where he underwent surgery. He was left with cognitive and neuropsychological deficits. He claimed damages in negligence against the defendant contending, inter alia, that the defendant’s negligent delay in undertaking the CT scan had resulted in a period of raised intra-cranial pressure which had caused or materially contributed to his brain damage. The defendant contended that only if the claimant could establish that damaging raised intra-cranial pressure caused by the defendant’s negligence had caused his brain injury that, applying the classic “but for” test of causation, he could recover as against the defendant, and that it was insufficient to establish “material contribution”.’
WLR Daily, 16th March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council: [2016] EWHC 448 (Admin)
‘The claimant submitted two separate planning applications to the defendant: one for the installation of a mezzanine floor at its property; and the other for external works to the property, which created no additional floor space. The defendant granted planning permission for both applications, informing the claimant that the mezzanine installation was development liable to a community infrastructure levy (“CIL”). The defendant’s view was that the development proposals fell within the scope of the meaning of development for CIL purposes due to the direct link between the two applications for the mezzanine and external alterations. The defendant, as the relevant CIL collecting authority, subsequently issued a CIL liability notice under regulation 65 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 in relation to the installation of a mezzanine floor and external alterations at the claimant’s property, and a demand notice under regulation 69 of the 2010 Regulations in respect of the same development. By a judicial review claim the claimant challenged the lawfulness of the defendant’s act in issuing the two notices on the grounds that the mezzanine planning permission fell within the exemption created by regulation 6(1)(c) and that the external planning permission created no floor space and so was not liable to a CIL.’
WLR daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The chief constable leading the fight against digital crime is calling for new legislation to tackle an “unimagined scale of online abuse” that he says is threatening to overwhelm the police service. Stephen Kavanagh, who heads Essex police, argues it is necessary to consolidate and simplify offences committed online to improve the chance of justice for tens of thousands of victims.’
The Guardian, 4th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A 92-year-old woman facing deportation has been given permission to stay in the UK.’
BBC News, 5th March 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Nine pharmacists who sold drugs illegally have been banned from practice, after a BBC investigation led to the “biggest crackdown” in UK pharmaceutical history.’
BBC News, 6th March 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A new law aimed at protecting children from health risks of adults smoking in cars has turned into a farce after it emerged that Britain’s largest police force has not prosecuted a single driver.’
Daily Telegraph, 7th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Police refused to respond to calls for help from staff at psychiatric units covering a large swath of east London and Essex on more than 125 occasions last year. The figures were released in response to a Guardian freedom of information request that sheds new light on how overstretched staff in mental health units are increasingly on the receiving end of violence.’
The Guardian, 7th March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024