‘A second appeal on a homelessness review, where a finding of intentional homelessness had been upheld, raising an important point on whether events or factors post-dating the decision or action that led to eviction need to be considered on review.’
Nearly Legal, 19th April 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The judgment Re Carluccio’s Ltd [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch) provides some much-needed clarity on the interrelation of the Furlough Scheme and the requirements of insolvency legislation. It is to be commended for its clarity and for the fact that it had to construe the workings of the Furlough Scheme in the absence of any statutory guidance as to its implementation. It is to be hoped that, when the Government comes to enact the necessary legislative measures (including perhaps amendments to Schedule B1 and IR 2016), that it does so with this judgment very firmly in mind.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 14th April 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘In the final part of our three-part mini-series: Civil Procedure, Human Rights and the Coronavirus, we consider how litigators may use the civil procedure rules to drive litigation forward in the time of coronavirus.’
Blackstone Chambers, 14th April 2020
‘An Upper Tribunal judge has set aside a decision by a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that upheld – after a freedom of information request – the withholding of an agent’s advice to a local authority on the tactics it should apply in negotiations with Tesco over a proposed development.’
Local Government Lawyer, 20th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Force majeure is a continental law (Civil Code) concept addressing, in very general terms, some event or circumstance that causes the inability to perform obligations under a contract.’
3PB, 3rd April 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘Two fee-earners are not needed for attending a witness or client – and you cannot charge for solicitors travelling to clients.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Employers looking to make 20 or more employees redundant must comply with rigorous procedural safeguards under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (“TULRCA”). Although the disruption caused by Covid-19 may force many employers to suddenly and unexpectedly consider a collective redundancy exercise, these safeguards remain unchanged by HM Government’s recent emergency legislation. Failure to follow the correct procedure can expose employers to liability for protective awards, although the current pandemic may well assist in establishing a defence of “special circumstances”.’
Thomas More Chambers, 16th April 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
‘We have heard a lot about how the courts are responding to the coronavirus pandemic by conducting hearings online instead of in a physical court room. But while hearings by Skype and Zoom enable participants to maintain social distancing and avoid the risks of contagion, they may not work for everyone. Is there another way of delivering justice to the digitally excluded?’
Transparency Project, 19th April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘The protocol aimed at cutting out opportunistic tactics by either claimants or defendants in personal injury (PI) cases during the Covid-19 pandemic has been extended to at least 20 May.’
Litigation Futures, 20th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In these strange and confusing times, every aspect of our legal system has been touched by delays, adjournments, revision and fundamental change. The management of housing, so reliant on face-to-face contact at all stages, has been subject to significant amendment.’
Park Square Barristers, 14th April 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Society is experiencing the biggest Government led restriction of movement since the Second World War, instigated by The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 which came into force at 1pm on 26th March 2020.’
St John's Buildings, 15th April 2020
Source: stjohnsbuildings.com
‘Many will no doubt pore over the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department to evaluate its significance for the common law constraint of prerogative power. Ultimately, however, the Supreme Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 that rendered the decision in question unlawful. This post considers the significance of the Data Protection Act 2018 for protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects. Although the narrow ground upon which the judgment was decided will offer some procedural protections for fundamental rights and freedoms, the case’s significance lies in its suggestion as to how data protection law might offer some scope for extending the extraterritorial application of human rights beyond the limits of the European Convention on Human Rights.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th April 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The House of Lords Constitution Committee recently published its recommendations in relation to the government’s fast-tracked Coronavirus Bill 2020. The House of Lords debates have welcomed the government’s decision not to derogate from the ECHR (in contrast to several other contracting parties). However, in seeking to ensure ECHR-compliance of the proposed scheme, the Committee placed significant emphasis on the availability of judicial review and administrative oversight of the powers contained therein to ensure their legality and constitutional acceptability. In this piece I suggest that, whilst these suggestions are no doubt welcome, the Committee’s focus on procedure rather than on the substantive requirements of human rights is indicative of wider concerning trends in human rights discourse.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 9th April 2020
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘It is a brave new world. The lockdown brought about by the coronavirus crisis is forcing the hand of our infamously old-fashioned profession to adapt quickly or lose myriad court dates; leaving our clients without satisfactory and timely resolutions to their disputes.’
3PB, 19th April 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 were made by the Health Secretary on 26 March 2020. Understandably, given the speed with which the crisis was and still is developing, the Regulations were made using a statutory emergency procedure, meaning that they were not subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. They have yet to be challenged in the courts. In the meantime, a lively and important debate has developed about whether those regulations are lawful.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Marie Dinou, the woman from York convicted of a non-existent coronavirus offence after being found “loitering between platforms” at Newcastle railway station was lucky to be charged with something newsworthy. Had hers been a mundane motoring charge it is highly unlikely that anyone would have spotted that her treatment by the police and the justice system was stupid, incompetent and unlawful.’
Pump Court Chambers, 7th April 2020
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
‘The Metropolitan police are to review the role of officers in schools after a legal challenge raised concerns that they could have a disproportionately negative effect on pupils from black and minority ethnic groups.’
The Guardian, 20th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Two judgments from the Supreme Court have set restrictions on the scope of vicarious liability. In Barclays Bank v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13 the test was whether the tortfeasor was in fact the ‘employee’ of the employer. The claimants alleged that they had suffered sexual abuse by a GP hired by the bank to carry out medical assessments of employees.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The applicant in Hafeez is a sixty-year old man with a number of health conditions, including diabetes and asthma. He was arrested pursuant to a request by the US Government for his extradition on drugs charges. He challenges the decision to extradite him, arguing that his pre-conviction and post-conviction detention conditions in the US would be inhuman and degrading; and that there is a real risk that he would be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024