‘It is time to consider lowering the burden of proof used by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) from the criminal to the civil standard, Sir Brian Leveson, the president of the Queen’s Bench Division has said.’
Legal Futures, 11th November 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The defendant was charged with murder. He admitted that he had strangled his partner, but denied murder on the ground that he had suffered a loss of control and that he had a personality disorder such as to give rise to a defence of diminished responsibility. He was convicted of murder. He applied for permission to appeal against conviction on the grounds that the trial judge had: (i) been wrong to decide that the burden of proof in relation to diminished responsibilty lay on the defendant under section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957, as amended, notwithstanding article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; (ii) misdirected the jury in relation to the words “general capacity for tolerance or self-restraint” in section 54(3) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009; and (3) failed to give the jury guidance on the meaning of the word “substantially” in section 2(1)(b) of the 1957 Act.’
WLR Daily, 3rd November 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Moyo v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2015] EWHC 3547 (Admin); [2015] WLR (D) 555
‘In fitness to practise hearings there was no formal burden or standard of proof at the sanction stage of the proceedings; rather it was for the panel to use its own professional judgment to decide what sanction would be proportionate in order to protect the public interest, which included: (1) protection of patients and others; (2) maintenance of public confidence in the professions and the regulatory body; and (3) declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct and behaviour.’
WLR Daily, 10th December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has reiterated that the burden of proof for proving whether a marriage is a sham for immigration law purposes rests with the Home Office. The case is Agho v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1198 and it confirms the obiter remarks of former President Blake in the earlier tribunal case of Entry Clearance Officer, Nicosia v Papajorgji [2012] UKUT 00038 (IAC) (FM post: New case law on meaning of genuine and subsisting marriage).’
Free Movement, 9th December 2015
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
‘A regular issue that is being raised at MOJ Stage 3 hearings, particularly since the introduction of the 13th edition of the JC Guidelines: can parties make new offers in their Part B forms and benefit from the cost consequences of Part 36.29 for beating/matching them? This article aims to set out the relevant rules and paragraphs to determine this issue.’
Park Square Barristers, 6th November 2015
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2015] EWHC 2484 (QB), a judgment of Green J handed down today, is an interesting – if somewhat fact-specific – contribution to the burgeoning body of case law on how subject access requests (SARs) made under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) should be approached, both by data controllers and by courts.’
Panopticon, 25th August 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘The Government needs to introduce a second civil law to tackle revenge porn – because the current criminal law does not go far enough to help victims – according to a specialist in the field.’
Daily Telegraph, 4th August 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Last week wrote an introductory article on a service charge case, The Gateway (Leeds) Management Ltd v Naghash and Shamsizadeh (citation above), a decision of Martin Rodger QC, Deputy President in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), in which I acted for the Defendants/Respondents. The facts are set out in that piece, and I do not propose to rehearse them here.’
Park Square Barristers, 15th July 2015
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘The High Court (Swift J, 22 May 2015) has upheld an order dismissing a claim under section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) on the summary basis, in the absence of conduct on the part of a lender causative of unfairness in a debtor/creditor relationship.’
Henderson Chambers, 3rd June 2015
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘Lawyers who act on instructions in threatening potential intellectual property infringers with action are to be exempt from being sued when the threat turns out to be groundless, after the government recently gave the go-ahead for law reforms.’
Legal Futures, 13th April 2015
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘When the Court of Appeal held that a disability discrimination defence to possession under Equality Act 2010 had to face the same ‘seriously arguable’ summary test as an Article 8 defence, we were surprised, and very unimpressed. It seems the Supreme Court felt similarly (and unanimously), although sadly it did not help the tenant in this case.’
Nearly Legal, 29th March 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Red-faced Ministry of Justice (MoJ) officials have been forced to deny claims that they had dismantled a centuries-old cornerstone of British law in advice that the ministry gave to people facing criminal trials.’
The Guardian, 1st February 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Dr John Fox, barrister of Lamb Building, reviews some recent cases which may suggest a re-consideration of the burden of proof in cases of alleged non-accidental injury.’
Family Law Week, 27th November 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Two more men have been banned from contact with young girls in an “innovative” High Court case to prevent child sexual exploitation.’
BBC News, 20th November 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Interflora Inc and another v Marks and Spencer plc (No 5): [2014] EWCA Civ 1403; [2014] WLR (D) 473
‘On a claim for infringement of a trade mark under article 5(1)(a) of Council Directive 89/104/EEC through keyword advertising the onus of proof lay on the trade mark proprietor to establish that the advertisement complained of did not enable normally informed and reasonably attentive Internet users, or enabled them only with difficulty, to ascertain whether the goods or services referred to by the advertisement originated from the trade mark proprietor or an undertaking economically connected to it or, on the contrary, originated from a third party.’
WLR Daily, 5th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘This case is an interesting example of a claim for breach of confidence (both in contract and in equity) where, although liability was established, only nominal damages (£1) were awarded to the Claimant.’
RPC Privacy Law, 7th October 2014
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
‘There is an important difference in the burden of proof between tripping accidents on highway and slipping accidents in shops.’
Zenith PI Blog,
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘This talk looks at the legal and practical tools available to employment lawyers to prove or disprove direct discrimination and harassment, exploring in particular three areas:
How judges apply the burden of proof s136(2)(3) EA 2010.
What is the role of Comparators in light of the Supreme Court decision of Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] ICR 1054, SC.
What role does knowledge of the protected characteristic now play in light of IPC Media Ltd v Millar [2013] IRLR 707.’
Cloisters, 29th August 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 996; [2014] WLR (D) 335
‘Where a claimant applied to introduce a new claim by amendment under CPR r 17.4, and the defendant could show a prima facie defence of limitation, the burden was on the claimant to show that the defence was not reasonably arguable. Amendments seeking to add or substitute a new cause of action would only be permitted if they arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue on the existing claims.’
WLR Daily, 17th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025