‘On 7 February 2020 Mrs Justice Cockerill DBE handed down judgment in PBS Energo AS v Bester Generacion UK Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 223 (TCC). Steven Walker QC and Tom Owen appeared for Bester instructed by Rebecca Williams of Watson Farley Williams.’
Atkin Chambers, 7th February 2020
Source: www.atkinchambers.com
‘Welcome to the February issue of Spire Barristers’ Public Law Newsletter covering news from around the web, practice updates and case reviews in Court of Protection and Public Law matters.’
Spire Barrister, 14th February 2020
Source: spirebarristers.co.uk
‘Where a Local Authority (the ‘Billing Authority) applies by way of complaint to the Magistrates Court for a liability order against an alleged ratepayer, for allegedly due but unpaid, national non-domestic rates (‘Business Rates’), the Magistrates Court will issue a summons requiring the alleged ratepayer to attend the Magistrates Court to answer the complaint (the ‘Complaint’).’
33 Bedford Row, 16th February 2020
Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk
‘The dispute arose from the claimant’s back problems, which, it was agreed, made her disabled within the Equality Act 2010. She was unable to travel far and wanted to work mainly from home. This caused difficulty because her role, auditing the performance of National Health Service bodies, was “client facing” and required her to visit those bodies. She was eventually dismissed for reason of ill-health capability after an occupational health report and negotiations with her union representative. The respondent was concerned that she was not meeting her financial targets, i.e. the required amount of chargeable time billed to the respondent’s clients. These receipts from clients funded her salary. There were not enough clients within the short travelling distance from her home that she could manage.’
3PB, 7th February 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘In 1999, Jerry Hall and Mick Jagger separated and in a move heralding a long and acrimonious legal battle, Jagger sensationally released a public statement saying that he would be contesting Jerry Hall’s petition for divorce on the grounds that he and Jerry Hall were not and never had been married!’
Becket Chambers, 17th February 2020
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘The Claimant (herein after referred to as “C”) was employed by the Respondent (herein after referred to as “R”) as a caseworker from 4 August 2016 until her dismissal on 8 December 2016, with the grounds for dismissing her being ones of conduct and performance during her probationary period.’
3PB, 7th February 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The decision of Master Cook in ARN v Ageas Insurance Ltd (27/1/2020), when approving a Fatal Accident Act settlement involving four children, provides a novel and pragmatic solution to a difficult apportionment problem. A single mother was killed in a road traffic accident, leaving four young children. The children were the deceased’s only dependants and their claim was settled for a substantial lump sum.’
12 King's Bench Walk, 13th February 2020
Source: www.12kbw.co.uk
‘Widespread knowledge that a company is subject to a creditor’s winding up petition can cause that company serious harm. Where the creditor’s winding up petition is warranted, this harm may just be an unfortunate consequence of a valid legal process being pursued against it. However, where the creditor’s winding up petition is unwarranted, and is eventually dismissed because it is unwarranted, its dismissal will be ‘cold comfort’ to the company where, in the intervening period between presentation and dismissal, the company has suffered irreparable reputational and operational damage.’
33 Bedford Row, 4th February 2020
Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk
‘Welcome to our February 2020, 5SAH Extradition and International quarterly newsletter. We are pleased to present a variety of articles from our team of specialist extradition and international law barristers.’
5SAH, 13th February 2020
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
‘The claimant (Mr Russell) was one of four individuals involved in a joint venture property development business. The parties entered into a joint venture agreement which obliged them to act with good faith towards each other, in certain limited respects. Mr Russell departed the business pursuant to the terms of a settlement deed. Shortly after that deed was executed, the remaining parties entered into an attractive development project that Mr Russell claimed the other parties did not tell him about, or give him the opportunity to participate in. Mr Russell claimed he was wrongfully excluded by the dishonest actions of the other joint venturers. The claims alleged were: (a) breach of fiduciary duty; (b) breach of the express/implied terms of the joint venture agreement; (c) fraudulent non-disclosure; (d) unlawful means conspiracy. As a result of the terms of the settlement deed, Mr Russell needed to establish fraud or dishonesty to succeed.’
Littleton Chambers, 13th February 2020
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Employment Tribunal judges have a wide discretion when making case management decisions, with it being rare for a challenge to such a decision being successful. The Court of Appeal in O’Cathail v Transport for London [2013] IRLR 310 have made it clear that tribunal decisions can only be questioned for error of law. The specific issue in that case was whether or not it was an error of law for a Tribunal to refuse a postponement application in circumstances in which a litigant in person had a fit note saying they were not fit to attend the hearing. The application was refused and the trial went ahead in his absence.’
3PB, 7th February 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The Claimant, Mr Casamitjana, was dismissed from his role at the League Against Cruel Sports in April 2018 after disclosing to colleagues that the company’s pension funds were being invested ‘unethically’. This was considered by the Respondent to be contrary to a management instruction not to provide financial advice to his colleagues. The Claimant brought claims of indirect discrimination, direct discrimination/harassment and victimisation by reference to his belief in ethical veganism, and PIDA detriment and dismissal, and wrongful dismissal.’
3PB, 7th February 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The Neo Bankside development is a striking modern development designed by Richard Rogers and Partners (now Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners). It is on the south side of the River Thames and is adjacent to the Tate Modern, Britain’s National gallery of international modern art, which is based in the former Bankside Power Station.’
Falcon Chambers, February 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘Neil Witham died at the age of 55 from mesothelioma leaving behind his wife (the Claimant) and his two foster children. At the heart of the dispute between the parties in this case was the width and breadth of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 and the proper method to quantify the dependency if it fell within the scope of the Act.’
12 King's Bench Walk, 14th February 2020
Source: www.12kbw.co.uk
‘This decision is important for any professional involved in solicitor and client disputes. The judgment is another example of the senior courts being willing to uphold robust case management decisions of first instance judges. Here the court held that “the judge was entitled to take the course he did which was well within the ambit of the proper exercise of his discretion.”’
Hardwicke Chambers, 19th February 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The statistics are against allowed appeals at the moment. Positive decisions from PINS on housing appeals are down. Appeals are failing in particular on heritage related matters. It is therefore critical in my view to neutralise as many issues as early as possible. And to be clear about the real focus from the outset. This appeal had ‘a full house’ when it came to an array of concerns, and some were heard through a round-table forum, making it hard to test assertions, particularly from members of the public.’
No. 5 Chambers, 17th February 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘Do the principles set down by the Supreme Court decision in the landmark decision in Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti (in which Simon Gorton QC and Jack Mitchell acted for the Royal Mail) apply to the assessment of whether an employer acted reasonably in dismissing an employee for the purposes of s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996?’
Old Square Chambers, 17th February 2020
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘In this post, we explain the Second Appeals test and note some recent developments in the area.’
Richmond Chambers, 14th February 2020
Source: immigrationbarrister.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025