Supreme Court, 4th March 2015
‘George Miller introduces leading experts from a wide variety of disciplines to discuss significant aspects of their respective fields in a series of accessible and stimulating discourses.George Miller introduces leading experts from a wide variety of disciplines to discuss significant aspects of their respective fields in a series of accessible and stimulating discourses.
Jeremy Phillips – Intellectual Property Consultant, Olswang, London; Professorial Fellow at the Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute. Editor of Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
An Honorary Research Fellow of the Intellectual Property Institute and Professorial Fellow, Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute, Professor Phillips has held positions in several leading academic institutions. He is the founder editor of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice and is also blogmeister of the IPKat and other weblogs.
In this podcast Jeremy outlines the field of IP law and how it was seen at the start of his intellectual property law career. Jeremy discusses how intellectual property evolved and grew to encompass many different features. He talks about how intellectual property interacts with the commercial world, including copyright in books and patents in pharmaceuticals, and how intellectual property law works in tandem with human rights law, and he also describes how the practical application of intellectual property works, and how human behaviour influences this.’
OUP Law Vox, 22nd March 2015
Source: www.soundcloud.com/oupacademic
Source:
‘A man known as the “naked rambler” has had his final appeal to be naked in public rejected by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).’
BBC News, 24th March 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In 1980, personal computers were still in their infancy, and the internet did not exist. There were, of course, genuine concerns about threats to our privacy, but, looking back at my book of that year, they mostly revolved around telephone tapping, surveillance, and unwanted press intrusion. Data protection legislation was embryonic, and the concept of privacy as a human right was little more than a chimera.’
OUP Blog, 20th March 2015
Source: http://blog.oup.com
‘In review proceedings under sections 2C and 2D of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997, challenging specified decisions of the Home Secretary to exclude an individual from the United Kingdom or refuse applications for naturalisation, the Home Secretary was required to disclose to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission and to the special advocates acting in the closed proceedings such material as had been used by the author of any relevant assessment, relied on by the Home Secretary in reaching the decision, to found or justify the facts or conclusions expressed therein; or if subsequently re-analysed, to disclose such material as was considered sufficient to justify those facts and conclusions and which was in existence at the date of decision.’
WLR Daily, 18th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘R(on the application of SG and others (previously JS and others)) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2015] UKSC 16. The Supreme Court was sharply divided yesterday over whether the benefit cap breaches the Human Rights Act.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 19th March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The approach to be taken to a defence to a claim for possession of residential premises which alleged unlawful discrimination against a disabled person, contrary to the Equality Act 2010, was different from that which applied to a defence which alleged a breach of an individual’s rights under article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In particular, summary judgment would not normally be an appropriate procedure for dealing with a possession claim where a disability discrimination defence was raised.’
WLR Daily, 11th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The government’s human rights watchdog has attacked Conservative party proposals to repeal the Human Rights Act and withdraw from the European court of human rights in Strasbourg.’
The Guardian, 20th March 2015
Soure: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court, in the case of Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd [2015] UKSC 15, have provided some much needed and helpful clarification of the practicalities of raising and potentially defeating a defence based on discrimination on a summary basis. In the event, events overtook the appeal, and Mr Akerman-Livingstone’s appeal was dismissed, but had it not been for a suitable offer of accommodation and the superior landlord serving notice to quit on the Housing Association and requiring vacant possession from them, the result would have been different.’
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 12th March 2015
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
‘This paper covers key information rights cases in 2014. The breadth of issues covered below, from legal professional privilege, human rights to vexatious requests, demonstrates the overlap between information law and many other areas of public law. This paper is intended to provide guidance, even for those who are not steeped, day-to-day, in the workings of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) and the Data Protection Act 1998 (the “DPA”), on the practical implications of these developments.’
Full story (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, February 2015
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Human Rights barrister claims gay marriage cake court case would erode right to refuse to act against conscience.’
Daily Telegraph, 18th March 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘This paper provides an overview of the procedure which has been put in place to implement the streamlined process by which the Court of Protection may authorise deprivations of liberty following the Supreme Court decision in P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19.’
Full story (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, February 2015
Source: www.39essex.com
‘The past decade has seen a number of advances in the field of law. As part of our exclusive Oxford law event, Unlock Oxford Law, we have asked some of our expert authors to identify what developments they thought were most significant. With constant changes and developments occurring across all the different areas of law, this is a subject that is very much up for debate. Read on to see what our authors said, and to see if you agree.’
OUP Blog, 18th March 2015
Source: www.blog.oup.com
‘In his monthly column, originally published by PLC, James Bickford Smith considers again the Supreme Court’s judgment in Coventry v Lawrence (No 2) [2014] UKSC 46, the adjourned hearing of which has been listed for 9-11 February 2015. James assesses some of the key issues which have been debated since his initial analysis of the decision in October 2014, including the potential uncertainty for current funding arrangements that are not dependent on the Access to Justice Act 1999.’
Littleton Chambers, 5th February 2015
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘These two appeals concern the assessment of article 8 ECHR claims in immigration cases. It is an important addition to the current cases on which rules apply to applications for leave to enter or remain made before the new Immigration Rules came into force on 9 July 2012. In Singh and Khalid, the Court of Appeal clarified the answer to this question and resolved the conflicting Court of Appeal authority in Edgehill v SSHD [2014] EWCA Civ 402 and Haleemudeen v SSHD [2014] EWCA Civ 558. ‘
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The Court of Appeal has considered the compatibility with Article 8 ECHR of the police’s removal of a 14 year old girl’s clothing after she had been arrested and taken to a police station.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘In a very welcome determination that comes a mere two years after the abolition of full rights of appeal for visitors but in the middle of the scything of full rights of appeal for everyone else, President McCloskey has turned his attention to the question of the relevance of compliance with the Immigration Rules to a human rights appeal. The answer is that where a person meets the terms of the Immigration Rules, their appeal will normally fall to be allowed on human rights grounds, assuming that human rights are engaged in some way in the first place.’
Free Movement, 10th March 2015
Source: www.freemovement.org.uk
‘R (Catt) and R (T) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] UKSC 9. A majority of the Supreme Court has held that the retention by police of information on the Domestic Extremism Database about a 91 year-old activist’s presence at political protests was (1) in accordance with the law and (2) a proportionate interference with his right to a private life under Article 8(1) of the ECHR.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 6th March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The Hon Mr Justice Hickinbottom gave a speech at The First Administrative Court in Wales Lecture on “Administrative Court in Wales – Evolution or Revolution” on 20 February 2014.’
Judiciary of England and Wales, 6th March 2015
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025