‘A high profile celebrity woman, who has been described as a “figure of trust”, has been granted a court injunction to prevent her lover from leaking details of her affair with a famous married man to the press.
The Independent, 22nd May 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The case considered whether Mr Rhodes could be prevented from publishing his memoir on the basis that to do so would constitute the tort of intentionally causing harm. Those acting on behalf of Mr Rhodes’ son were particularly concerned about the effect upon him of learning of details of his father’s sexual abuse as a child.’
Full story
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd May 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A concert pianist has won a legal battle to publish an autobiographical book giving details of sexual abuse he experienced as a child.’
BBC News, 20th May 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A multi-millionaire businessman has won a permanent ban on a former friend and business colleague from exposing details of alleged sex and drugs parties.’
Daily Telegraph, 7th May 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Justice Warby rules an anonymity order protecting a wealthy well-known defender who had a one-night stand despite having a long term partner and child should be lifted.’
Daily Telegraph, 25th March 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Simpler and more flexible powers introduced by Coalition Government put victims and communities at heart of the response.’
Home Office, 23rd March 2015
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
‘John Tughan QC of 4 Paper Buildings reviews recent judgments of particular importance to all practitioners in public children law.’
Family Law Week, 3rd March 2015
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank and another v Pugachev [2015] EWCA Civ 139; [2015] WLR (D) 94
‘Under the terms of a freezing order the court had jurisdiction to order a member of a class of beneficiaries under a discretionary trust to make disclosure of the details of the trust and the trust assets.’
WLR Daily, 27th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
R (James) v HM Prison Birmingham and others [2015] EWCA Civ 58; [2015] WLR (D) 59
‘There was no obligation on a judge to deduct from a term of imprisonment the time spent on remand by a person arrested under section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 for breach of a final gang injunction order under sections 34 to 36 of the 2009 Act, and subsequently imprisoned for contempt of court pursuant to section 14 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and section 120 of the County Courts Act 1984.’
WLR Daily, 9th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The undertaking in damages given on the appointment of a provisional liquidator did not automatically terminate on the making of a winding up order so as to deprive the court of jurisdiction to enforce the undertaking by ordering an inquiry as to damages.’
WLR Daily, 6th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘FOCUS: Proposed changes to the workings of the Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) will make it more likely that competition law is enforced and will give some smaller companies a boost in pursuing competition claims.’
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd January 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
‘An attempt to prevent a performing artist from publishing his memoir on the grounds that its contents would be distressing for his son to read has opened up “a new, substantial and unpredictable threat to freedom of expression”, lawyers representing free speech campaigners have told the UK supreme court.’
The Guardian, 19th January 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police v Scott Calder [2015]. The Greater Manchester Police (‘GMP’) have been unsuccessful in an attempt to obtain an Injunction to Prevent Gang-Related Violence (“IPGV” or “Gangbo”) against Scott Calder. The application was based on police intelligence and the lyrics of Mr Calder’s YouTube Grime Rap videos. On 14 January 2015, Mr Justice Blake dismissed the GMP’s appeal to the High Court, and in doing so laid out guidance on the purpose and ambit of the IPGV legislation, which is currently being substantially amended by Parliament.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 19th January 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Sarah Lucy Cooper, barrister of Thomas More Chambers, explains the details and effect of this recently implemented EU personal protection law.’
Family Law Week, 15th January 2015
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The Law Society has obtained a groundbreaking injunction that prevents a struck-off solicitor from holding himself out as a solicitor or being involved in a law firm without its approval.’
Legal Futures, 16th January 2015
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
Law Society of England and Wales v Shah [2014] EWHC 4382 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 5
‘The supervisory jurisdiction embodied in section 50 of the Solicitors Act 1974 could not be invoked by the Law Society in the case of a solicitor who may have pretended to be one, but who had not necessarily done so, who denied doing so, and had not been cross-examined on the issue. Section 41(4)(c) of the 1974 Act was wide enough to enable the court to grant an order against a struck off former solicitor, which could be framed so as to restrain him from committing criminal acts, namely that of acting as a solicitor when disqualified, or carrying on a reserved legal activity without entitlement to do so.’
WLR Daily, 12th January 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The test for the grant of an interlocutory injunction to prevent payment under an irrevocable letter of credit on the grounds of fraud was whether it was seriously arguable that, on the material available, the only realistic inference was that (i) the beneficiary could not honestly have believed in the validity of its demands under the letter of credit, and (ii) the bank had been aware of such fraud.’
WLR Daily, 9th September 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The president of the Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, and Lord Dyson, the Master of the Rolls, will head a seven-judge panel for the eagerly awaited Coventry costs hearing on 9 February, it has been announced.’
Litigation Futures, 9th January 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has recently granted Richemont a blocking order requiring the five largest ISPs in the UK to prevent access to various third party websites from advertising and selling goods which infringe Richemont’s trade mark rights. This was the first time that such a blocking order had been sought against ISPs on the basis of trade mark infringement anywhere in the EU (other than, perhaps, in the Danish case of Home v Telenor).’
Full story
RPC IP Hub, 8th January 2015
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
‘In Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others [2014] EWHC 3354 (Ch), [2014] WLR(D) 464 three of the subsidiaries of Compagnie Financière Richemont SA applied to Mr Justice Arnold for injunctions against the five largest internet service providers.’
NIPC Law, 6th January 2015
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024