‘The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has suggested that people defending themselves from strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) could be protected by a £5,000 costs cap.’
Legal Futures, 22nd July 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘James Bickford Smith and James Green review the recent judgment of the Dubai International Financial Centre Court of Appeal in Abdelsalam v Expresso Telecom Group [2021] DIFC CA 011. The decision resolved uncertainty as to whether the 2019 Employment Law could render earlier-issued claims under the 2005 Law out of time, and confirmed the presumption that DIFC law should not have retrospective effect.’
Littleton Chambers, 11th May 2022
Source: littletonchambers.com
‘Family law specialists need a better understanding of the impact of the menopause on clients – and female lawyers too – according to the solicitor launching a project to highlight the issue.’
Legal Futures, 28th February 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Paul & Ors v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (13 January 2022). The Court of Appeal dismissed a set of claims for psychiatric injury on the basis of prior binding authority, but indicated that the issue is suitable for consideration by the Supreme Court.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th January 2022
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A common problem with the articles of association is the addition of poorly drafted precedents with unambiguous terms. The court is often asked to make judgments on such provisions and to interpret the true meaning of the words used. To instigate the process of establishing the intention of the parties, it is important to consider firstly the articles in terms of their contractual obligations.’
Bloomsbury Professional Law Online Blog, 22nd November 2021
Source: law.bloomsburyprofessional.com
‘Civil practitioners dealing with personal injury claims are generally familiar with the three-year limitation period imposed by section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980. Put simply, claims for personal injury (whether arising from negligence, nuisance or breach of duty) must be brought within three years of the date on which the cause of action accrued (section 11(4)(a)) or the date of knowledge (if later) of the person injured (section 11(4)(b)). A person’s “date of knowledge” for the purposes of section 11(4)(b) is defined in section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 2nd November 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘R (Akinola & Anor) v Upper Tribunal & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1308 (26 August 2021). In these judicial review proceedings, the Court of Appeal decided that in circumstances where an extension of time had been granted for an out-of-time appeal against the refusal of an application to vary limited leave to remain, the original leave was revived under section 3C(2)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971 with future effect from the time when the appeal was instituted. The appeal was instituted and became a pending appeal within section 3C(2)(c) when the notice of appeal was filed, not the date when the extension of time was granted. The Court of Appeal found that the withdrawal of a decision did not have the consequence of causing leave to be extended retroactively under section 3C from the date of the decision. Three conjoined appeals, namely those of Ms Akinola, Mr Abbas and Mr Anwar, raised issues about the interpretation and effect of section 3C which provides for the extension of immigration leave in certain defined circumstances. Of key importance was the position under section 3C where an application has been made to vary existing leave, the application has been refused by a decision of the SSHD, and later (i) there is an out-of-time appeal for which an extension of time is granted, or (ii) the decision-maker withdraws and/or reconsiders the decision. The issues arose in the context of applications under paragraph 276B of the Immigration Rules for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) on the ground of long residence.’
EIN Blog, 13th September 2021
Source: www.ein.org.uk
‘It is no coincidence that construction cases play a prominent role in many of the leading decisions concerning limitation. It is the nature of our work that problems have a tendency to emerge some time after the work was completed and, more than occasionally, new problems come to light after proceedings have commenced.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 7th September 2021
‘The scope of duty and the extent of liability of professional advisers are two hotly contested issues at the core of many a dispute between professional advisers and their clients in negligence claims.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 24th August 2021
‘Preparations are being made for the deportation of a number of Jamaican nationals who came to the UK as children, in an apparent reversal of an earlier agreement not to deport people who arrived in this country as minors. A charter flight to Jamaica is scheduled for 11 August, returning several dozen people whose criminal convictions have triggered deportation orders. However, campaigners have protested that it is unreasonable to remove people who have spent a lifetime in the UK to a country where they have no ties.’
The Guardian, 5th August 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Court of Appeal has rejected as “too binary” the approach taken by a High Court judge when striking out a negligence claim against lawyers over their former client’s capacity to litigate.’
Legal Futures, 5th August 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘In this post, Max Eshraghi, an associate working within the insurance team at CMS, comments on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court in the matter of Matthew and others v Sedman and others [2021] UKSC 19, which concerns the application of limitation timebar.’
UKSC Blog, 4th August 2021
Source: ukscblog.com
‘In its 23 July 2021 judgment, the Supreme Court tackled the severe limitations of solicitors’ undertakings in the modern era in Harcus Sinclair LLP v Your Lawyers Ltd [2021] UKSC 32. All practitioners will need to know about this vitally important unanimous judgment.’
Hailsham Chambers, 26th July 2021
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
‘The UK Supreme Court has delivered its long-awaited judgment in R (on the application of SC, CB and 8 children) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and others (Respondents) on the two-child rule (in the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016) limiting key subsistence benefits to two children per household, and it wastes no opportunity to disappoint.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 26th July 2021
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘What is reasonable diligence when a company has entered an insolvency process and has abandoned its trading functions?’
Gatehouse Chambers, 22nd July 2021
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed this appeal concerning the law of limitation.’
UKSC Blog, 23rd July 2021
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A man who received “devastating news” that his lower leg needed to be amputated seven years after settling his personal injury claim is not prevented by limitation from suing his lawyers for negligence, the High Court has ruled.’
Legal Futures, 21st July 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘This is, so we have been repeatedly told, the vehicle through which the government will save leaseholders from having to pay life-changing sums to remediate the fire safety defects which are so prevalent at blocks of flats across the country. The headline is that it does not do that (nor does it contain the details of the much delayed loan scheme). To the contrary, this Bill creates a bespoke process by which landlords of “higher-risk” buildings can recover their building safety costs even if their leases do not let them do so.’
Nearly Legal, 5th July 2021
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024