‘The wording of the Public Sector Equality Duty must be strengthened so that the discriminatory consequences of decisions by the Government and public authorities can no longer be ignored, peers have said.’
Local Government Lawyer, 29th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A bitter dispute between campaigners and councillors over a controversial programme to cut down thousands of trees has continued at a hearing at the High Court in London.’
The Independent, 22nd March 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has upheld a challenge brought by traders against a High Court ruling that the decision by former Communities Secretary Eric Pickles to confirm a compulsory purchase order for Shepherd’s Bush Market was lawful.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A parish council has won a High Court challenge over a local authority’s refusal to register land in its area as a village green.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has ruled that the claims of two boys against a council for negligence in failing to protect them from harassment from neighbours on the estate where they lived were wrongly struck out.’
Local Government Lawyer, 18th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Bill and Mary Nicholson were awarded compensation after the Cedar tree’s roots caused serious damage to their semi-detached £400,000 property’
Daily Telegraph, 21st March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Can the name of a local councillor who has defaulted on Council tax properly be withheld from disclosure under the exemption for personal data in s.40 FOIA? That was the issue for the Upper Tribunal (“UT”) in Haslam v (1) Information Commissioner (2) Bolton Council [2016] UKUT 0139 (AAC), 10 March 2016. Mr Haslam, a journalist on the Bolton News, had submitted a FOIA request to Bolton Council for disclosure of names of councillors who had received reminders for non-payment of Council tax since May 2011. The Council refused to name names, citing the exemption in s.40 FOIA. The Information Commissioner and First-Tier Tribunal (“FTT”) upheld the Council’s decision. The UT (Judge Markus QC) has now reversed the FTT’s decision, and held that the name of the individual councillor concerned should be released.’
Panopticon, 18th March 2016
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘Pursuant to its power under section 226(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the local planning authority made a compulsory purchase order in respect of land which included a well known market. The claimant and the market traders’ association objected and a public inquiry was held. The planning inspector recommended that the order not be confirmed. The Secretary of State issued a decision confirming the order, ostensibly giving reasons for departing from the inspector’s recommendation. The judge dismissed the claimant’s challenge to the validity of the order under section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. The claimant and the association appealed on the grounds that the reasons given by the Secretary of State for departing from the inspector’s recommendation were inadequate and/or inadequately expressed.’
WLR Daily, 18th March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A Family Court judge has ordered a council to pay a 10-year-old boy £5,000 in damages after it failed for three years to seek to revoke a placement order.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Two children who say they suffered “harassment and worse” whilst being brought up on a tough council estate have won the right to sue for massive compensation.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Scotland Yard has dropped its investigation into electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets after finding “insufficient evidence that criminal offences had been committed”. Detectives launched the probe after Lutfur Rahman, the borough’s former mayor, was found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices by a judge following a High Court hearing.’
Daily Telegraph, 17th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A teenager who did not want to live with her family because “they were not strict enough Muslims” after being returned from the Syrian border, should have been provided with accommodation and support by the local authority, the High Court has said.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th March 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The London Borough of Redbridge is to share information and intelligence with other councils and HM Revenue and Customs, after three people were found guilty of a £1.4m housing benefit fraud.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch). Quite a lot of councils have agreements with water suppliers under which the council will collect water charges from their tenants, effectively as an addition to the rent. This case concerned a challenge to the nature and validity of Southwark’s agreement, at least before 2013.’
Nearly Legal, 5th March 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘A London borough has overcharged approximately 37,000 tenants for water and sewerage services, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Local Government Lawyer, 4th March 2016
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption): [2016] EWHC 440 (Fam)
‘In two cases babies, JL and AO, were born in England to mothers from Eastern Europe but relinquished at birth for adoption. In the case of JL the child, whose Estonian mother worked in England and whose putative father lived in Estonia, was accommodated by the local authority with the mother’s consent pursuant to an agreement under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and was placed with foster carers. The mother gave her written consent to his adoption and the putative father, maternal family and the Estonian authorities all supported his adoption in this country. The local authority sought a placement order under section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. In the case of AO, the Hungarian parents working in England wished the child to be adopted in this country. AO had been removed at birth and placed with foster carers and had been made a ward of court. The local authority, children’s guardian and Hungarian authorities sought the child’s return to Hungary so that she could be placed for adoption there. Common issues arose as to what jurisdiction the court had to make orders facilitating such placements, (ii) the factors which had to be taken into account when making decisions about relinquished babies, the possible outcomes and the procedures to be followed and (iii) where a child born to nationals of a foreign country had been placed voluntarily in the care of a local authority, with a view to adoption or otherwise, whether the authority was under an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 to inform the consular officials of that country about the placement. In the case of JL, the further issues arose whether the court had jurisdiction to make a placement order and what order, if any, should be made. In the case of AO, the further issues arose whether it was open to the court either to transfer jurisdiction to Hungary under Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels IIA”) or to make an order permitting the local authority to send AO to Hungary; and what order, if any, the court should make.’
WLR Daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd) v Swindon Borough Council: [2016] EWHC 448 (Admin)
‘The claimant submitted two separate planning applications to the defendant: one for the installation of a mezzanine floor at its property; and the other for external works to the property, which created no additional floor space. The defendant granted planning permission for both applications, informing the claimant that the mezzanine installation was development liable to a community infrastructure levy (“CIL”). The defendant’s view was that the development proposals fell within the scope of the meaning of development for CIL purposes due to the direct link between the two applications for the mezzanine and external alterations. The defendant, as the relevant CIL collecting authority, subsequently issued a CIL liability notice under regulation 65 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 in relation to the installation of a mezzanine floor and external alterations at the claimant’s property, and a demand notice under regulation 69 of the 2010 Regulations in respect of the same development. By a judicial review claim the claimant challenged the lawfulness of the defendant’s act in issuing the two notices on the grounds that the mezzanine planning permission fell within the exemption created by regulation 6(1)(c) and that the external planning permission created no floor space and so was not liable to a CIL.’
WLR daily, 3rd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A local authority criticised for failing to protect Poppi Worthington’s siblings for almost a year after her death did not discipline social workers and instead applied for a draconian order in an attempt to cover-up the failings, documents show.’
The Guardian, 2nd March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025