Supreme Court – Page 34 – Current Awareness

Case Comment: Cardtronics UK Ltd and others v Sykes and others (Valuation Officers) [2020] UKSC 21 – UKSC Blog

Posted June 5th, 2020 in appeals, news, rates, Supreme Court, valuation by sally

‘In this case comment, Marcus Barclay, Will Charnock and Siani McNamara, who work in the real estate disputes team at CMS, comment on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court on 20 May 2020 in the matter of Cardtronics UK Ltd and others v Sykes and others (Valuation Officers) [2020] UKSC 21, which concerns business rates liability for ATMs in retail stores.’

UKSC Blog, 5th June 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

No well-tuned cymbal: fairness in judges – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted June 5th, 2020 in appeals, chambers articles, defamation, judges, media, news, retrials, Supreme Court by sally

‘This is, to say the least, a rather unfortunate saga. The Claimant, Mr Serafin, brought a defamation claim against a Polish newspaper run by the Defendants. An article had alleged various things including that he was financially untrustworthy and was dishonest in his dealings with women. At trial before Jay J, he represented himself. He was comprehensively disbelieved by the judge. His claim was dismissed, in most cases because the judge found that the article was accurate, but in some instances because the defendants had a public interest defence under s. 4 Defamation Act 2013.’

UK Human Rights Blog, 4th June 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Dishonesty? Ghosh, Ivey got a surprise for you! (R v Barton) – 5SAH

Posted June 5th, 2020 in appeals, chambers articles, criminal justice, deceit, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Court of Appeal affirmed in the case of R v Barton that the test for dishonesty to be used in criminal proceedings is that set out in obiter dicta by the Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos UK (t/a Cockfords Club), expressly overruling the two-stage test set out in R v Ghosh. Modifying (albeit to a limited extent) the principle of stare decisis, the court held that, in limited circumstances, where the Supreme Court directs, obiter dicta, that an otherwise binding decision of the Court of Appeal should no longer be followed and proposes an alternative test that it says must be adopted, the Court of Appeal is bound to follow that direction. The test in Ivey ensures dishonesty is objectively assessed by reference to society’s standards, rather than the defendant’s own understanding of what is dishonest. This resolves the problematic second limb of the Ghosh test.’

5SAH, 18th May 2020

Source: www.5sah.co.uk

After Elgizouli: what does the judgment mean for mutual legal assistance? – 6KBW College Hill

Posted June 4th, 2020 in death penalty, EC law, human rights, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘In Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 10, a seven-Justice Supreme Court held that the provision of material by way of mutual legal assistance to the US for the prosecution of Shafee El Sheikh and Alexanda Kotey, without obtaining an assurance that the evidence would not be used in a death penalty trial, was unlawful. The consequences of this judgment, both generally and specifically for Mr El Sheikh and Mr Kotey, are unknown. Where does it leave the provision to the US of further material in relation to these two individuals? In what circumstances could the UK government truly claim to be satisfied that the transfer would be lawful? Only a careful reading of this judgment can assist, and even then such assistance may be limited.’

6KBW College Hill, 1st June 2020

Source: blog.6kbw.com

Supreme Court hears argument on whether £14 billion consumer competition class action should proceed against Mastercard – Exchange Chambers

Posted June 4th, 2020 in class actions, competition, consumer protection, fees, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court last week heard Mastercard’s appeal seeking to prevent a proposed class action on behalf of 46 million consumers valued at £14 billion from proceeding against it. The case is interesting not merely from the perspective of whether the “juggernaut” of a claim should proceed against Mastercard but also because of its impact on other competition law class actions waiting in the wings and its influence more generally on how the fledgling competition law class action regime will develop in the UK.’

Exchange Chambers, 22nd May 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk

Implications for expulsions following the Supreme Court ruling of AM (Zimbabwe) – Garden Court Chambers

Posted June 4th, 2020 in appeals, government departments, human rights, immigration, interpretation, medical treatment, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘Cases where applicants seek to resist removal from the UK because of adverse health consequences have given rise to both great passions and difficult points of principle. The decision of the Supreme Court in AM (Zimbabwe) [2020] UKSC 17 gave the opportunity for the UK’s approach to catch up with that taken by the ECtHR in recent years. In this post we look at the implications of the judgment both generally and in relation to two specific scenarios, namely destitution and “fitness to fly”.’

Garden Court Chambers, 19th May 2020

Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk

The consequences of breaching absolute covenants – Tanfield Chambers

Posted June 4th, 2020 in covenants, landlord & tenant, leases, news, Supreme Court by sally

‘Residential leases can last a long time. A lot can change in 99 years or 999 years. What the landlord deemed an absolute “no-no” in 1965 might not seem such a bad idea now. However, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd [2020] UKSC 18; [2020] PLSCS 84 if the landlord has given other leaseholders in the block the benefit of a mutual enforceability covenant, the landlord will put itself in breach of covenant if it gives a tenant permission to do something which would breach an absolute covenant. The consequences of this decision are potentially far reaching.’

Tanfield Chambers, 13th May 2020

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

New Judgment: Serafin v Malkiewicz & Ors [2020] UKSC 23 – UKSC Blog

Posted June 4th, 2020 in bias, defamation, defences, judges, litigants in person, news, public interest, retrials, Supreme Court by sally

‘Serafin had sued Malkiewicz & Ors for libel in respect of an article they had published about him in Nowy Czas, a newspaper addressing issues of interest to the Polish community in the UK. The Court of Appeal found that the conduct of the trial by Mr Justice Jay in the High Court had been unfair towards the claimant and allowed the claimant’s appeal. The defendants appealed against that finding to the Supreme Court. They also challenged the Court of Appeal’s analysis of the effect of the Defamation Act 2013, S4, which sets out “the public interest defence” to a defamation claim.’

UKSC Blog, 3rd June 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

“Hostile” judge harassed litigant in person, Supreme Court rules – Litigation Futures

Posted June 4th, 2020 in bias, defamation, defences, judges, litigants in person, news, public interest, retrials, Supreme Court by sally

‘A High Court judge “harassed and intimidated” a litigant in person in ways which “surely would never have occurred if the claimant had been represented”, the Supreme Court has ruled.’

Litigation Futures, 3rd June 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Supreme court orders libel case retrial over judge’s ‘barrage of hostility’ – The Guardian

Posted June 4th, 2020 in bias, defamation, defences, judges, litigants in person, news, public interest, retrials, Supreme Court by sally

‘The supreme court has ordered the re-trial of a long-running libel case after finding that a high court judge, Mr Justice Jay, subjected the unrepresented claimant to a “barrage of hostility” and offensive language.’

The Guardian, 3rd June 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Supreme Court to rule on ‘paedophile hunters’ case – BBC News

Posted June 3rd, 2020 in appeals, child abuse, children, deceit, human rights, internet, news, police, privacy, prosecutions, sexual offences, Supreme Court by sally

‘A convicted paedophile who was snared by a vigilante group is to have his case examined at the UK Supreme Court.’

BBC News, 3rd June 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Whittington Hospitals NHS Trust v XX [2020] UKSC 14 – Hailsham Chambers

Posted June 1st, 2020 in appeals, cancer, chambers articles, damages, hospitals, news, Supreme Court, surrogacy by sally

‘The dispute arose as a result of a delay, by the Trust, in diagnosing the Claimant (Respondent)’s cancer, and the infertility this caused.’

Hailsham Chambers, 21st May 2020

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

R (on the application of Palestine Solidarity Campaign Ltd and another) v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2020] UKSC 16 – Wilberforce Chambers

Posted May 29th, 2020 in appeals, judicial review, local government, news, pensions, Supreme Court by sally

‘In 2016, the Government issued guidance to local authorities administering the local government pension scheme (“LGPS”) which had the effect of restricting divestments from UK defence companies and foreign countries. In response, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, a company dedicated to campaigning in support of the rights of the Palestinian people, sought judicial review of this guidance. In R (on the application of Palestine Solidarity Campaign Ltd and another) v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2020] UKSC 16, the Supreme Court ruled by a bare majority in favour of the PSC.’

Wilberforce Chambers, 28th May 2020

Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk

Can urns be buildings? Supreme Court rules in landmark listing dispute – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted May 27th, 2020 in appeals, listed buildings, local government, news, planning, Supreme Court by sally

‘A landowner who sold two 18th century lead urns he had inherited with his home without realising that they were subject to a listing order has had his appeal against an enforcement notice backed by the Supreme Court. Today’s ruling in Dill v Secretary of State for Housing and Local Government could help clarify the definition of “building” on the statutory list.’

Law Society's Gazette, 20th May 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

New Judgment: Dill v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2020 UKSC 20] – UKSC Blog

Posted May 27th, 2020 in appeals, listed buildings, local government, news, planning, Supreme Court by sally

‘This appeal concerns the correct treatment of a pair of early 18th century lead urns resting on limestone pedestals. It raised important questions about the correct interpretation and application of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, namely, whether the items were “buildings” for the purposes of the Act. The Courts below concluded that the items were “buildings” and the applicant appealed to the Supreme Court.’

UKSC Blog, 27th May 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

New Judgment: Cardtronics UK Ltd & Ors v Skyes & Ors (Valuation Officers) – UKSC Blog

Posted May 27th, 2020 in banking, news, rates, Supreme Court by sally

‘These appeals concern the treatment for rating purposes of ATMs situated in supermarkets or shops owned and operated by the retailers. The issues raised by the case were whether the sites of the ATMS are to be properly identified as separate hereditaments from the stores and if so who was in rateable occupation of the separate hereditaments. Hereditament is defined in the General Rate Act 1967, s 115 (1) as “property which is or may become liable to a rate, being a unit of such property which is, or would fall to be, shown as a separate item on the valuation list”.’

UKSC Blog, 26th May 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

New Judgment: Fowler v Commissioners for HMRC [2020] UKSC 22 – UKSC Blog

Posted May 27th, 2020 in double taxation, income tax, news, self-employment, Supreme Court, treaties by sally

‘Mr Fowler is a qualified diver who is resident in the Republic of South Africa. During the 2011/12 and 2012/13 tax years he undertook diving engagements in the waters of the UK’s continental shelf. HMRC stated that he is liable to pay UK income tax for this period. Whether he is liable depends on the application of a Double Taxation Treaty between the UK and South Africa. Article 7 of the Treaty provides that self-employed persons are taxed only where they are resident (i.e. South Africa), whereas article 14 provides that employees may be taxed where they work (i.e. the UK). For the purposes of this appeal, the parties have assumed that Mr Fowler was an employee. Mr Fowler claims he is nevertheless not liable to pay tax in the UK. His case centres on a “deeming provision” in section 15 of the UK’s Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 (“ITTOIA”). This provides that an employed seabed diver is “treated” as self-employed for the purposes of UK income tax.’

UKSC Blog, 26th May 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Cash machines in supermarkets not separate hereditaments for rating purposes: Supreme Court – Local Government Lawyer

Posted May 26th, 2020 in appeals, local government, news, rates, Supreme Court, valuation by sally

‘The Supreme Court has upheld a Court of Appeal ruling that ATM machines are not rateably occupied separately from the host stores.’

Local Government Lawyer, 21st May 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Rule committee urged to review disbursements in fixed-cost cases – Litigation Futures

Posted May 22nd, 2020 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, fees, news, personal injuries, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court has called on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee to review the issue of whether disbursements should be payable separately in fixed-cost personal injury cases.’

Litigation Futures, 21st May 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Supreme Court hands down key ruling on listed buildings – Local Government Lawyer

Posted May 22nd, 2020 in appeals, building law, interpretation, local government, news, planning, Supreme Court by sally

‘Planning inspectors should reconsider whether two lead urns that were placed on top of limestone piers at a historic house were “buildings” or not, the Supreme Court has ruled.’

Local Government Lawyer, 21st May 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

«
1
…
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
…
114
»

Archives