‘Better teamwork, smaller panels and less controversial cases have all been put forward by a seminar attended by Supreme Court justices and other senior judges as reasons for a decline in dissenting judgments at the court.’
Litigation Futures, 19th December 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Three landmark appeals being heard this week should clarify who is ‘vulnerable’ and entitled to priority rehousing by local authorities.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 16th December 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The UK’s highest court has overturned a ruling made in favour of two Catholic midwives who object to any involvement in abortion procedures.’
The Guardian, 17th December 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The widow of right-to-die campaigner Tony Nicklinson is taking his fight to the European Court of Human Rights.’
BBC News, 16th December 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘We have dealt with the basic facts in Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd [2014] UKSC 52 when considering its previous incarnations (Cooke v Mortgage Business [2012] EWCA Civ 17 and Re North East Property Buyers Ltd [2010] EWHC 2991 (Ch)). In summary, the basic question for the Supreme Court was this: where a seller has agreed, prior to the contract of sale, that the buyer will grant the seller a tenancy after the sale, does the seller have that right so as not only to bind the buyer but also the buyer’s lender? I think, when framed as a question like that, the answer seems obvious. Call me a weak-kneed liberal, but all the equity (colloquially speaking) is in favour of the seller. They have entered in to the transaction on that basis and would not have entered in to the transaction otherwise. We all make bad deals which the law doesn’t get us out of, but the equity isn’t really in our favour: why should the law get us out of a bad deal?’
Nearly Legal, 14th December 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
Being Human Event – The Humanity of Judging (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 19th November 2014
‘Indeterminate sentences and the inadequate funding of rehabilitation during them has posed problems since Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences hamstrung the system. The courts here and in Strasbourg have been in two minds what to do about cases where prisoners have not received the assistance they ought to have received – and hence are not, by domestic standards, ready for release.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 11th December 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘In a stunning decision, the Supreme Court has given an indication that the pre-Jackson costs regime may breach the rights of paying parties under the European Convention of Human Rights. The issue has the potential to affect all agreements signed under the pre-April 2013 costs regime.’
Legal Week, 11th December 2014
Source: www.legalweek.com
‘The Supreme Court will next week hear three cases where homeless applicants for housing assistance are seeking to challenge the Pereira test of vulnerability.’
Local Government Lawyer, 11th December 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A secure tenant who was unlawfully evicted from his accommodation has won his Supreme Court battle with a London council over the level of damages payable.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd December 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has confirmed the risks of sale and rent back arrangements in Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd v Scott [2014] UKSC 52. Mrs Scott was the vendor in a sale and rent back. Against her knowledge the purchaser had obtained a mortgage to fund the purchase of her home and defaulted, causing it to be repossessed. She was unsuccessful in arguing that her lease took priority to the mortgage.’
New Square Chambers, 28th November 2014
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
The Judiciary, the Executive and Parliament: Relationships and the Rule of Law (PDF)
Speech by Lord Chief Justice
Institute for Government, 1st December 2014
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
‘A decision that a Brighton peace activist’s details can be removed from an extremism database is being challenged in the UK’s highest court.’
BBC News, 2nd December 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court is to consider the consequences of failing to comply with an unless order for a second time, it has emerged.’
Litigation Futures, 28th November 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Supreme Court recently gave judgment in the case of AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors [2014] UKSC 58. The decision provides an important treatment of equitable compensation within the wider scheme of remedial rules.’
Littleton Chambers, 26th November 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The Supreme Court yesterday emphasised the importance of compliance with court orders as it dismissed an appeal by a Saudi prince who failed to personally sign a witness statement in breach of an unless order.’
Litigation Futures, 27th November 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
Supreme Court, 26th November 2014
‘The government’s most senior legal adviser acted unlawfully when he overrode a court and blocked the publication of secret letters written by Prince Charles, the supreme court has been told.’
The Guardian, 25th November 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025