‘Speech by Sir Ernest Ryder, Senior President of Tribunals: Justice in a Modern Way.’
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 7th August 2018
Source: www.judiciary.gov
‘Video hearings will not supplant face-to-face hearings in the majority of cases before the courts, even after their use is expanded, the deputy director of HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has predicted.’
Legal Futures, 31st July 2018
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Paragraph 11 of Schedule 5 to Housing Act 1985 provides that a property is exempt from the Right to Buy where:
11.—
(1) The right to buy does not arise if the dwelling-house—
(a) is particularly suitable, having regard to its location, size, design, heating system and other features, for occupation by elderly persons, and
(b) was let to the tenant or a predecessor in title of his for occupation by a person who was aged 60 or more (whether the tenant or predecessor or another person).’
Nearly Legal, 25th July 2018
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Milton Keynes Council was won a rare appeal under the right to buy legislation in a dispute over whether the property in question was particularly suitable for occupation by elderly persons.’
Local Government Lawyer, 19th July 2018
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in the UK is seeking “unprecedented” powers to obtain information about taxpayers without independent oversight from the tax tribunal, a tax expert has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 12th July 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Steven Gasztowicz QC considers the radical question of whether there could ever be ‘one civil court’ & ‘one judiciary’.’
New Law Journal, 6th July 2018
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘A doctor who left his date paralysed in a car crash kept his job after a tribunal heard he used medical knowledge to try and help her walk again.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th June 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Challenges to a failure to adjourn seem to be popping-up at the moment. There was the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Solanki v (1) Intercity Telecom Ltd (2) Guidinglight Finance Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101 – where a judge had failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting medical evidence justifying an adjournment. By contrast, in the recent decision of Lindsay v Solicitors’ Regulatory Authority [2018] EWHC 1275 (Admin), the respondent in misconduct proceedings failed to advance adequate evidence to support such an application. What lies deeper beneath, however, is whether an appeal against a decision not to adjourn requires the appellate court or tribunal to consider whether the original decision lay within the range of reasonable responses open to the decision maker below or, alternatively, has to determine the question of fairness / correctness itself.’
UK Police Law Blog, 15th June 2018
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘Speech by The Right Hon. The Lord Burnett of Maldon: The Age of Reform.’
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 8th June 2018
Source: www.judiciary.uk
‘A doctor who caused a baby to be decapitated during birth has been cleared of misconduct and can return to work.’
The Independent, 6th June 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A gynaecologist who caused an unborn baby to be accidentally decapitated in her mother’s womb has been found guilty of medical misconduct.’
Daily Telegraph, 4th June 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘John Gould puts disciplinary procedures & the standard of proof required by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal under the spotlight.’
New Law Journal, 1st June 2018
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘The Upper Tribunal has upheld the Pensions Regulator’s (TPR) use of its powers to seek financial support from ITV for members of a defined benefit (DB) pension scheme attached to the now defunct Box Clever TV rental business.’
OUT-LAW.com, 25th May 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘In UK tax avoidance disputes there are practical difficulties in asserting legal privilege to prevent legal advice being disclosed to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) where the taxpayer has to explain the motivations behind a transaction, but properly asserting privilege should never be seen as being ‘uncooperative’.’
OUT-LAW.com, 9th May 2019
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The senior partner of a personal injury firm who bungled 37 noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) claims and lied to the court has been struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).’
Litigation Futures, 25th April 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has strongly criticised a solicitor who gave “misleading” evidence on her husband’s £80,000 investment in a personal injury firm, which it said encouraged her to pay banned referral fees.’
Legal Futures, 26th April 2018
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Upper Tribunal has its own rules. It is not governed by the CPR. Inevitably, this leaves some gaps on occasion. One of those which occasionally puzzles people interested in the system is that there is no equivalent to CPR rule 5.4C, which allows non-parties the right to ask to see the court file. So can a non-party get access to an Upper Tribunal file, whether or not the material has been referred to in an open hearing?Yes, said the Tax and Chancery Chamber of the Upper Tribunal in Aria Technology Ltd v HMRC & Situation Publishing [2018] UKUT 111 (TCC). Although there was no specific power given in the Rules to disclose documents to non-parties upon request, there was nothing to prohibit it either. The provisions of rule 14(8) – which allows a party to seek a direction preventing disclosure – implicitly recognises a power to disclose. Indeed, Judge Sinfield went further. Applying the open justice principle as set out in no uncertain terms in R (Guardian News and Media Ltd) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2012] EWCA Civ 420, the Upper Tribunal had an inherent power and indeed a common law duty to consider any request for access to or disclosure of the court file, including material not referred to in open court.’
Panopticon, 25th April 2018
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘If there is one thing everyone using FOIA is used to, it is the idea that the personal data (names, contact details) of ‘junior civil servants’ will be redacted out of the disclosed information, applying the section 40(2) personal data exemption. Unless there is a good reason not to. But what if everyone is wrong? Is redacting junior civil servants just a personal data shibboleth?’
Panopticon, 23rd April 2018
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has removed the conditions on the practising certificate (PC) of a solicitor fined for allowing improper payments to be made out of client account.’
Legal Futures, 3rd April 2018
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024