‘The senior president of tribunals, Lord Justice Dingemans, has spoken of “unwarranted” media commentary, judges’ safety and a 2027 date for the Home Office’s plans for a body of assessors to take decisions on asylum appeals in his first annual report.’
Law Society Gazette, 17th January 2026
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The judiciary is familiar with addressing bias but GenAI presents new challenges. Sophie Mitchell examines how, why and when gender bias might present itself in judicial use of AI tools and calls for urgent debate’
Counsel, 16th January 2026
Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk
‘An attempt to halt the use of pepper spray on children held in young offender institutions (YOIs) has failed after the high court ruled on Monday that the weapon’s rollout was lawful.’
The Guardian, 19th January 2026
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Unauthorised car meet-ups will be banned in a north London borough for another year after the High Court extended an injunction.’
BBC News, 20th January 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Using a £16,000 private flight to extradite a TikTok influencer wanted on dangerous driving charges back to the UK was “not necessary or proportionate”, a judge has told Surrey police.’
The Guardian, 16th January 2026
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A group of nurses who complained about a trans colleague using single-sex changing rooms at work suffered harassment, an employment tribunal judge has ruled.’
The Guardian, 16th January 2026
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The High Court has quashed a Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) decision to strike off a nurse following a review hearing.’
Kingsley Napley Regulatory Blog, 16th January 2026
Source: www.kingsleynapley.co.uk
‘The government has pulled an amendment to its proposed Hillsborough law amid concerns from campaigners and MPs that the legislation was being watered down and had become a “car crash” for the government.’
The Guardian, 18th January 2026
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In addition to challenging the role of the European Court of Human Rights in immigration issues, the current Secretary of State for the Home Department (“SSHD”) has proposed limits to the domestic judiciary’s role as regards immigration decisions. Despite this, the judiciary’s role overseeing the SSHD’s decisions in regard to detention of migrants remains significant. A recent case suggests that when the SSHD makes detention decisions, in certain cases she is under a more onerous duty of inquiry than previously thought. This highlights the extent to which the court’s oversight on detention decisions remains significant, even as its powers on immigration generally are being challenged. The case, R (AH and IS) v SSHD [2025] EWHC 3269 (Admin) (“AH”), clarifies the scope of the SSHD’s Tameside duty of inquiry when making the decision to detain individuals under immigration powers where there is prima facie evidence they have severe mental health issues.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 19th January 2026
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The Legal Ombudsman (LeO) has been ordered to reconsider part of its findings of poor service by a direct access barrister after it overlooked a key piece of evidence.’
Legal Futures, 19th January 2026
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A woman who hunted an e-bike rider in her Range Rover, killing him in a case of mistaken identity, has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 35 years for murder.’
The Independent, 16th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Clinical negligence defences frequently adopt a boiler plate approach of non-admissions and putting claimants to proof. In this article, Michael Rivelin of Clinical Negligence team, will be focusing on Man v St George’s [2024], and how claimants can capitalise on these defences.’
St John's Chambers, 8th January 2026
Source: www.stjohnschambers.co.uk
‘Sami Allan explores the decision in Stacks Living Limited & ors v The Official Receiver (as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Balvinder Shergill) & ors [2025] EWHC 2478 (Ch) and the potential to avoid the effects of a judgment debtor’s bankruptcy for the purposes of enforcing a judgment debt.’
Tanfield Chambers, 9th January 2026
Source: tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘An artist who claimed her ex-husband signed over their £1.5m home to her via WhatsApp after they split has lost a High Court “test case” fight to keep it.’
The Independent, 15th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Too often, limitation of liability clauses are treated as standard boilerplate – something to tidy up at the end of a negotiation once the “real” commercial points are agreed.’
Kingsley Napley Corporate and Commercial Law Blog, 15th January 2026
Source: www.kingsleynapley.co.uk
‘A gunman who shot an eight-year-old girl and her father while pretending to be a Deliveroo driver in north-west London has been jailed for 38 years.’
BBC News, 15th January 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A judge has rejected a Mazur-inspired attempt to throw out charges against a serial rail fare dodger on the basis that they were brought by lay prosecutors for the train company.’
Legal Futures, 16th January 2026
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A driver who killed a young motorcyclist and tried to evade justice by claiming he had a brain injury has been jailed after a huge police operation uncovered footage of him playing rugby, dancing at a festival and smiling on holiday.’
The Independent, 15th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘TUPE has a reputation for difficulty and complexity in some quarters, which the recent decisions reviewed in this note—Sean Pong Tyres Ltd v Moore1 and ABC v (1) Huntercombe (No. 12) Limited (2) Active Young People Limited (3) Dr Veerraju Banisetti (4) Dr Mark Tattersall2—may well do little to dispel. These decisions address the question of how the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE)3 engage with the vicarious liability of a transferor employer for the acts and omissions of one of its employees in circumstances where, subsequent to the events giving rise to the relevant claim, the employment of the tortfeasor employee transfers from the transferor to a transferee pursuant to a ‘relevant transfer’4 for the purposes of TUPE and either the employment of the claimant does not transfer to the transferee – because the claimant’s employment terminates for reasons unconnected with the transfer or the claimant is not “in scope” to transfer – or the claimant is a third party without an employment relationship relating to the transferor and therefore has a non-employment claim against the transferor. More specifically, on a relevant transfer, does a transferor’s vicarious liability for a transferring tortfeasor employee’s acts and omissions transfer with that tortfeasor employee to the transferee? This note seeks to assess, synthesise, and expand upon the reasoning adopted in, and the policy justifications for, the Pong and Huntercombe decisions, which, taken together, held that in such circumstances the transferor’s (vicarious) liability to the claimant did not transfer to the transferee. It also addresses the consideration in those cases of the prior decision in Doane v Wimbledon Football Club Ltd5 which, in contrast, held that a transferor’s vicarious liability for a transferring employee’s tortious acts pre-transfer did transfer to the transferee on a relevant transfer.’
Industrial Law Journal, 12th January 2026
Source: doi.org
‘A recent decision by the Upper Tribunal (UT) underlines the importance for UK taxpayers in carefully framing the proposed conditions when seeking suspension of an HMRC penalty, an expert has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 14th January 2026
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
© Inner Temple Library 2026