header-logo header-logo

17 January 2014
Issue: 7590 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Administrative law

Samuda v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and another [2014] EWCA Civ 1, [2014] All ER (D) 03 (Jan)

The claimant sought permission to appeal against the refusal of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) (the UT) to set aside its decision refusing to grant the claimant permission to appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber). R (on the application of Cart) v Upper Tribunal; R (on the application of MR (Pakistan)) v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) [2011] 4 All ER 127, and ss 10(1) and 13(8) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 were considered. The Court of Appeal, in dismissing the application, held that there could be no appeal to the court from a refusal of the UT to review its decision to refuse permission to appeal.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll