header-logo header-logo

14 October 2019
Issue: 7859 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Employment , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Brexit in court

A bicycle courier and two cleaners, all on low pay, and the Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain (IWGB) filed proceedings for a judicial review in the High Court last week to force Prime Minister Boris Johnson to abide by the Benn Act and ask for an Art 50 extension. 

The case will run alongside a similar case brought by Scottish campaigners in the Court of Session. IWGB General Secretary Jason Moyer-Lee said: ‘Low paid workers need every tool possible to fight exploitative bosses and EU law has been crucial in that regard.’

Issue: 7859 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Employment , Judicial review
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll