header-logo header-logo

15 January 2010
Issue: 7400 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

European Union

European Commission v Ireland and others C-89/08 P, [2009] All ER (D) 230 (Dec)

It was established law that the statement of reasons required by Art 253 EC had to be appropriate to the measure at issue and had to disclose in a clear and unequivocal fashion the reasoning followed by the institution which adopted the measure in question in such a way as to enable the persons concerned to ascertain the reasons for the measure and to enable the competent community court to exercise its power of review.

The requirements to be satisfied by the statement of reasons would depend on the circumstances of each case, in particular the content of the measure in question, the nature of the reasons given and the interest which the addressees of the measure, or other parties to whom it is of direct and individual concern, might have in obtaining explanations. It would not be necessary for the reasoning to go into all the relevant facts and points of law, since the question whether the statement of reasons had met

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll