header-logo header-logo

07 November 2019
Issue: 7863 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

Animal

Electronic Collar Manufacturers Association (an unincorporated association) and another v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2019] EWHC 2813 (Admin), [2019] All ER (D) 150 (Oct)

There were aspects of the defendant Secretary of State’s approach to the introduction of a proposed ban on e-collars which were justifiably open to criticism, but she had not acted unlawfully. Accordingly, the Administrative Court dismissed the claimants’ application for judicial review of her decision to ban the use of hand-held remote-controlled e-collar devices for cats and dogs.

Costs

Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ [2019] UKSC 48, [2019] All ER (D) 190 (Oct)

A non-party costs order was imposed on the appellant (the insurer) under s 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, in respect of a group litigation brought against a company which operated medical clinics that supplied and fitted breast implants, some of which had ruptured and injured a number of claimants. The Supreme Court allowed the insurer’s appeal, holding, among other things, that, of the three elements of the insurer’s

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll