header-logo header-logo

21 June 2024
Issue: 8076 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 21 June 2024

Criminal law

R (on the application of McGill) v ­Newcastle Magistrates Court [2024] EWHC 1207 (Admin), [2024] All ER (D) 18 (Jun)

The Administrative Court, in allowing the claimant’s judicial review claim, held that the decision of the Acting Legal Team Manager (Crime) of the defendant magistrates’ court, refusing to issue a summons against the claimant’s former business partner (Mr H) (the impugned decision), had been unlawful. The impugned decision had referred to the fact that the claimant had brought a private prosecution against Mr H and his wife which the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had taken over and discontinued. However, the discontinued proceedings concerned the alleged forgery of banking documents, whereas the request for the summons in the present judicial review concerned an allegation of forgery of a shareholder agreement. The court held that the failure, in making the impugned decision, to appreciate that the CPS had not considered the shareholding agreement forgery allegation had been a public law material failure to have had regard to an obviously relevant consideration, and that,

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

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll