header-logo header-logo

25 February 2022
Issue: 7968 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 25 February 2022

Human rights

AB (by the Official Solicitor, his litigation friend) v Worcestershire County Council and another [2022] EWHC 115 (QB), [2022] All ER (D) 76 (Jan)

The Queen’s Bench Division allowed the defendant councils’ application for summary judgment, and struck out the claim based on art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in circumstances where the claimant had been abused by his mother while he had lived in the second defendant’s local authority area from 2005 to 2011, and the first defendant’s until 2016, but had not been made the subject of a care order until 2015. With regards to the strike out application, the claimant’s art 6 claim, that he had a civil right to be taken into care, disclosed no legally recognisable claim given that a child has no right to seek a care order or have one made in respect of their care. Only a local authority is empowered to make such an application and in doing so the authority is not acting on behalf of the

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll