header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 25 March 2022

25 March 2022
Issue: 7972 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Costs

R (on the application of Butt) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (indemnity costs) [2022] UKUT 69 (IAC) All ER (D) 56 (Mar)

The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (the UT) considered an order for costs to determine, under the UT’s discretion pursuant to s 29(1) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the extent of costs to be awarded to the applicant national of Pakistan to be paid by the respondent Secretary of State for the Home Department. The applicant had applied for leave to enter the UK as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant and had been challenging an ongoing failure by the Secretary of State to issue a decision in respect of his entry clearance application. The Secretary of State had failed to comply with a consent order in the agreed time frame which had resulted in the applicant having to initiate further judicial review proceedings challenging the failure of the Secretary of State to return the applicant’s passport with entry clearance. The UT held

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll