header-logo header-logo

14 January 2022
Issue: 7962 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 7 & 14 January 2022

Human rights

R (on the application of Youssef) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2021] EWHC 3188 (Admin), [2021] All ER (D) 17 (Dec)

The Queen’s Bench Division dismissed the claimant’s application for judicial review of the review mechanism for the continuation of asset-freezing scheme provided in the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 and the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida (United Nations Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (SI 2019/466). The claimant alleged that the scheme had not allowed him access to a court to review his original listing as a ‘sanctioned person’ by the United Nations Al-Qaida and Taliban Financial Sanctions Committee and the present imposition of the asset-freezing regime, contrary to Arts 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). The court held that the remedy available under the Act and the Regulations was ‘effective’, in the sense that the court could order the Secretary of State to use her best endeavours to procure the removal of that listing by 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

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