header-logo header-logo

08 July 2016
Issue: 7706 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Local government

R (on the application of Jewish Rights Watch, trading as Jewish Human Rights Watch) v Leicester City Council; R (on the application of Jewish Rights Watch, trading as a Jewish Human Rights Watch and another) v Gwynedd Council; R (on the application of Jewish Rights Watch, trading as Jewish Human Rights Watch and another) v City and County of Swansea [2016] EWHC 1512 (Admin), [2016] All ER (D) 164 (Jun)

 

The Divisional Court dismissed the claimant’s application for judicial review of three resolutions passed by the defendant local authorities which were critical of the State of Israel and its policies. The claims based on s 149 of the Equality Act 2010 and s 17 of the Local Government Act 1988 failed on an analysis of the facts and the applicable legal principles.

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

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