header-logo header-logo

16 July 2010
Issue: 7426 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Police

R (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and another [2010] EWHC 1601 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 25 (Jul)

Section 113B(4) of the Police Act 1997 required the chief officer—on meeting a request from the secretary of state, considering the issue of an enhanced criminal record certificate—to have regard to sub-para (a), which set out a relevance test, and sub-para (b), which involved the issue of proportionality, ie setting a balance between the importance and desirability of providing information on the one hand against, on the other, the degree of interference with and the likely consequences of such interference in the private life of the person to whom the information related.

The decision was expressly that of the chief officer; context was relevant; there was no presumption to be made against disclosure and nor was there a presumption to be made in favour of disclosure; the balance required by proportionality necessitated a close attention by the decision-maker to detail; relevant in striking the balance was the force of the accusations; and it

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll