header-logo header-logo

10 April 2017
Issue: 7742 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Supreme Court to visit the “Auld Reekie”

The Supreme Court is heading north in June to hear three cases in Edinburgh, and has now confirmed its dates.

The court will sit as a panel of five judges in the City Chambers, home of the City of Edinburgh Council, with Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, presiding. Members of the public are welcome to attend, and seating arrangements have been arranged for 120 people on a “first come, first served” basis. The proceedings will be live streamed via the Supreme Court website.

On 12 June, 11am–4pm, the court will consider the evidential burden on the state when disrupting “sham marriages”, in Sadovska and another v Secretary of State for the Home Department.

On 13 June, 10.30am–4pm, it will hear Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority v Elsick Development Company Limited. This appeal concerns the correct legal test to be applied when assessing planning obligations, and the extent to which planning authorities are bound to comply with national planning policy.

On 14 June, 10.30am–4pm and 15 June, 10.30am–1pm, it will consider the obligation on the state to assist the rehabilitation of determinate sentence prisoners, in Brown v The Scottish Ministers. Lord Carloway will sit on the panel to hear this appeal.

Some of the justices will then head to the Law Society of Scotland headquarters, where they have agreed to speak at a professional development session. 

Issue: 7742 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll