header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 September 2019
Issue: 7856 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Advertisement

R (on the application of Actegy Ltd) v Advertising Standards Authority Ltd and another [2019] EWHC 2374 (Admin), [2019] All ER (D) 23 (Sep)

The claimant was unable to show that the first defendant’s general approach for assessing whether or not efficacy claims made for a medical device in an advertisement were substantiated had failed any test of proportionality and it was not established that the first defendant had adopted an approach on the facts of the case which had been unlawful. Accordingly, the Administrative Court dismissed the claimant’s application for judicial review of the decision, upholding complaints against a newspaper advertisement placed by the claimant for a medical device.

Constitutional law

R (on the application of Miller) v Prime Minister (Baroness Chakrabarti and others intervening) [2019] EWHC 2381 (QB), [2019] All ER (D) 24 (Sep)

The decision of the defendant prime minister to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament from a date between 9 and 12 September until 14 October 2019 had not been justiciable, as the criteria adopted 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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll