header-logo header-logo

16 August 2018
Issue: 7806 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

Compensation

JT v First-Tier Tribunal (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) [2018] EWCA Civ 1735, [2018] All ER (D) 15 (Aug)

Paragraph 19 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012, which prevented the appellant from being paid compensation for criminal injuries sustained prior to 1 October 1979 when she had been living with her assailant as members of the same family, was incompatible with her rights under Art 14 in conjunction with Art 1 of the First Protocol to, the European Convention on Human Rights. In allowing the appellant’s appeal, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, declared that the appellant was not prevented from being paid an award of compensation under the scheme.

Competition

Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International RX (UK) [2018] EWCA Civ 1881, [2018] All ER (D) 40 (Aug)

On the first occasion challenging a warrant under ss 28 and 28A of the Competition Act 1998, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that any judge considering an application to set aside or vary a warrant was obliged to consider

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll