The latest news in this ongoing and controversial problem is yesterday’s Government announcement of a £3.5bn fund towards the repair/removal of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings in England.
News for Alistair Cantor
Alistair Cantor represented the successful respondent, a residents’ association, in a High Court appeal against a ‘negative declaration’ in effect confirming that the appellants (a local authority and another party) did not enjoy the benefit of any easements over a private road.
Alistair Cantor considers the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in FJM v United Kingdom, App No 76202/16 which conclusively rules out the employment of Article 8 defences in possession proceedings between private individuals The facts FJM was a vulnerable individual suffering from mental health disorders. She became the assured shorthold tenant of […]
Alistair Cantor considers the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Nottingham City Council v Parr [2018] UKSC 51, which conclusively establishes licensing authorities’ powers to limit HMOs occupation to certain classes of person through use of licensing conditions under the Housing Act 2004. References in bold square brackets are to paragraphs of the Supreme […]
Alistair Cantor considers Brown v Hyndburn Borough Council [2018] EWCA Civ, a case with important implications for many local authorities.
Alistair Cantor reviews the Supreme Court’s decision on the appropriate rate of deductions from pay for striking workers. The ruling is likely to have implications for most professionals on annual contracts paid monthly.
M, the daughter of N, a 68-year-old female, brought proceedings under s15 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for a declaration that it was not in N’s best interests to continue to receive life-sustaining clinically assisted nutrition and hydration via an endoscopic tube.
Alistair Cantor looks at the Court of Appeal’s decision in Georgina O’Brien v Bolton St Catherine’s Academy on the relationship between the tests of disproportionality under s15 EqA and that of unreasonableness under s98(4) ERA.