Here you will find articles written by our barristers in leading newspapers, industry journals and the legal press.
Cobb J concluded proceedings and determined whether it had been right to use the inherent jurisdiction to make interim injunctive-type orders in respect to a capacitous but apparently vulnerable adult.
The claimant’s principal argument was that the policy was unlawful because the council had failed to comply with the public sector equality duty in section 149 Equality Act 2010. This case shows that if local authorities carry out (and record) comprehensive equalities assessments of their policies, it is likely to be very difficult for claimants to successfully argue a failure to comply with the public sector equality duty.
Jonathan Pennington Legh discusses the Court of Appeal judgment in Adesotu v Lewisham London Borough Council  EWCA Civ 1405 which was handed down on 2 August 2019.
The court determined a child (M) to be habitually resident in England and Wales and that the English court had jurisdiction regarding matters pertaining to parental responsibility.
Jared Norman considers the case of Livewest Homes Limited v Bamber  EWCA Civ 1174. Section 21 has become a minefield for landlords who let properties under assured shorthold tenancies. The Livewest case is of particular relevance to social landlords who have entered into fixed term tenancies of more than two years and/or where they are operating a break clause.
Social landlords subject to the public sector equality act duty can take some comfort in the fact that the Court of Appeal has dismissed a second appeal against a possession order notwithstanding a breach of the PSED.
Applications for authorisation of care plans, inter alia, for deprivation of liberty [‘DoL’] of restricted patients under ‘Hospital Orders’.
The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the case of Yavuz Yildiz v London Borough of Hackney on 24 July 2019, a case which examined the interaction between section 83(1) and Ground 15A of the Housing Act 1985.
Urgent application by the treating Trust to permit treatment in respect a 16-year old girl, B, refusing treatment.
Separation is a traumatic time for most people. On top of the upheaval, you’re unlikely to want to pay tax when you divide up the assets if you don’t have to.
Judgment in Queen’s Bench Division providing international family lawyers with a meticulous overview on establishing forum.
Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 provides that local authorities are under a full duty to secure accommodation to a person found homeless, if certain conditions are satisfied, one of which is that they are not satisfied that she “became homeless intentionally”.
A mother’s unsuccessful appeal against an order for the summary return of a child to Israel.
District Judge Moore sitting at the Magistrates Court in Bexley handed down judgment in Williams v London & Quadrant Housing Trust. There were some lessons in her judgment regarding the use of experts in Environmental Protection Act 1990 prosecutions.
A request by the Slovakian Central Authority (SCA) to transfer proceedings to the Slovakian courts pursuant to Article 15 of Brussels II Revised Regulation (BIIR) was refused by His Honour Judge Dancey sitting as a section 9 judge.
Local authority and social landlords have seen an increase in recent years in private prosecutions brought against them under section 82, Environmental Protection Act 1990 (“1990 Act”).
In Salix Homes v Mantato  EWCA Civ 445 the Court of Appeal considered whether cause of action estoppel prevents a landlord obtaining a possession order on rent arrears grounds where there is an existing undischarged order for possession on the basis of earlier arrears, and for payment of those arrears.
Mostyn J refused an application by a husband to revoke a disclosure order made during financial remedy proceedings.
Jonathan Pennington Legh discusses the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) case of London Borough of Southwark v Baharier.
Is it possible to be in adverse possession of land of which you are the registered proprietor ? Yes, says the Court of Appeal in Rashid v Nasrullah.
The criminal offence of assisting or encouraging suicide has recently attracted press coverage and political discussion. That attention focuses on the risks of prosecution and imprisonment, but for many families the financial consequences will be of equal or greater importance.
The High Court has dismissed a claim for damages in respect of accommodation provided under section 17, Children Act 1989 which was alleged to be in breach of article 8. Emma Godfrey of Field Court Chambers appeared for the respondent authority.
Knowles J refused seven applications by a father for permission to appeal and made an extended civil restraint order.
Judgment of Hayden J in the Court of Protection in a case in which His Lordship recognises the need for public debate and further consideration as to “whether the MCA, by collateral declarations, is apt to limit the autonomy of individuals in spheres where they are capacitous”.
Genevieve Screeche-Powell considers the guidance given by Mr. Justice Cobb on the difficult and sensitive question of the observance of Islamic religious practice for an adult lacking capacity in the case of Re IH (Observance of Muslim Practice)  EWCOP 9.
Court of Appeal judgment overturning a judgment which had found that a wife had acquired a domicile of choice in England.
Alistair Cantor considers Brown v Hyndburn Borough Council  EWCA Civ, a case with important implications for many local authorities.
Unsuccessful appeal to the High Court by a mother against a decision which transferred the residence of C to her father.
Joshua Swirsky considers The Public Guardian’s Severance Applications  EWCOP 10 in which District Judge Eldergill gave guidance following 17 applications by the Public Guardian for LPAs to be severed.
Alistair Cantor considers a recent decision of the Administrative Court in R (on the application of JF) v London Borough of Merton  EWHC 1519 concerning the lawfulness of a Care Act assessment and associated decisions made by the local authority in respect of the termination of an existing placement and the suitability of a proposed new placement.
Jonathan Cowen considers the decision of the Administrative Court in R(Liverpool City Council and others) v The Secretary of State for Health  EWHC 986 (Admin) in which four local authorities challenged the sufficiency of funding for the deprivation of liberty regime.
If the young person wishes to challenge the age assessment he has to then obtain legal advice and, if appropriate, see an interim injunction. Sometimes the interim relief is applied for after the young person has been dispersed.
The 2 applicants in these cases that were heard together were from Afghanistan and Vietnam respectively. There was nothing remarkable about the facts of either case. Both raised factual issues that are to be tried by the Upper Tribunal, however, Popplewell J ordered that a ‘rolled up’ hearing to consider the challenge to LBC’s practice.
Hilton Harrop-Griffiths considers the decision of the Administrative Court in R (S) v Croydon LBC  EWHC 265 and the duty on local authorities to accommodate a young person pending the determination of an age assessment.
Jonathan Pennington Legh looks at the problems that generally arise for the home owner in relation to mortgages and leases.
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.
On 26 January 2017, the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in London Borough of Hackney v Williams and anor  EWCA Civ 26, departing from a long chain of Family Court judgments highlighting the necessity for local authorities to obtain the informed consent of parents prior to accommodating children under section 20.
In January 2017, the High Court handed down judgment in AP (by his litigation friend, BA) v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council  EWHC 65 (QB), concerning the preliminary issue of limitation in Human Rights Act claims.
Sarah Salmon considers the Supreme Court judgment in N v A Clinical Commissioning Group and others  UKSC 22;  2 WLR 1011, a case described from the outset to be about the “jurisdiction” of the Court of Protection. It was, in fact, as Lady Hale noted, unfortunate that the case had been put this way: it was about the role of the Court of Protection and the approach that should be taken in light of its limited powers.
Emma Godfrey looks at Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea  UKSC 36 where the Supreme Court has revisited the question of whether decisions by local housing authorities as to the duty owed under Part VII Housing Act 1996 amount to the “determination of a civil right” which engages the right to a hearing before an impartial and independent tribunal under art 6 ECHR.
In attempting to purchase a vacant unencumbered property, without itself relying on the funds of a mortagee lender, Dreamvar fell victim to identity fraud.
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.
The Court of Appeal has held that, as a matter of statutory construction, a notice of proceedings served in relation to an introductory tenancy under s.128, Housing Act 1996 can satisfy the necessary requirements even if the information is contained in more than one document. Whether the requirements are satisfied, however, will be a question of objective fact in every case.
Sarah Salmon looks at the Court of Appeal’s decision in Nottingham City Council v (1) Parr and (2) Trevor Parr Associates Ltd  EWCA Civ 188 which considers whether or not licence conditions imposed under the HMO regime in the Housing Act 2004 could restrict the type of occupier who could live in the accommodation.
Sarah Salmon looks at the Court of Appeal’s decision in Turley v (1) Wandsworth LBC and (2) Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which was another challenge to the succession regime under the Housing Act 1985 albeit following amendments made by the Localism Act 2011 (which did not apply to this case) and future amendments, should they be brought into force, under the Housing and Planning Act 2016.
Grace Cheng looks at the Court of Appeal’s decision in Harrod and Others v. Chief Constable of West Midlands Police and Others, where the Court gives helpful guidance on the appropriate focus for tribunals considering indirect discrimination claims.
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.
Nikolas Clarke considers the CJEU’s controversial decision in Achbita v. G4S Secure Solutions NV on the lawfulness of banning staff from wearing religious dress.
Lauren Suding summarises the EAT’s decision in Peninsula Business Services Ltd v Baker.
Jonathan Cowen summarises the Court of Appeal’s recent judgment in Secretary of State for Justice v Staffordshire County Council and others  EWCA Civ 1317
Lauren Suding explains the Court of Appeal’s reasoning in Pimlico Plumbers v Smith and examines implications for the gig economy.
Francis Hoar summarises the principles in the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Kuznetsov v. Royal Bank of Scotland, where the Court gave guidance on amendments to add whistleblowing claims, the EAT approach to making case management orders without remission, and the need for promptness in applying for cost protection orders.
Christine Cooper and Eirwen Pierrot represented the Claimants in this important case.
The European Court of Human Rights’ once again considers the position of those who are detained against their wishes as a result of mental illness.
Hilton Harrop-Griffiths considers whether the High Court has jurisdiction to attach a power of arrest to a non-molestation injunction, granted under its inherent jurisdiction, for the benefit of a vulnerable adult.
Francis Wilkinson recently led Lauren Suding in public law children proceedings with an international element, in which interim Forced Marriage Protection Orders (FMPO) had previously been made in respect of the children’s older siblings. A referral was made to the local authority after the police were contacted by the older siblings in relation to the forced marriages.
Joshua Swirsky appeared for the London Borough of Croydon in an important case in the Upper Tribunal which gives general guidance on the use of evidence of dental development in the assessment of age.
The principal issue facing the Court of Appeal in Finance and Business Training v HMRC was whether EU law meant that a provider of university courses was entitled to the VAT education exemption in the same way as a university, even if not so entitled under UK VAT law.
Minority interest – perhaps – but according to HHJ Dight, sitting as a Judge of the Upper Tribunal in Murdoch v Amesbury  UKUT 3 (TCC), the answer in “No.”
No, said the Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd  UKSC 72.
Miles Croally recently participated in Private Client Adviser’s ‘Best of Intentions’ roundtable discussing elements of best practice in estates administration and probate.
Matthew Stott, considers the implications of the decisions in Re A, B, C, D and E (Children) where the local authority professionals involved were named by the court.
Costs in Family Proceedings explains the rules and procedure relating to costs and funding in all family proceedings, co authored by Francis Wilkinson and Dr. Sara Hunton.
Matthew Stott writes for Jordan’s Family Law on the importance of potentially being aware of sock line hyperpigmentation (SLHP) as it mimics child abuse.
Michael Reason discusses the importance of tradition in the rule of law and how physical buildings support that tradition.
Christopher Stirling writes for the Private Client Adviser on how to secure a share in a property held under one name
Christine Cooper writes for the Private Client Advisor on care fees
Hilton Harrop-Griffiths and pupil barrister Eirwen Pierrot write for Local Government Lawyer
Hilton Harrop-Griffiths writes for Private Client Adviser
Bill Bowring writes for Who’s Who Legal exploring the nature of corporate responsibility in Russia and the country’s status in the global economic order.
Francis Wilkinson writes for Family Law Week asking whether an application to set aside is permissible where there has been a change of circumstances which undermines the basis of a consent order