Application to admit expert evidence in regarding to potential career earnings
Various Claimants v McAlpine & Ors [2016] EWHC 45 (QB)
The court dismissed the application of the claimants to admit expert evidence on the estimation of their potential career earnings had they not been blacklisted.
Informal visits by police officers, seeking entry by consent, to the home of a registered sex offender who was subject to notification requirements were lawful
R (M) v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary [2014] EWCA Civ 1651
Informal visits by police officers, seeking entry by consent, to the home of a registered sex offender who was subject to notification requirements were lawful. The scheme for the protection of vulnerable persons from sex offenders including notification requirements placed on the offender, informal monitoring and the power of authorised search and entry was not disproportionate.
Duty to detain civilians for security does not override ECHR obligations
Iraqi Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2014] EWHC 3686 (QB)
Although United Kingdom forces had been under a duty pursuant to Security Council resolutions 1483 and 1511 to detain individuals where necessary for imperative reasons of security, that duty did not override their obligations under the ECHR, art 5.
Secretary of State must consider PSED when making regulations
R (Cushnie) v Secretary of State for Health [2014] EWHC 3626 (Admin)
The claimant challenged the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1556, reg 11(c). Held: allowing the application, there was a breach by the Secretary of State of the public sector equality duty in the process leading up to the making of the regulation. However, the Court reserved its judgment with regard to what relief to grant pending consideration of counsel’s submissions.
Application for summary judgment against claim for confidentiality breach
Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Judge [2014] EWHC 3556 (QB)
The defendant was previously a non-executive director of the claimant company. The present case was an application by the defendant for a summary judgment and/or to strike out a claim against him for breach of his contractual and fiduciary duties, in particular his duty of confidentiality.