Search results
10 results ordered by
The High Court continues interim anti-harassment injunction
At a return date hearing on 12 July 2024, Aidan Eardley KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) continued until trial or further order an anti-harassment injunction granted to prevent the Defendant from, amongst other things, approaching or contacting the Claimant.
Read moreThe Supreme Court clarifies the law on the recovery of damages for non-pecuniary damage arising out of a maliciously false statement
The Claimant was an employee of the second defendant, LCA, a recruitment agency owned and operated by the first defendant. After leaving LCA, the Claimant was employed by another recruitment agency and began targeting LCA's clients. LCA's owner told two third parties, one of whom was the Claimant’s new line manager and the other a client of LCA, that by doing this the Claimant was in breach of her contract of employment with LCA. In fact, there was no term of that contract (as the owner of LCA knew) which prohibited the claimant from soliciting business from LCA’s clients.
Read moreThe Model Anti-SLAPP Law: an overview
Following the Government's response to the SLAPP consultation in the summer, the UK Anti-SLAPP coalition (a working group that includes English PEN, the Foreign Policy Centre and Index on Censorship, "the Coalition") has this week published a model Anti-SLAPP law, which has been endorsed by a collection of free speech and anti-corruption organisations, journalists, editors and lawyers.
Read moreCAT Collective Proceedings - Summer 2024 update
Developments in the UK’s competition collective proceedings regime continue apace with new claims recently issued in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).
Read moreUK authorities seize £179m from suspected criminals – up 16% in a year
UK authorities, including the SFO, HMRC and police, seized £179m last year[1] from criminals using draconian Confiscation Orders – an increase of 16% on £154m a year earlier, according to analysis of new data by international law firm RPC.
Read moreThe CAT's new approach: I can't afford a carriage (dispute)
Since the collective proceedings regime in the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) kicked off, a number of carriage disputes have arisen. So-called 'carriage disputes' arise when there are two or more competing proposed class representatives (PCRs) seeking certification (and therefore 'carriage') of overlapping class actions.
Read more2023 Update - CAT Collective Proceedings
A new era of consumer-focussed competition class actions is now well underway. It kicked off with the first collective proceedings order (CPO) granted by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in Merricks in the summer of 2021, opening the gates for further collective claims to be certified.
Read moreJudicial developments in recent treaty cases
A spate of recent cases concerning the application of double tax treaties has seen the courts and tribunals striving for common¬sense, policy-driven outcomes.
Read moreJudicial review: does the Court of Appeal’s decision in Murphy offer taxpayers a glimmer of hope?
Judicial review provides a constitutionally important judicial check on the exercise of statutory powers by public bodies such as HMRC. However, the wide margin of appreciation afforded to public bodies by the courts, coupled with recent reforms to the judicial review process, make it a remedy of last resort that can be difficult for taxpayers to pursue successfully. In overturning the High Court’s refusal of the taxpayers’ judicial review claim, the Court of Appeal in Murphy v HMRC confirmed that HMRC had breached their legitimate expectation as to the application of an extra-statutory concession. While Murphy is unlikely to be the harbinger of a wholesale rebalancing of the judicial review scales in the taxpayer’s favour, it is a welcome step in the right direction.
Read moreFTT prevents HMRC from having two bites of the cherry!
In Lady Henrietta Pearson v HMRC [2014] UKFTT 890 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) ('FTT') concluded that HMRC had "ignored" its previous decision by seeking to reduce the amount of a VAT refund which it had ordered HMRC make to Lady Henrietta Pearson ('the taxpayer').
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here