The High Court has provided much-needed guidance on dealing with the aftermath of Search and Seizure Orders made under the Civil Procedure Rules and how to manage the inspection of imaged digital data in a way that respects privacy, privilege and protects the rights of claimants.
In a rare step, the Court of Appeal has granted an application to re-open an appeal where the judge deciding it did not have the right documents and the appellant had nowhere else to turn for a remedy against a Home Office family visa refusal.
Allegations of bias are easily made but hard to prove. Two recent Upper Tribunal cases have discussed the duty of advocates to raise issues of procedural unfairness as and when they occur.
In principle yes, according to the Court of Appeal in a claim brought by current and former employees over alleged sexual assaults by a doctor that Barclays Bank instructed to perform compulsory medical tests. [Trigger warning: refers to incidents of historic sexual assault].
Parties to judicial review claims should be familiar with this new Court guide or they could face adverse costs consequences. This post gives you a comparative analysis of the key changes since the 2017 guide.