Our Case Comment blog features reviews of recent judicial decisions as well as articles on the current caselaw within our areas of practice
Wilmot v Maughan  EWCA Civ 1668; Discretion to vary orders or second bite at the cherry? By Keith Chipato, pupil at Invictus Chambers
The case concerned a divorced husband and wife for financial remedy proceedings that were resolved in 2007. The wife then sought to enforce the orders made from around October 2011. This appeal arose from an order of Mostyn J’s, dated 13 January 2016 dismissing an application by the husband to set aside all orders made […]
Salekipour and Saleem v Parmar  EWCA Civ 2141. Jurisdiction of the County Court to set aside judgment for perjury and subornation of witnesses. By Tim Samuel, housing barrister at Invictus Chambers.
The Court of Appeal in the recent judgment of Salekipour and Saleem v Parmar has decided that the County Court does have the jurisdiction to set aside an earlier judgment of the Court on the grounds of alleged perjury and subornation of witnesses. In 2012 after a trial, the Judge found for Mr and Mrs […]
Elizabeth Fisher, pupil barrister at Invictus Chambers, on when an applicant may no longer be deemed intentionally homeless under section 193 Housing Act 1996 having found settled accommodation. In November 2010, Mr Doka had been evicted from his property for which he had a secure tenancy. His eviction had been on account of rent arrears […]
Court of Appeal overturns Order that judgment providing guidance on the use of covert recordings in family proceedings should be published. By Victoria Kiver, pupil barrister at Invictus Chambers. The case concerned a father’s appeal against two orders which were made in private law proceedings in June 2016 by Judge Bellamy sitting as a Circuit […]
Panayiotou v Waltham Forest LBC & Smith v Haringey LBC  EWCA Civ 1624. What does “significantly vulnerable” mean for the purposes of homeless assistance under section 189 Housing Act 1996? By Tim Samuel, housing barrister at Invictus Chambers.
Lord Neuberger found in Hotak v Southwark LBC  UKSC 30 ,  AC 811 that to be in priority need for homelessness assistance under section 189(1)(c) of the Housing Act 1996 a person needed to be “…”significantly more vulnerable than ordinarily vulnerable” as a result of being rendered homeless…” The role of the decision […]
Department for Communities and Local Government v Shirley Frances Blackmore (Executrix of the Estate of Cyril Leonard Hollow, Deceased)  EWCA Civ 1136
Jacqueline Rubens, barrister at Invictus Chambers, on when employees may be judged as contributorily negligent to asbestos related deaths. Asbestos related disease is highly prevalent in the UK. Legislation banning its use came into force in the mid 1980s, and asbestos related liability continues to be a headache for many manufacturers and insurers. The sole […]
Simao Paxi-Cato, employment and discrimination barrister at Invictus Chambers, reviews the long awaited decision of the Supreme Court in R (Unison) v Lord Chancellor  UKSC 51 concerning the lawfulness of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 and considers the implications for past (including thereotical) litigants. The issue in the Supreme Court […]
Chesterton Global Limited and Another v Nurmohamed (2017) EWCA Civ 979 – The “Public Interest” Test in Whistleblowing Claims
Trisan Hyatt, employment and discrimination barrister at Invictus Chambers, reviews the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in which the Court considered the “public interest” test in the whistleblowing legislation (as amended) and gave it a wide interpretation. In order to be protected against detriment or dismissal under the whistleblowing legislation, a worker must […]
Alexander Swain, immigration barrister at Invictus Chambers, considers the High Court’s decision in The Queen on the application of MK (a child by her litigation friend CAE) v SSHD  EWHC 1365 [Admin]. The High Court’s decision in The Queen on the application of MK (a child be her litigation friend CAE) v SSHD (“MK”) […]
As part of our regular review of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), Martha Lewis, pupil barrister at Invictus Chambers, examines the High Court’s recent judgment concerning applications to set aside default judgments under CPR 13.3. In Redbourn Group Ltd v Fairgate Development Ltd, the High Court refused the Defendant’s application to set aside default judgment. […]