header-logo header-logo

09 October 2014
Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Grayling loses (again)

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has lost a second judicial review, this time over a decision affecting mesothelioma sufferers.

The High Court held that the Ministry of Justice would be acting unlawfully if it were to include mesothelioma claimants in reforms in the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) without a review and report on the likely impact, in R (on the application of Tony Whitson) v Justice Secretary [2014] EWHC 3044 (Admin).

Under LASPO, personal injury claimants must pay up to 25% of their damages towards their legal costs and insurance premiums. An amendment secured by the House of Lords excluded mesothelioma claims from this change, and required the government to review and report on the likely impact before any move to include them.

Mr Justice William Davis concluded that the government did not conduct a proper review of the likely effects.

Richard Stein, partner at Leigh Day, who brought the judicial review against the decision, said: “This judgment should send a clear message to the government that it has to conform with the laws of the land and cannot ride roughshod over the interests of mesothelioma sufferers and their families to benefit the insurance industry.”

In August 2014, the Justice Select Committee expressed surprise over a secret heads of agreement document between the government and the insurance industry, concerning mesothelioma, which was not disclosed to other parties. In September, the High Court ruled that Chris Grayling had failed to consult properly on duty solicitor reforms by withholding two key reports.

Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News , Judicial review
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll