header-logo header-logo

09 February 2022
Issue: 7966 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

No-show from Brexit campaigners

Brexit campaign company Leave.EU has lost its appeal against a ruling that it breached data protection laws after failing to turn up to court

Brexit campaign company Leave.EU has lost its appeal against a ruling that it breached data protection laws after failing to turn up to court

Leave.EU left Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Lewison, Lady Justice Asplin and respondent, the Information Commissioner and counsel waiting in vain in court 71 at the Royal Courts of Justice last week.

Sir Geoffrey noted that substantive grounds and a skeleton argument had been filed by Leave.EU’s solicitors Kingsley Napley, who had, on its application, come off the record as acting for the company on 26 January. On 31 January, the court attempted to contact Jacobus Coetzee, who is registered at Companies House as sole director, but with no response. Consequently, the usher called Leave.EU outside court at the start of the hearing on 1 February with no response, and the court adjourned at 11am for nearly half an hour.

The court sat again this week to decide what it should do when a corporate appellant fails to appear.

Counsel for the Information Commissioner Christopher Knight submitted the court should either dismiss the appeal or proceed on the basis of the skeleton argument and with only Knight’s oral arguments.

Dismissing the appeal, Leave.EU v Information Commissioner [2022] EWCA Civ 109, Sir Geoffrey, Lewison LJ and Asplin LJ decided it would not be ‘just or appropriate to hear the substantive appeal in the absence of Leave.EU’. Sir Geoffrey said both sides should be heard ‘when important legal issues are in play which may affect many others in society’, as well as noting the time of the court ‘is at a premium’ and ‘there must be finality in litigation’.

Leave.EU was appealing a ruling that it breached data protection legislation when it sent 21 email newsletters to 51,000 supporters of Leave.EU containing unsolicited marketing material for Eldon Insurance Services (a business then owned by Leave.EU owner Aaron Banks).

Issue: 7966 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Constitutional law
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