Ohpen Operations UK Limited v Invesco Fund Managers Limited [2019] EWHC 2246 (TCC)

In a recent TCC decision, Mrs Justice O’Farrell has reiterated that the Courts will enforce contractual dispute resolution procedures and give parties every opportunity to settle disputes before pursuing litigation.

Null, & of no effect: R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent) and Cherry & Ors (Respondents) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland)

To adopt the description of my learned colleague in Chambers: “This is absolutely massive. Was justiciable and was unlawful. Prorogation was void and of no effect.”

Massages at Work and the Shifting Burden of Proof: Raj v (i) Capital Business Services Limited (ii) Ward [2019] UKEAT/0074/19 6 June 2019 (published 16 September 2019)

The employee appealed against the Employment Tribunal’s dismissal of his harassment claim which arose out of his (female) line manager giving him massages at work.

Does the FTT have jurisdiction to decide the extent of a party’s beneficial interest? Hallman v Harkins [2019] UKUT 0245 (LC)

The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chambers) has answered a very important practical question about beneficial interests – despite being able to determine whether a party has a beneficial interest in land, the First-tier Tribunal has no jurisdiction to quantify it.

High Court of England & Wales v Inner House of the Court of Session

The highest courts in England and Wales, and in Scotland, considered prorogation in principle, and the decision to prorogue on 9 September 2019 in practice, before coming to a different, reasoned judgment and opinion, respectively.