In this article written for the British Tax Review, Max Schofield reviews News Corp UK & Ireland Ltd v HMRC and whether digital versions of newspapers should attract VAT, while printed versions do not.
View ArticleSearch Results for: CSCM-001 PDF 🐃 CSCM-001 Lernhilfe 🧦 CSCM-001 Buch 🦺 Suchen Sie auf der Webseite ⇛ www.itzert.com ⇚ nach { CSCM-001 } und laden Sie es kostenlos herunter 🎐CSCM-001 Probesfragen
Court of Appeal confirms the causative approach to the ‘material factor test’ in equal pay claims
Grace Boorer looks at Walker v Co-Operative Group Ltd & Anor and identifies some important practical considerations to avoid falling into error when considering material factor defences.
SEND provision beyond 24 September 2020 - a brewing storm?
Caroline Stone examines the forthcoming changes to the SEND Regulations 2014.
Council wins Judicial Review challenge to academy order
Katherine Anderson reviews Somerset County Council v Secretary of State for Education [2020] EWHC 1675 (Admin).
“Low arousal” environments examined by the Upper Tribunal
Emma Waldron reviews JI and SP v Hertfordshire County Council (SEN), in which the Upper Tribunal examined whether sufficient reasons had been given by the First Tier Tribunal for rejecting expert evidence and for finding that a school could provide a “low arousal environment”.
Disability Discrimination in the Employment Tribunal: lessons for education lawyers
Sarah Bowen and Naomi Webber consider two recent appellate decisions (Khorochilova v Euro Rep Limited UKEAT/0266/19/DA and Robinson v DWP [2020] EWCA Civ 859) in respect of the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA) in relation to the protected characteristic of disability. Whilst the facts of the cases relate to the employment sector, the same definition of disability applies in the context of education. Accordingly, their principles are directly relevant and applicable to disability discrimination claims in education.
Relocation dos and don'ts
Elisabeth Hudson reviews the dos and don'ts of children relocation.
Trade marks and the drinks industry
Nicole Bollard reviews a selection of recent trade mark decisions concerning the drinks industry, including:
- Sazerac Brands LLC and others v Liverpool Gin Distillery Limited and others [2020] EWHC 2424
- Les Grands Chais de France SAS v Consorzio di Tutela Della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco
- Gleann Mor Spirits Company Limited v Muckle Brig Limited (O/366/20).
The protection of shapes in 2020: Trade Marks, Copyright & IPR Cumulation - Victoria Jones considers the following cases:
On trade marks
- Freixenet SA v OHIM C-344/10 and C-345/10 [2011] ECR I-10205 on Inherent Distinctiveness
- Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions v Boots C-108/97 and C-109/97 on Acquired distinctiveness
- The London Taxi Corporation Ltd v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anr [2017] EWCA Civ 1729
- Jaguar Land Rover Limited v Ineos Industries Holdings Limited [2020] EWHC 2130 (Ch)
- Gömböc: C-237/19
On copyright
- Cofemel v G-Star Raw CV C-683/17
- Brompton Bicycle Ltd v Chedech/Get2Get C-833/18
- Response Clothing v Edinburgh Woollen Mill Limited [2020] EWHC 148 (IPEC)
Lydia Pemberton provides useful probate guidance in the era of Covid-19.
View ArticleCost plus: still alive and kicking?
Matthew Curtis analyses Heskett v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWCA Civ 1487, a case likely to make it easier for employers to prove they have a legitimate aim in age discrimination cases.
The strictness of contractual appeal time limits
Matthew Curtis analyses Joseph v Deloitte NSE LLP [2020] EWCA Civ, and reminds us that where contractual rights of appeal are involved, it is essential to get the appeal in within the time specified in the contract, even in if the employer has delayed another part of the process.