In the first suspension application to be heard by the High Court under regulation 96(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, the court refused an application to lift an automatic suspension on a local authority. Counted4 challenge Sunderland City Council’s award of a contract for the provision of substance misuse treatment and harm reduction services to another tenderer.

Fiona Banks successfully represented Counted4 in resisting the application to lift the suspension.

To read the Case Law article on Lawtel please click here.

Public Law analysis: Following the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, which President Hollande described as ‘an act of war’, the President invoked Article 42(7) of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU)–dubbed the EU’s ‘mutual defence clause’–to request bilateral aid and assistance from other EU Member States. At a European Council meeting on 16 and 17 November 2015, European ministers expressed their unanimous and full support to France. Dr Theodore Konstadinides, senior lecturer in law at the University of Surrey and a legal expert in EU Law, and Philip Moser QC of Monckton Chambers, explain the implications of the invocation of Art 42(7) TEU.

Please click here to read the article.

This article was first published on Lexis®PSL on 24 November 2015

 

This article in our Viewpoint series considers the recent decision of the CJEU in Mapfre which indicates that the Court is continuing to adopt a wide interpretation of VAT exemptions for insurance and financial services.

To read the full article on Bloomberg BNA magazine please click here.

Human Rights analysis: Discussing the Supreme Court’s ruling on the suspension of benefits for a severely disabled child in hospital, Steve Broach, a barrister at Monckton Chambers, points out that Mathieson is the latest in a line of recent Supreme Court judgments where international human rights conventions have played a significant role.

Please click here to read the article Supreme Court considers disability living allowance rules.

This article was first published on Lexis®PSL on 20 July 2015. Click for a free trial of Lexis®PSL.

To read the article published by Rights Info please click here.

The Appellant was represented by Ian Wise QC and Stephen Broach, instructed by Mitchell Woolf of Scott-Moncrieff and Associates.

To read the article published by Oxford Human Rights Hub please click here.

The Appellant was represented by Ian Wise QC and Stephen Broach, instructed by Mitchell Woolf of Scott-Moncrieff and Associates.

Please click here to read the article Edenred – a deceptively narrow decision but with wide reaching consequences

This article was first published on Thomson Reuters.

Public Law analysis: What impact will the ruling by the Supreme Court on Edenred v HM Treasury have on public outsourcing contracts? Philip Moser QC, a barrister at Monckton Chambers, advises this will now be the leading judgment on material variation in public procurement and will no doubt inform challenges on contract review clauses.

Please click here to read the article Varying the terms of public contracts — what are the rules

This article was first published on Lexis®PSL Public Law analysis on 9 July 2015. Click for a free trial of Lexis®PSL.

 

To read the full article from The Lawyer please click here.

An article considering how the parties’ choice of court when bringing a claim for competition damages can have a decisive influence on the outcome of a case.

As every experienced litigator knows, the parties’ choice of court can have a decisive influence on the outcome of a case. This article examines the potential for clashes between competent courts for competition law damages claims and the risk of spawning multiple sets of proceedings with irreconcilable judgments. For competition law damages claims, a claimant currently has a choice of two courts in England and Wales (the Chancery Division of the High Court or the Commercial Court) and, from 1 October 2015 onwards, will also be able to start proceedings in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). The precise choice of court will depend on a number of strategic and practical considerations, including the type and degree of judicial or economic expertise required.

Please click here to view the full Choice of English courts for competition damages claims article.

This article was first published by Practical Law.