Philip Moser QC of Monckton Chambers was interviewed on Radio 5 Live today (4 June), discussing the judgment in Delaney v Secretary of State for Transport.

The High Court held in this case that the UK’s current exceptions to the payment of compensation for passengers under the Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement 1999 are contrary to EU law.

To download the podcast, dated 4 June, please click here.

The case has been featured in various media, including the BBC, The Telegraph and the Independent.

For more information on Delaney v Secretary of State for Transport, please click here.

The High Court has held that the UK’s current exceptions to the payment of compensation for passengers under the Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement 1999 are contrary to EU law.

The Agreement between the Secretary of State for Transport and the Motor Insurers’ Bureau was intended to implement the UK’s obligations under the Second Motor Insurance Directive.

The Court also found that the UK’s breach was sufficiently serious to warrant the payment of Francovich damages to the Claimant, who had sustained life-threatening injuries following a collision in 2006.

Philip Moser QC and Eric Metcalfe, instructed by Pinto Potts, acted for the Claimant.

Click to read the full Delaney v SoST judgment.

Monckton Chambers is delighted to announce that experienced EU practitioner Christopher Muttukumaru CB has joined Monckton as a tenant.

Monckton Chambers is the leading set in EU law, and Christopher’s extensive experience in Constitutional and Administrative Law, European Union (including State Aid) Law and Information Law will complement Monckton Chambers’ key areas of practice. Christopher’s EU work in the Better Regulation field will also bring a unique perspective.

Christopher’s illustrious career includes positions as Deputy Legal Advisor at the Ministry of Defence, Legal Director for the Department for Culture, Media & Sport and Legal Director for the Environment, Local Government and Housing at the Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Christopher is also an accredited mediator.

Christopher’s legal excellence and specialist knowledge gained from 30 years within the Government Legal Service will be an invaluable addition to Monckton.

Paul Lasok QC, Head of Monckton Chambers said: “Professional and lay clients in a number of market sectors encounter difficult problems in relation to which Christopher, with his background and experience, is uniquely placed to give authoritative guidance and advice. His return to private practice after many years in the public sector fills a serious gap in the market.”

Christopher Muttukumaru said: “Monckton is rightly regarded as a top set of chambers. Their invitation to me to join is therefore a fantastic opportunity. I look forward in due course to supporting a fresh client base through a consultancy service that brings new insights to problem-solving.”

David Hockney, Senior Clerk said: “I am delighted that Christopher has accepted our offer of tenancy. Christopher’s unique skill set and very considerable experience working within the corridors of the power, will serve Monckton Chambers very well, neatly complementing our market leading practice.”

The Upper Tribunal has confirmed the correctness of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal in Patersons of Greenoakhill which dismissed a test case behind which appeals by 123 landfill site operators have been stayed.

The Upper Tribunal found that landfill tax is payable on biodegradable waste, notwithstanding the fact that the methane, which is an inevitable by-product of the process of degradation, is converted  into electricity and fed into the national grid. The Upper Tribunal found that exemption would defeat the policy objectives of the tax and that extracting and converting methane into electricity is part and parcel of running a landfill site. Since methane production is inevitable, it is no more used than a gardener uses rain falling on her garden to water it. Since “use” by the landfill site operator was the Appellant’s core argument, the appeal was dismissed.

Please click for the Decision in Patersons v HMRC

The EU and UK Legal Framework in Practice

Tuesday 10 JUNE 2014 | 6pm Registration & Drinks for 6.30pm start | 1 CPD POINT

THE COURTROOMS AT BROWNS, 82 – 84 ST MARTIN’S LANE, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON, WC2N 4AG

“Payment via phone bill” has the potential to become one of the most common payment methods in the future. The value and range of goods and services paid for by consumers via their phone bills is growing, and so too is interest in the regulatory framework for regulating premium rate phone services.

In this seminar, Monckton Chambers’ specialists in EU, competition and telecoms law explore some of the key issues likely to come before the courts in the coming years relating to the operation and effectiveness of the UK’s regulatory regime for premium rate services. They will also consider how that regime fits within, or may be in tension with, the wider EU framework for regulating electronic communications services. This is a seminar that will be of interest to executives in the premium rate and wider telecoms industry, as well as their in-house and external legal advisers.

Chaired by Kassie Smith QC

Programme 6:30pm – PhonepayPlus Practice and Procedure – Gerry Facenna

6:45pm – Regulation of premium rate video services – Ligia Osepciu

7:00pm – UK regulation of premium rate services and the EU legal framework: Complementary or in conflict? – Alan Bates

7:15pm – Panel Discussion with our speakers and Laura Harcombe Partner of Hamlins LLP

Click here to download the full Regulating Premium Rate Services under Law programme.

How to register: Our seminars are free to attend. To ensure your place, please RSVP to Jessica Lines jlines@monckton.com or call 020 7468 6330.

The High Court has dismissed a restitution claim brought by a number of construction companies to recoup some of the penalties imposed on them by the OFT in its 2009 Construction Decision.

The OFT imposed penalties totalling almost £130 million on 103 construction companies for bid rigging.  Some of the companies successfully appealed their penalties to the CAT and secured significant reductions.  Six companies that had chosen not to appeal sought to argue that they were entitled to have their penalties reduced under the principles set out by the House of Lords in Woolwich v Inland Revenue.

Mr Justice Morgan noted that the scheme for statutory appeals under the Competition Act 1998 provided for appeals to a specialist tribunal (the CAT) on a tight timetable and subject to other procedural safeguards, and held that the policy underlying this scheme would be undermined if it were possible for parties to ignore the statutory system and challenge their penalties in another way.

Please click to view the judgment in Lindum et al v OFT

Martin Retail Group Limited v Crawley Borough Council, Central London County Court, Judgment of 24 December 2013.

This recently published judgment decided in December 2013 should raise alarm bells for local authorities. A letting scheme which was designed to promote a ‘diverse and vibrant’ shopping parade for the benefit of the local community has been held to breach competition law. Tenants are likely to attempt to use this case as a precedent to upset similar letting schemes elsewhere and to argue against restrictive user clauses in leases and possibly even to obtain wider user clauses on lease renewal.

Read the full Martin Retail Group Limited v Crawley Borough Council case note. Or read our useful guide Competition & Commercial Property.

Join us for a topical seminar on ‘Merger Control and Market Investigation: Challenges on Judicial Review Principles.’

Chaired by Alistair Lindsay, experts from Monckton Chambers will consider the following topical issues:

Fairness appeals – where next?
Ben Rayment

Challenges on the substance – are we in a new era of restraint?
Meredith Pickford

Looking for a lasting victory – points of law
Alison Berridge

Event Details

15 May 2014
6pm Registration for 6.30pm Start | 1 CPD point
Goldsmiths Centre, 42 Britton Street, London, EC1M 5AD

How to register:

Our seminars are free to attend.
To ensure your place, please RSVP to Jessica Lines jlines@monckton.com or call 020 7468 6330.

On 1 May, the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association launched its report, Freedom of Expression on Trial, in Baku, Azerbaijan. The report highlights serious deficiencies in trials involving journalists and bloggers in Azerbaijan and calls on the Aliyev government to take steps to ensure effective fair trial guarantees.

Eric Metcalfe was the author of the report and rapporteur of the IBAHRI’s fact-finding mission to Baku in December 2013. He returned to Azernbaijan to speak at the report’s launch.

Click here to read the report and to see a short video summary of its findings and recommendations.

 

In April 2014 Ofgem announced the appointment of John Swift QC as the Chairman of its new Enforcement Decision Panel. In its Press release Ofgem said “The Enforcement Decision Panel will bring a wealth of experience to the table and help Ofgem as we continue in our role to protect current and future consumers.” In the same month Monitor, the Health Service regulator, following the dissolution of the Cooperation and Competition Panel ( CCP), of which John Swift had been a member since 2009, continued his appointment in a new role as an expert adviser to the Board of Monitor and to its Cooperation and Competition Executive.

To read the full press release please click here.