Articles

Joseph England analyses Kau Media Group Ltd v Hart [2025] EWHC 553 (KB), a case that highlights the importance of making sure there is evidence to back up the apparent justification contained in often hastily prepared pleadings.

The case also offers a specific analysis of the digital marketing industry, with the covenants’ length and scope providing useful comparisons against an individual case.

Naomi Webber and Alex Leonhardt analyse the long-anticipated judgment in Higgs v Farmor’s School handed down by the Court of Appeal in February, a judgment which offers pertinent lessons for practitioners representing student/parents, schools and universities, where questions of balancing freedom of speech, institutional reputation and the rights of others frequently come into play.

Alice de Coverley reviews the case of B v St Dominic’s Grammar School: [2025] UKUT 048 (AAC), in which Judge Stout provides clear guidance on how further parts of section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 are to be interpreted, clarifying how the shifting burden of proof applies to both the reason for unfavourable treatment and the ‘something arising’ from disability.

Ben Amunwa predicts a groundswell of systemic legal challenges - including but not limited to judicial reviews - on a range of social and economic issues affecting the education sector.

Olivia McGonigle analyses the case of R (RWU) v The Governing Body of A Academy [2025] EWCA Civ 147, which provides clarification on the application of Article 4 ECHR for schools and academies when considering the need to protect vulnerable students.

Exploitation should be taken into account when considering permanent exclusion, and educational institutions’ policies should reflect that.

Rebecca Farrell, specialist commercial and insolvency barrister at 3PB, has written an article exploring three recent Insolvency Appeals and their potential impact.

Michael Smith reviews the case of Jones v SoS for Health and Social Care [2024] EWCA Civ 1568, in which the CoA found that an ET acted perversely in deciding that it was not just and equitable to extend time for a race discrimination claim to be brought outside the primary limitation period and expressed doubts as to whether suspicion would ever be a relevant factor in the assessment of whether it was just and equitable to extend time.

Daniel Brown analyses the case of Eddie Stobbart Limited v Graham [2025] EAT 14, a case in which the EAT explains how to assess compensation for injury to feelings, particularly where the evidence of injury is scant.

Naomi Webber and Alex Leonhardt analyse the case of Higgs v Farmor’s School [2025] EWCA Civ 109, an important decision which explains how direct discrimination interrelates with the right to hold and manifest religious and philosophical beliefs in the workplace.

Alex and Naomi draw out key points from the judgment and explain how it can be applied in future cases.

Jo Laxton on the case of Douglas v North Lanarkshire [2024] EAT 194 in which the EAT considered if, in granting an application to amend, it was an error of law for a tribunal to address the issue of limitation at the final hearing, noting the decisions in Amey Services v Alridge and Galilee v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

The decision also briefly addresses a more discrete, secondary point, about the application of Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited v. Hitt.

Kara Cann considers current attitudes to ‘denial models’ of risk assessment.