Case notes

Our JUSTICE Student Members publishes these case notes for the purpose of assisting our members in the development of their legal knowledge. Here they summarise the key facts and analyse the outcome.

To publish and view the full case notes library in the JUSTICE members area – join as a student member here.


R (on the application of Hemmati and others) (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] UKSC 56

In the Hemmati litigation, the five respondents arrived in the United Kingdom illegally and claimed asylum. The respondents had all travelled to the United Kingdom via at least one other EU Member State.

Lloyd v Google LLC [2019] EWCA Civ 1599

Between August 2011 and February 2012, Google took advantage of an Apple-devised exception to cookie blockers, the “Safari Workaround”, which allowed Google to harvest browser generated information (“BGI”) of Apple iPhone users by placing tracking cookies without the consumers’ knowledge.

Re: D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

Child D was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactive disorder, Asperger’s syndrome and Tourette’s syndrome, and has a mild learning disability. As a result, he was admitted to hospital aged 14 and resided at a specialist unit in the hospital grounds.

R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent); Cherry and others (Respondent) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland) [2019] UKSC 41

The Supreme Court (‘UKSC’) was asked to rule on the lawfulness of the Prime Minister’s decision to advise the Queen to prorogue Parliament from the 9th of September until the 14th of October 2019.

Beghal v The United Kingdom (Application 4755/16)

Beghal considered the lawfulness of Schedule 7 Terrorism Act 2000 (Sch.7) powers. Under this provision police, immigration and customs officers at border crossings can stop, question and detain individuals travelling into and out of the UK. This is to determine if an individual is concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

Re: M (Children) [2019] EWCA Civ 1364

The appellants were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 [‘TA 2000’] on returning from Syria and their children were taken into police protection under the Children Act 1989 [‘CA 1989’].