Blacker (The Lord Harley) v The Law Society [2016] EWHC 947 (QB) (27 April 2016)

Blacker (The Lord Harley) v The Law Society [2016] EWHC 947 (QB) (27 April 2016)

There is no serious issue to be tried as the files in question contain no private information about the claimant, the Law Society's actions do not engage Articles 6 or 8 of the Human Rights Act, and the claimant has no proprietary right to the files. The claim discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 947 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Dr Alan Blacker (The Lord Harley); Defendant: The Law Society
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Interim Injunction and Application to Strike Out/summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out; summary judgment for defendant
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Freedom of Information, Data Protection Act, Human Rights Act, Regulatory Law, Summary Judgment, Striking Out
Civil Procedure Human Rights Data Protection Injunctive Relief Freedom of Information Data Protection Act Human Rights Act Regulatory Law +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Alan Blacker (The Lord Harley)

Claimant

The Law Society

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Interim Injunction and Application to Strike Out/summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an injunction restraining the Law Society from releasing or publishing certain files
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to delivery up of SRA files
  3. 3 Whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action under the Data Protection Act or Human Rights Act

Ratio Decidendi

There is no serious issue to be tried as the files in question contain no private information about the claimant, the Law Society's actions do not engage Articles 6 or 8 of the Human Rights Act, and the claimant has no proprietary right to the files. The claim discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim and should be struck out under CPR Part 3.4(2)(a).

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; summary judgment for defendant

Orders

  • Claimant's application for interim injunction refused
  • Claim struck out under CPR Part 3.4(2)(a)