Temple Garden Chambers is a leading common law set based in London and The Hague.
With excellence from top to bottom Chambers provides a first class service in a number of different fields.
Home /
Widow recovers £150,000 from a landowner in respect of the death of her husband killed by a falling branch from one of his trees. Marcus Grant instructed by Nick Godwin of Slater & Gordon, represented a 68-year-old widow whose 64…
Sole counsel for SSHD in two test cases in the Court of Appeal, concerning the Zambrano principle and the implications of Case C-133/15 Chavez Vilchez and others in “family unit” cases. David Blundell of Landmark Chambers represented SSHD in a…
Three national newspapers (The Times, Daily Mail, and The Mirror) were attempting to avoid paying any additional liabilities (success fees and ATE premiums) to privacy and defamation claimants funded by conditional fee agreements. The challenge was based upon the newspapers’…
Alleged fraud case. Court of Appeal decision following an insurers appeal against a finding that an accident had been proven on a balance of probabilities. Guidance given on when an appeal Court can interfere, when an acquittal of fraud can…
Whether an insurer’s admission made under the MoJ Portal is binding on insured in separate proceedings.
Instructed as sole counsel for HMRC. The Court of Appeal upheld HMRC’s decision that Mrs Arthur’s husband was ordinarily resident in the UK and thus that she ought to have made a joint claim for tax credits.
Case concerning: (i) the quality of residence necessary to establish permanent residence under Article 17 of Directive 2004/38; and (ii) the proportionality of the extension of the Worker Registration Scheme between 2009 and 2011. Now on appeal to Supreme Court….
Instructed for SSHD. Administrative Court rejected Claimant’s argument that s.120 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 required SSHD to consider an application based on EU law rights. Claimant’s reliance on EU law principle of equivalence also rejected….
The appellants, who all had extant leave to remain in the UK, applied in time for further leave to remain. They could have benefited from section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 extending their leave until after their applications had…
The claimants were all foreign criminals whose deportation was generally required by section 32 of the UK Borders Act 2007. The Court of Appeal considered the way in which the Immigration Rules in force before 28 July 2014 should be…
