EU Law post-Brexit

Examples of recent cases include:

• R (Trinity College (CSP) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2021] EWHC 1355 (Admin) - about the circumstances in which grants could be refused under the European Regional Development Fund and the relationship with national procurement rules, upholding the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse where those rules had not been fully complied with.
• R (King) v Secretary of State for Education [2021] EWHC 2509 (Admin) – about entitlement to student support for Surinder Singh spouses, upholding the regulations that excluded them from eligibility for maintenance support Celik v SSHD – pending Court of Appeal case. 
• Waltham Forest LBC v Hussain [2022] UKUT 241 (LC) [2023] H.L.R. 1 might fit the bill. It’s about the powers of local authorities to licence Houses in Multiple Occupation and whether Directive 2006/123/EC (and/or the Provision of Services Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2999) apply to applications for licences. AT v SSWP. 
  
• R (IMA) v SSHD [2022] EWHC 3274 (Admin)
  
• CG v Dept of Communities for Northern Ireland 
  
• Fratila v SSWP [2021] UKSC 53 
  
• R (Roehrig) v SSHD [2023] EWHC 31 (Admin)
  
• R (Akinsanya) v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 37 
  
• Begum v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 1878 
  
• Carrington v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2022] EWCA Civ 1724 
  
• Chowdhury v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 1220 
  
• Robinson (Jamaica) v SSHD [2020] UKSC 53
  
• Konevod v SSWP [2020] EWCA Civ 809 – TB for Konevod
  
• Latayan v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 191 
  
• Kaur v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 98 
  
• Patel v SSHD [2019] UKSC 59
  
• SSWP v Gubeladze [2019] UKSC 31
  
• Case C-43/12 Commission v. European Parliament and Council (an application to annul Directive 2011/82/EU of the European Parliament and Council on the cross-border exchange of information on road safety and traffic offences, on the basis that it had wrongly been adopted on the basis of Art. 87(1) TFEU, which permits an opt-out by Member States, as opposed to Art. 91(1), which does not).
• Case C-507/12 St Prix v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] 1 C.M.L.R. 38 (on the meaning of ‘worker’ for the purposes of Art. 7 of the Citizenship Directive and the compatibility of the Directive with the anti-discrimination provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights).
• R (Harrison) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] 2. C.M.L.R 23 (on the rights of non-EU family members of EU citizens lawfully resident in the UK, following the CJEU’s judgments in Zambrano, McCarthy and Dereci).
• Case C-530/11 Commission v United Kingdom (on the compatibility of the costs rules in UK environmental litigation with the Public Participation Directive).
• Case C-567/10 Inter-Environnement Bruxelles ASBL v Region de Bruxelles-Capitale [2012] 2 C.M.L.R. 30 (on the scope of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).
• Case C-186/10 Oguz v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] 1 W.L.R. 709 (on the interpretation of the EEC – Turkey Association Agreement).
• Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2011] 2. C.M.L.R 45 (on the compatibility with EU law of the UK Government’s “right to reside” test for social security benefits).
• R (Midlands Co-Operative) v Birmingham City Council [2012] EU L.R. 640 (on the applicability of the Public Contracts Directive to development agreements and s.106 obligations).

A number of our members have held visiting lectureships in EU law at academic institutions, including Oxford University.