- Cited — Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v The Mayor of London 2020-08-05
“…erest in question” and his “selection of an appropriate means by which that protection can be provided”: see R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2015] UKSC 41, [2016] AC 697 at [66]. So far as the balance between competing interests under the Equality Act 2010 is concerned, she submits that there is a wide margin of discretion to b…”
- Applied — Friends of Antique Cultural Treasures Ltd, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs 2020-05-18
“…The approach to be applied has been considered in previous domestic cases: R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2016] AC 697 (“Lumsdon”); Scotch Whiskey Association v Lord Advocate [2017] SLT 1261 (“Scotch Whiskey”); Transport for London v Uber London Limited and others [2018] EWCA C…”
- Cited — Seabrook Warehousing Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Revenue And Customs 2019-07-29
“…[2015] UKSC 41, [2016] AC 697 (“Lumsdon”). The very recent decision is Secretaryof State for Work and Pensions v Gubeladze [2019] UKSC 31 (“Gubeladze (SC)”), on appeal from the decision of …”
- Cited — Omar & Ors v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2019-02-21
“…te as being no more than was suitable and necessary to meet the attainment of the objective in question: cp. R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2015] UKSC 41, [2016] AC 697 at paragraphs 52 and 74. He submitted that the Secretary of State “does not begin to show that”.…”
- Cited — The Lord Chancellor & Anor v McCloud & Ors 2018-12-20
“…As for the need for a social policy aim to be supported by evidence, Judge Lewzey cited para 56 from the judgment of Lords Reed and Toulson in Lumsdon [2016] AC 697, which we cited at para 61 above but here repeat:-…”
- Cited — Uber London Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v Transport for London 2018-05-25
“…ntly, the judge had to determine whether the Voice Contact Requirement was proportionate. The relevant approach is set out in R(Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2016] AC 697 and relevant EU case-law. At [33], in the judgment of Lord Reed and Lord Toulson, with which the other members of the court agreed, it was held:…”