‘The High Court will examine whether the Metropolitan Police is acting lawfully with its deployments of live facial recognition, in the UK’s first judicial review of how the technology is being used.’
Computer Weekly, 27th January 2026
Source: www.computerweekly.com
‘A man who sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl as she walked home in her school uniform nearly 30 years ago has been jailed following a DNA evidence “breakthrough”.’
BBC News, 23rd January 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A man who sought asylum in the UK has been found guilty of raping a “drunk and obviously vulnerable” woman in a Nottinghamshire park.’
The Independent, 26th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘”Tomas” is a two year old boy who was removed from his parents to live in foster care under an interim care order in January 2025. (None of the parties’ real names are used in this post.) In a three-day final hearing in November, care and placement for adoption orders were made in respect of Tomas by Cardiff Family Court.’
Transparency Project, 26th January 2026
Source: transparencyproject.org.uk
‘The Home Secretary has unveiled what are being described as the most significant reforms to policing in its history.’
The Independent, 26th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A former prison officer has been jailed after admitting a sexual relationship with an inmate.’
BBC News, 26th January 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A longstanding bugbear of mine is the lack of transparency over remedial discretion in published judicial review judgments, i.e. not seeing in published judgments what the remedy for a successful judicial review is. Often this is largely understandable, because the matter can only be addressed through further submissions after hand down.’
Administrative Court Blog, 23rd January 2026
‘A British-based YouTube critic of the Saudi royal family has been awarded more than £3 million in compensation after his phone was hacked and he was subjected to a physical assault outside Harrods in London.’
The Independent, 27th January 2026
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The saying “Fair’s fair” refers to the instinctive sense that acting fairly is what everyone should do, even if they don’t. However, local authorities and other public bodies have a duty to act fairly following the principles of natural justice. These are that no one is to be a judge in their own cause (nemo iudex in causa sua) and that the parties must have a fair opportunity of presenting their views on the matters in issue (audi alteram partem – hear the other side). But as Lord Bridge (pictured) observed in Lloyd v McMahon [1987] AC 625: “The so-called rules of natural justice are not engraved on tablets of stone. To use the phrase which better expresses the underlying concept, what the requirements of fairness demand when any body, domestic, administrative or judicial, has to make a decision which will affect the rights of individuals, depends on the character of the decision-making body, the kind of decision it has to make and the statutory or other framework in which it operates. In particular, it is well-established that when a statute has conferred on any body the power to make decisions affecting individuals, the courts will not only require the procedure prescribed by the statute to be followed, but will readily imply so much and no more to be introduced by way of additional procedural safeguards as will ensure the attainment of fairness.”‘
Law Society's Gazette, 23rd January 2026
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2026