Setting Standards: The future of legal services education and training regulation in England and Wales – Legal Education and Training Review
Legal Education and Training Review, 25th June 2013
Source: www.letr.org.uk
“The judges have nothing to gain and everything to lose by negotiating with Chris Grayling in private.”
The Guardian, 25th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“As the dust from the Civil Justice reforms begins to settle, it appears that Parliamentary counsel have slipped another consultation through in the background. Published in March this year, it appears innocuous enough, but on further consideration raises a number of significant concerns. I also question why this report was even necessary. Parliamentary austerity and wholesale changes to the legal profession should have lent caution to the writers of the report, given that this can be construed as a real attack upon the legal profession. Ill-timed and badly thought out, the principle will be applauded by businesses that will look at the superficial benefits but not appreciate the issues, and is therefore convenient politically.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th June 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexhange.co.uk
“Researchers that wish to conduct “electronic analysis” of copyrighted content for non-commercial purposes will have a right to copy that information under proposed new copyright laws.”
OUT-LAW.com, 25th June 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“In the wake of the Edward Snowden disclosures, some fear that changes to UK whistleblowing laws could discourage those here wanting to spill the beans.”
The Guardian, 25th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Where the question arose as to whether a defendant who had committed an offence was a victim of trafficking the prosecution was, and remained, responsible for deciding whether to prosecute or not. The court’s role was to protect the rights of a victim of trafficking by overseeing the decision of the prosecutor and refusing to countenance any prosecution which failed to acknowledge and address the victim’s subservient situation.”
WLR Daily, 21st June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“When the Pensions Regulator, acting by the determinations panel, made a determination about a financial support direction in relation to a pension scheme, the trustees of that scheme, by virtue of their office, were persons “directly affected” by that determination for the purposes of section 96(3) of the Pensions Act 2004, and accordingly had standing as of right to refer that determination to the Upper Tribunal under that provision. Further, where any person referred such a determination of the Regulator to the Upper Tribunal under section 96(3) of the Act, the two-year time limit in section 43(9), which, prior to amendment by the Pensions Act 2011, required the Regulator to issue a financial support direction within two years of the time which he selected for determining whether the preconditions in section 43(2) for the issue of a direction had been fulfilled, did not apply to any directions which the Upper Tribunal might give regarding a financial support direction under section 103(5) and (6), or to any order made on appeal from those directions.”
WLR Daily, 21st June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Riežniece v Zemkopības ministrija and another (Case C-7/12); [2013] WLR (D) 247
“In circumstances where a much higher number of women than men took parental leave, Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 (as amended) and the Framework Agreement on Parental Leave, contained in the Annex to Council Direction 96/34/EC precluded a situation where (1) as part of an assessment of workers in the context of abolishment of officials’ posts due to national economic difficulties, a worker who had taken parental leave was assessed in his or her absence on the basis of assessment principles and criteria which placed the worker who had taken leave in a less favourable position compared to workers who did not take parental leave; and (2) a female worker who had been transferred to another post at the end of her parental leave following that assessment was dismissed due to the abolishment of that new post, where it was not impossible for the employer to allow her to return to her former post or where the work assigned to her was not equivalent or similar and consistent with her employment contract or employment relationship because, at the time of the transfer, the employer was informed that the new post was due to be abolished.”
WLR Daily, 20th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Allegations that undercover officers were used to smear reputations of Stephen Lawrence’s family will be investigated, says Home Secretary.”
Ministry of Justice, 24th June 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
“UNISON has applied to the High Court for a judicial review of the Ministry of Justice’s decision to introduce employment tribunal fees from the end of next month, it has announced.”
OUT-LAW.com, 25th June 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
The Crown Prosecution Service has been criticised by two separate Crown court judges after sending an ‘incompetent’ advocate to prosecute a murder trial and for ‘lamentable failures’ that delayed a rape trial.
Law Society’s Gazette, 25th June 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A man who attacked a ballet dancer, broke his neck and left him lying in the street has been jailed for 13 years.”
BBC News, 24th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Bankers should be subject to a new code of conduct overseen by a body similar to the General Medical Council, a consumer watchdog has claimed.”
Daily Telegraph, 25th June 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The justice secretary, Chris Grayling, has been warned by the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, not to undermine the independence of the judiciary through plans to privatise parts of the court service or make it self-financing.”
The Guardian, 24th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A convicted hacker who was detained in a young offender institution has been released – but will now face strict limitations on his technology use.”
BBC News, 24th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk