“For the first time a UK court has permitted non therapeutic sterilisation of a male individual who, through learning disabilities, was unable to consent to such a procedure.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th August 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The British parliament is to investigate Prince Charles’s controversial role in helping to shape government legislation in a move likely to increase pressure on Whitehall to reduce the secrecy around alleged royal lobbying.”
The Guardian, 12th August 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“David Cameron wants to block access to pornography unless people opt in, but is it possible to filter only the things you want?”
The Guardian, 8th August 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Energy companies will need to negotiate a ‘tangled web; of regulatory approvals just to carry out exploratory ‘fracking’, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 7th August 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“A woman who was subjected to an arranged marriage with a man who has severe mental disabilities begged a High Court judge not to annul the union because it would consign her to permanent spinsterhood and ostracism by the Sikh community.”
Daily Telegraph, 6th August 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“In this two part article, Adreeja Chatterjee provides an introduction to the forced marriage legislation. This article explores the ‘typical’ forced marriage scenario, and how this compares to scenarios which crop up in the Court of Protection – where the mental capacity of the bride or groom is at the heart of the case. There is also an exploration of the case of [XCC v AA & Anor (Rev 3) [2012] EWHC 2183 (COP) (26 July 2012)] – a case in which Adreeja appeared in the first part of the litigation, and which merits close scrutiny.”
No. 5 Chambers, 29th July 2013
Source: www.no5.com
“A five-member panel of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal last week issued its decision in Re: a Complaint of Surveillance (case no: IPT/A1/2013). The decision was on a preliminary point arising from this sort of factual scenario: suppose you voluntarily participate in an interview with policing/investigatory authorities but, unbeknownst to you, the investigators use a device to record that interview? Would this act of recording constitute ‘surveillance’ for the purposes of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), such that it requires authorisation (assuming it to be ‘directed’) was required? Would it engage your rights under Article 8 ECHR?”
Panopticon, 29th July 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“The House of Lords ad hoc Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has now heard three sessions of evidence.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 3rd July 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The government is risking a fresh row with the judiciary by raising the prospect that television cameras could be allowed to film within crown courts.”
The Guardian, 1st July 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Regina v McNally: [2013] EWCA Crim 1051; [2013] WLR (D) 256
“Consent to sexual penetration could be vitiated by a deception by the defendant as to gender because vitiating deceptions were not limited to deceptions relating to features of the offence.”
WLR Daily, 27th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The case law shows that undercover police officers who slept with protesters are on dangerous legal ground.”
The Guardian, 28th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
R v Brown (Appellant) (Northern Ireland) [2013] UKSC 43 | UKSC 2011/0233 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 26th June 2013
“Guidance to doctors and nurses on decisions about whether or not to resuscitate patients is being reviewed amid concerns over whether it is being properly implemented.”
The Guardian, 21st June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The introduction of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) was celebrated for establishing a groundbreaking legal framework which empowers and protects those who lack capacity. Yet only six years after its implementation, the criticisms of MCA 2005 have grown to such an extent that the House of Lords has established a post-legislative scrutiny committee. So what has led to this apparent volte face?”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 12th June 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“Leading doctors are calling for a change in the law, so that unconscious patients can be tested for HIV if those treating them get injured.”
Daily Telegraph, 2nd June 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“It is estimated that 12,000 men and 85,000 women on average are raped in England and Wales every year, but it is not an issue that is talked about openly. One woman has waived her anonymity and bravely spoken about her story, from reporting the attack to bringing her rapist to justice.”
BBC News, 3rd May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Campaigners demand urgent shake-up of court procedure after seven barristers cross-examined a girl every day for three weeks in child-grooming case.”
The Guardian, 19th May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Regina (F) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 945 (Admin); [2013] WLR (D) 178
“For the purposes of an offence of rape contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003, choice was crucial to the issue of ‘consent’ to sexual intercourse. Evidence relating to ‘choice’ and the ‘freedom’ to make any particular choice had to be approached in a broad common sense way. Where a man deliberately ignored the basis of his partner’s consent to penetration as a manifestation of his control over her consent to penetration could be vitiated and give rise to a conviction for rape.”
WLR Daily, 24th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Businesses should have to ask for individuals’ consent before sharing anonymised personal data with third parties, digital rights campaigners have said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 15th May 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The BBC has reported today that the law on consent has been further defined by the Lord Chief Justice. The article reads: ‘A woman who agreed to sex might still be the victim of rape, the High Court has ruled. The most senior judge in England and Wales and two other judges said there was consensual penetration, but the man behaved aggressively and ignored the woman’s demand that he not ejaculate.’ ”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th April 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
