‘The Court of Appeal is to hear a disciplinary case which led to the Bar Standards Board being accused by Lord Justice Moses of “misleading conduct”.’
Legal Futures, 10th July 2014
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Metropolitan police cannot use its policy of “neither confirm nor deny” in response to damages claims brought by women who claim they were tricked into forming relationships with undercover officers.’
The Guardian, 2nd July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Last night saw the House of Lords’ first reaction to the Government’s proposed changes to judicial review as the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill had its second reading. Already dissected at some length in this blog, the proposals have been roundly criticised by both the senior judiciary and the Joint Committee on Human Rights. Consultations responses, including from JUSTICE, expressed concern that the measures appear, by design or coincidence, to undermine the rule of law, inhibit transparency and shield the Government from judicial scrutiny. Two key concerns arise from the Government proposals: restricting access for individuals without substantial means and limiting the courts’ discretion to do justice in the public interest. Yesterday’s debate was robust and eloquent, with former Law Lords joined by bishops and backbenchers alike to condemn the new measures.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 1st July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Although there was no doubt that there were circumstances in which the High Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, could properly make an order requiring someone to lodge their passport with the court or with some suitable custodian it was not permissible to make such an order to compel a third party without parental responsibility, or any other form of power or control over the child, to take steps to secure the return of an abducted child. Furthermore, where the subject of the order was not yet 17 it was simply wrong as a matter of principle to attach a penal notice to the order since a child could not be imprisoned or detained for contempt.’
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Requiring applicants for those jobs which require enhanced criminal record checks to disclose all spent convictions no matter how historic or minor is an unnecessary and disproportionate interference with their human rights, the UK’s Supreme Court has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 25th June 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The provisions in Part V of the Police Act for the automatic release of a person’s convictions, cautions and warnings— regardless of their relevance or the length of time that had elapsed— when that person was required, by reason of articles 3 or 4 of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1975, to obtain and disclose an enhanced criminal record certificate for the purpose of obtaining employment or some other position which involved working with children or other vulnerable groups of persons, did not meet the requirement of legality for the purposes of article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and so was incompatible with the person’s right to respect for their private life guaranteed by that article. Moreover, the provisions contravened article 8 in that they were not “necessary in a democratic society”, as required by article 8.2.’
WLR Daily, 18th June 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Whether it is “fair” to share an individual’s personal data for lawful public policy reasons requires a careful balancing of the interests of that individual and the interests of others, including the public interests, the High Court in England has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd June 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
Regina (Nunn) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary: [2014] UKSC 37; [2014] WLR (D) 265
‘Where, after a defendant’s trial had ended in his conviction, material came to light which might cast doubt on the safety of the conviction, the prosecutors’ duty of disclosure required him to disclose that material to the defendant, unless there were good reason not to do so, and, where there was a real prospect that further inquiry might reveal such material, to make that inquiry. There was, however, no indefinitely continuing duty on police or prosecutors to respond to whatever inquiries the defendant might make for access to case materials to allow re-investigation.’
WLR Daily, 18th June 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has unanimously declared that government rules regarding the disclosure of spent convictions are unlawful and incompatible with Article 8 of the Convention.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The issue of just how open our justice system should be is an issue which is or should be of fundamental concern to all practising lawyers. If, as Jeremy Bentham once stated ‘publicity is the very soul of justice’ (cited by Lord Shaw in the leading case of Scott v Scott [1913] AC 477), then an open justice system is the corporeal expression of that soul. However, we now live in times where open justice is increasingly under threat. Indeed, as last week’s headlines reminded us all, matters have now got to a stage where some judges at least have been prepared to allow, not merely the deployment of a limited closed procedure to deal with certain aspects of a case, but a completely secret trial. It no doubt came as a relief to many that the Court of Appeal was not prepared to sanction such a comprehensive departure from the open justice principle: Guardian News v AB CD. However, the mere fact that the judiciary was prepared to contemplate such a procedure shows how far we have come since the days of Scott v Scott.’
Panopticon, 18th June 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘A man serving life in prison for murdering his ex-girlfriend has lost his fight to have forensic exhibits retested.’
BBC News, 18th June 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Supreme Court, 18th June 2014
Supreme Court, 18th June 2014
‘A salesman serving life in prison for murdering his former girlfriend will today find out the result of his Supreme Court fight to have key forensic exhibits retested.’
The Independent, 18th June 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court is today due to rule whether job applicants should be forced to disclose all convictions to certain potential employers.’
The Independent, 18th June 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has published its decision in Guardian News Media v AB and CD. It is not a judgment, the Court says. Judgments – plural – will be given “in due course.” Still, the 24 paragraph decision contains the order and explanation of the order, and gives an indication of some of the reasons that will follow.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 12th June 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Given the paucity of case law, it is notoriously difficult to estimate likely awards of compensation under section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 for breaches of that Act. It is also very difficult to assess any trends in compensation awards over time.’
Panopticon, 13th June 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘Since Tuesday, running a personal website has become a privacy minefield for people using .uk domain names. A recent rule change by Nominet, the company which manages the .uk registry, means that domain name owners whose home addresses were previously kept private may now be publicly visible in online searches. People setting up domain names through Nominet must now also show their full legal personal or business name on the public registration database.’
The Guardian, 11th June 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Crown Prosecution Service has been told it must reveal details about its decision not to prosecute the former Rochdale MP Cyril Smith for alleged offences against children.’
BBC News, 9th June 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The anniversary of the implementation of the Jackson reforms looms. Has all the fear and dread it engendered at the time been justified? Views will vary, whether because of temperament or because of preference, but in our view, for what it’s worth, the answer is “yes”. In the sphere of relief from sanctions at least, and in the kind of costs budgeting that we most often face, many of the concerns warned of in advance have come to pass. The by now well-know case of Andrew Mitchell has illustrated the draconian approach being taken by the courts to relief from sanctions, with the support of what appears to be a hand-picked Court of Appeal. The methodology of county courts in dealing with costs budgeting and CCMCs varies widely, making it difficult to predict or advise on procedural issues in the run up to trials and hearings.’
Full story (PDF)
Falcon Chambers, 25th March 2014
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024