David Torrance: A Tale of Two Accessions: 1952 and 2022 – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted September 29th, 2022 in burials and cremation, Crown, news, Privy Council, royal family, succession by sally

‘No two Accessions are the same. That of King Edward VII in 1901 was characterised by widespread confusion regarding custom and practice, for Queen Victoria’s succession to the Throne had long ago faded from the public consciousness. This time, the “official mind” was better prepared and the major difference between the Accession of King Charles III in 2022 and that of his mother Queen Elizabeth II in February 1952 was its visibility. By comparing the ceremonial surrounding these Accessions (and some others), this article reveals developments in what Walter Bagehot called the “dignified” constitution over the past seven decades.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 28th September 2022

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Freezing injunctions are permitted without an underlying cause of action, rules Privy Council – Littleton Chambers

‘On 4 October 2021, Privy Council handed down a landmark judgment in Convoy Collateral Ltd v Broad Idea International Ltd and Cho Kwai Chee [2021] UKPC 24. Lord Leggatt’s majority judgment provides the first comprehensive legal foundation for freezing and interim injunctions, and removes many of the restrictions imposed on injunctions by previous cases.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 7th October 2021

Source: littletonchambers.com

Chu v Lau [2020] UKPC 24: The Privy Council’s review of the law on just and equitable winding-up – Exchange Chambers

‘In its Judgment handed down on 12 October 2020, [[2020] UKPC 24], the Privy Council, comprised of Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows, provided a welcomed clarification of the law applicable to the just and equitable winding-up of a company; with a particular emphasis on the alternative rules which apply to those companies having the status of a quasi-partnership.’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, 16th October 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk

Kate Ollerenshaw: Retained EU Case Law: A Fourth Option – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted July 28th, 2020 in brexit, EC law, news, precedent, Privy Council, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Ministry of Justice issued a consultation paper on Retained EU Case Law on 2 July 2020, seeking views on the exercise of the powers contained within Section 6(5A) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (“the 2018 Act”) that were inserted by Section 26(1) of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 (“the 2020 Act”). These powers allow the Government, inter alia, to designate additional courts and Tribunals (over and above those already given the power via Section 6(4) of the 2018 Act) as having the ability to depart from retained EU case law.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 27th July 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Yuan Yi Zhu: The Supreme Court: Options for Change – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted June 8th, 2020 in constitutional law, news, parliament, Privy Council, Supreme Court by sally

‘Since the Conservative government’s landslide victory in the 2019 general election, constitutional reform has been on top of its agenda. The most high-profile target of its attention has been the Supreme Court, whose performance came under sustained Conservative criticism during Brexit, most notably in Miller II/Cherry. Few details have so far been published about the Government’s constitutional reform plans, and it remains possible that these never reach fruition, especially in the face of concerted political opposition. Nevertheless, given the government’s considerable parliamentary majority and the high priority given to constitutional reform at the political level, it seems that the Supreme Court’s days might indeed be numbered. Hence, it is worth considering, without offering an opinion on the desirability of reforming the Supreme Court, some possible options for change.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 8th June 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Craig Prescott: Harry and Meghan, Regency, Counsellors of State and a “Slimmed Down” Royal Family – UK Constitutional Law Association

Posted January 21st, 2020 in constitutional law, Crown, news, Privy Council, royal family by sally

‘On 19th January, after discussions within the Royal Family, it was announced that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will step back from royal duties, no longer receive public funds, or ‘formally represent the Queen’. Neither will they use their HRH titles, and more generally they will not be classed as ‘working members of the Royal Family’. Instead, the Sussexes will pursue a new life in Canada, outside the structure of the Royal Family, although they have committed to continue to ‘uphold the values of Her Majesty’.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 21st January 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Lord Briggs at the Sultan Azlan Shah Law Lecture, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – Supreme Court

‘Lord Briggs at the Sultan Azlan Shah Law Lecture, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.’

Full speech

Supreme Court, 5th November 2019

Source: www.supremecourt.uk

Stephen Tierney: Prorogation and the Courts: A Question of Sovereignty – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘The request made by the Privy Council that the Queen prorogue Parliament was a clumsy and inappropriate attempt to shorten the time available for parliamentary scrutiny of the Brexit process. That much seems clear from papers submitted to the Court of Session in Cherry. It is therefore no surprise that the Inner House was receptive to the petitioners’ argument that the advice given to Her Majesty violated the conventional purposes for which prorogation ought to be used and was therefore unconstitutional (Cherry, [1]; see also Lord Sumption). Where the court erred was in concluding that the act of prorogation was itself unlawful. The intimate relationship between the prerogative power to prorogue and the supremacy of Parliament precludes such a conclusion. If, as seems correct, a response to this breach of convention is warranted, it is one that can, constitutionally, only come from Parliament itself.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th September 2019

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Forthcoming JCPC challenge to same-sex marriage prohibition in Bermuda – Law & Religion UK

‘Does a law prohibiting same-sex marriage violate the right to manifest one’s religion or belief? This novel argument will soon be tested in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), where the Government of Bermuda will be appealing against successive decisions by the island’s first instance and appellate courts to strike down legislation which prohibited same-sex marriage.’

Full Story

Law & Religion UK, 30th July 2019

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

Supreme Court turns back on procedural appeals – Litigation Futures

‘The Supreme Court is not keen to entertain appeals on procedural points, its annual report has indicated. It handled 23 permissions to appeal (PTA) applications in relation to procedure in the year to 31 March 2019 – far more than any other category of law – and only granted permission in one of them.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 11th June 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Lady Hale gives the Michael Ryle Lecture at the House of Lords, London – Supreme Court

‘Should the Law Lords have left the House of Lords?’

Full speech

Supreme Court, 14th November 2018

Source: www.supremecourt.uk

Trinidad judge loses bid to halt legal inquiry into his private life – The Guardian

‘Judges in London have dismissed an attempt by the chief justice of Trinidad and Tobago to halt a legal investigation into his private life and alleged business dealings.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 16th August 2018

Source: www.theguardian.com

The history and importance of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council – OUP Blog

Posted June 8th, 2018 in legal history, news, Privy Council by sally

‘The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) signifies different things to different people. It is both a court and an advisory body. It rules on disputes ranging from the personal, such as the inheritance of a hereditary title amid accusations of historic infidelity, to those of great public importance, such as the validity of elections, or significant commercially, such as the ownership or control of Turkey’s largest mobile phone company. It renders advice to a Queen and a Sultan and sits as the final court for 30 overseas jurisdictions, including three republics. It is at the same time an anachronism and a functioning part of many modern systems of justice. For some it is a hanging court, and for others an upholder of human rights.’

Full Story

OUP Blog, 4th June 2018

Source: blog.oup.com

Trinidad waits on British judges’ death row ruling as murders soar – The Guardian

Posted January 15th, 2018 in appeals, death penalty, jurisdiction, news, Privy Council, Trinidad & Tobago by sally

‘Five British judges will this week consider whether a prisoner who may be mentally ill should remain on death row after a Caribbean court convicted him of murdering another inmate.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 15th January 2018

Source: www.theguardian.com

Privy Council: ‘fairness’ central to whether evidence must be put to party at trial – OUT-LAW.com

Posted August 21st, 2017 in cohabitation, cross-examination, evidence, news, Privy Council, shareholders by sally

‘The question of whether a case will fall if a judge rejects a party’s evidence on grounds which that party has not had a chance to explain during the trial should be based on whether the overall trial is fair, senior UK judges have indicated.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 18th August 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

McPhee v The Queen – WLR Daily

McPhee v The Queen [2016] UKPC 29

‘The defendant, a 17-year-old from Nassau, was arrested on a neighbouring island of The Bahamas on suspicion of murder following an armed robbery. He gave his mother’s phone number in Nassau to the police but no contact with her was established and no lawyer was called. After more than 31 hours in custody, during which time the custody log showed he had been taken from his cell several times but without any record made of his being questioned, a church minister in his mid-seventies was asked to come to the police station to witness the defendant make a statement. The minister did not speak to the defendant alone nor offer him any advice, but observed that the defendant was hungry and gave the police money to buy him a meal, after which the defendant made a written statement under caution confessing to the murder. Apart from the confession the only evidence against the defendant was that of another defendant who became a prosecution witness during the trial. At trial, the defendant claimed that his statement had been made following torture and so was not admissible. The judge rejected the claim of torture but did not consider whether the taking of the defendant from his cells had been for the purpose of informal interrogation, or whether the minister could properly be said to have been acting as an “appropriate adult” for the witnessing of a juvenile’s confession, and allowed the confession to go before the jury. The defendant was convicted of murder. The conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeal of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas. The defendant appealed to the Privy Council on the grounds, inter alia, that the confession should have been excluded under section 20 of the Bahamas Evidence Act as being unreliable, by reason of the defendant having been subjected to unrecorded questioning in the absence of a lawyer or appropriate adult and in any event should have been excluded as unfair under section 178 of the Bahamas Evidence Act.’

WLR Daily, 24th October 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Supreme Court upholds right to claim against ‘malicious’ civil cases – OUT-LAW.com

Posted July 29th, 2016 in costs, malicious prosecution, news, precedent, Privy Council, Supreme Court by tracey

‘Private individuals should have the right to bring a claim against another on the grounds that that person sued them in the civil courts with “unnecessary malice”, the UK’s highest court has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 27th July 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Accountant wins legal claim to baronetcy in ‘cuckoo in the nest’ case that could challenge the British class system – Daily Telegraph

Posted June 21st, 2016 in DNA, news, peerages & dignities, Privy Council, time limits by sally

‘A retired accountant from Buckinghamshire is to be made a baronet in a landmark ruling set to shake the foundations of the British system of hereditary titles by opening them up to challenge through DNA tests for the first time.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 20th June 2016

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

UK judges to rule on death penalties for ‘intellectually disabled’ – The Guardian

‘The fate of two Trinidadian prisoners, both of whom have been condemned to death despite having extremely low IQs, will be decided by British judges this week.’

Full story

The Guardian, 15th May 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Material Contribution and Williams – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted March 22nd, 2016 in appeals, medical treatment, negligence, news, Privy Council by sally

‘On 25 January 2016 the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council handed down judgment in the case of Williams v The Bermuda Hospitals Board [2016] UKPC 4, the most recent reported decision regarding material contribution in clinical negligence cases. While not binding in domestic courts the case is highly persuasive authority.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 8th March 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk