‘US law firms will have less incentive to employ UK-qualified lawyers as a way to access European markets and the UK solicitor title could become less desirable as a result of Brexit, the Law Society has warned.’
Legal Futures, 16th January 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘David Bedingfield, barrister of 4 Paper Buildings, considers the arguments in a debate of vital importance to family lawyers.’
Family Law Week, 4th January 2017
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Jon Henley is joined by Jolyon Maugham, Philip Syrpis, Jennifer Rankin and Owen Bowcott to discuss the legal challenges to the government’s use of Article 50, and how the EU will interpret the Lisbon Treaty’s exit mechanism in the coming negotiations.’
The Guardian, 20th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed a high profile challenge by four Portuguese state-owned transport companies to the jurisdiction of the English courts in a dispute over a commonly-used standard form derivatives agreement.’
OUT-LAW.com, 14th December 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v Charity Commission was striking from many points of view. Mr Kennedy was a journalist frustrated by the way the Commission handled his allegations concerning George Galloway MP’s controversial Iraq charity, the Miriam Appeal. He applied for disclosure of documents under the Freedom of Information Act, arguing that a prohibition from disclosure under s 32 should be interpreted compatibly with Article 10, as required by s 3 of the HRA. However, the Supreme Court declined to follow the recent ECtHR case law, holding that Article 10 did not encompass a right of access to information, deprecating the parties’ failure to rely upon the common law right to information and disagreeing over the question of whether proportionality should replace Wednesbury unreasonableness: see my previous post on this here.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 13th December 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The current attitude towards victim support reveals much about societal attitudes towards domestic abuse, which does not see dignity as something abuse survivors are entitled to as a fundamental and inalienable human right, but rather as an additional extra for which they must work, opt in to, convince society that they have earned.’
The Independent, 16th December 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘One of the most striking aspects of the arguments of counsel in Miller, as Rachel Jones has pointed out, was how much the disagreement between the parties focussed on the meaning of silence. The government’s case boiled down to an assertion that silence on the issue of whether legislation was needed to invoke Article 50 of the Treaty of European Union in a succession of statutes – the European Communities Act 1972, the Referendum Act 1975, the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008, the European Union Act 2011 and the European Union Referendum Act 2015 – should be interpreted as parliament intending that the government was permitted to use the prerogative to invoke Article 50. For example, counsel for the government repeatedly argued that because some of these statutes, especially the 2008 and 2011 Acts, put restrictions on the exercise of the government’s foreign affairs prerogative power, it must follow that those statutes mean that other aspects of the prerogative must have been intended to have been left unfettered. Expressio unius exclusio alterius. On the other side, the applicants argued that parliament’s silence, especially in the 1972 Act, meant that it intended a specific pre-existing rule to apply, namely the rule that ministers could not use the prerogative, and in particular the foreign affairs prerogative, to change the law. They also argued that parliament’s subsequent silence in the other statutes confirmed that original choice.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 13th December 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Could the Sewel Convention scupper Brexit, asks Michael Zander QC.’
New Law Journal, 8th December 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Theresa May faces a new challenge to her bid to start the process to take Britain out of the European Union after it emerged that opponents plan to launch a fresh legal action on Monday.’
Daily Telegraph, 11th December 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘From the royal prerogative and Henry VIII clause to what makes lawyers laugh – and how to interpret a judge’s choice of tie.’
The Guardian, 8th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘This is a brief (1200 words brief) summary of the ‘statutory basis’ argument. This post responds directly to the fact that, in the Supreme Court case being heard today, Lord Mance directly asked Mr Eadie QC whether Article 50 had been incorporated. Mr Eadie said that it was not because it did not have ‘direct effect’. It is suggested that the failure to claim Article 50 is in fact part of domestic law was mistaken. A strong argument can be made that triggering Article 50 could be done under an existing statutory power.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 5th December 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Theresa May’s plan to implement Brexit without the authorisation of a vote in parliament would be “a contemporary necessity” rather than a misuse of outdated ancient royal powers, the attorney general said at the start of the most keenly awaited constitutional law case in recent memory.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Government’s challenge against the High Court ruling that parliamentary approval is required to start the process of leaving the European Union will be hard tomorrow.’
The Independent, 4th December 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The share of European litigants opting to settle their disputes in the English courts has fallen for the fourth successive year, down to 20% from a peak of 35% in 2012/13, according to annual research.’
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd December 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Brexiteers and their media allies have declared war on our judiciary. On behalf of the people, the supreme court must push back.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘All 11 of the UK’s most senior judges will take their seats on the supreme court bench on Monday to decide whether parliament or the government has the authority to trigger Brexit.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Michael Zander QC reviews the written cases of the government & the lead claimants in next week’s Supreme Court hearing.’
New Law Journal, 1st December 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Prerogative is the enemy of the people. This has been settled as matter of law for a very long time. The constitutional settlement of 1688 made a decision for responsible and representative government. We have had no constitutional moment of similar magnitude since. All constitutional changes – some very significant – have taken place within that foundational structure. The Bill of Rights treats prerogative as the antithesis of good government. Its primary target is a range of extra-legal powers hitherto asserted by the King, pride of place being given to the power to dispense with laws and the power to suspend Acts of Parliament.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 2nd December 2016
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The article 50 supreme court hearings won’t solve our systemic crisis. We need a new way to connect people and state.’
The Guardian, 2nd December 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024