Law in Practice

Feeds
gettyimages-522973398_fmt

Balance of power

‘Shifting powers’ and an ‘unfair, hostile and resource-driven’ climate are sidelining the needs of vulnerable defendants and witnesses, the ICCA’s ambitious inaugural conference heard. David Wurtzel reports  

The first annual conference of the Inns of Court College of Advocacy (ICCA) on 29 October 2016, organised by Bernard Richmond QC, chose as its theme the vulnerable client.  

20 December 2016 / David Wurtzel
istock-610123822_fmt

Seed-funding justice

A call for views: Justin Fenwick QC explains how a properly thought-out contingency legal aid fund on a not-for-profit basis could fit into the new landscape of litigation funding  

The idea of a contingency legal aid fund (known for short as ‘CLAF’) has been around for a long time, with the first preliminary feasibility study having been issued by the Bar Council as long ago as January 1998.  

20 December 2016 / Justin Fenwick KC
120139_21

Criminal finances

Jonathan Fisher QC briefs readers on the most radical overhaul of law on criminal property since the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002  

The Criminal Finances Bill is currently making its way through Parliament with strong all-party support.  

20 December 2016 / Jonathan Fisher KC
istock-459015299_fmt

Live links in the Crown court

Richard Hearnden sets out the case for greater use of cheaper, off-the-shelf systems in the Crown court without recourse to changes in the law  

The publication of Transforming Our Justice System , by the Ministry of Justice, the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals in September 2016, marks another milestone on the road to the digitisation of court proceedings.  

20 December 2016 / Richard Hearnden
gettyimages-578324766_fmt

Miller and the duties of the LC

Sir Jeffrey Jowell QC asks whether the Lord Chancellor should have acted to stem the misleading and inflammatory media allegations which continue in the wake of the Miller case  

Visitors from abroad have always been mystified by our uncodified constitution.  

20 December 2016 / Sir Jeffrey Jowell KCMG KC
gettyimages-463908591_fmt

Brexit’s Gordian Knot

Deciding how we Brexit is not within the government's gift, argues Dominic Grieve QC MP. No Parliament worth its name can abandon input into the biggest and most complex constitutional change in modern times. Discussion is vital 

16 December 2016 / Dominic Grieve
127575

Brave new world

How will losing passporting rights affect the UK’s financial services sector? Saima Hanif argues that the equivalence regime is not a satisfactory alternative  

As the President of the European Council Donald Tusk remarked, in response to comments from Boris Johnson that the UK could have its cake and eat it by keeping single market access without accepting free movement of persons: ‘There will be no cakes on the table, for anyone. There will be only salt and vinegar…’ 

21 November 2016 / Saima Hanif
GettyImages-621056842_fmt

Brexit in court

Professor Michael Zander QC assesses the High Court decision and predicts the government is likely to lose its appeal to the Supreme Court  

Asked on the day for a first assessment of the decision I wrote: ‘The Divisional Court’s unanimous decision is very clear and very strong.  

21 November 2016 / Michael Zander KC
rexfeatures_6316656z_fmt

Sexual history evidence: fair game?

Ali Naseem Bajwa QC and Eva Niculiu examine the issues raised by use of the complainant’s sexual history in the Ched Evans rape retrial  

On the night of 29-30 May 2011, a professional footballer, Clayton McDonald, on a night out in Rhyl, North Wales, met a 19-year-old waitress who was heavily intoxicated. McDonald took her back to his hotel room.  

21 November 2016 / Eva Niculiu / Ali Naseem Bajwa
istock_22569964_large_fmt

The ‘radical’ challenge

When does the state have the right to interfere in family life on the basis of radical views held by family members? Damian Woodward-Carlton reports on the inherent difficulties arising in the family courts  

Family lawyers and courts are currently grappling with the most fundamental of questions: when does the state have the right to interfere in family life on the basis of the views – however unpalatable – of some family members, or their interest in exploring, viewing and reading material which others might find abhorrent?  

21 November 2016 / Damian Woodward-Carlton KC
Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results
virtual magazine View virtual issue

Chair’s Column

Feature image

Time for change and investment

The Chair of the Bar sets out how the new government can restore the justice system

Job of the Week

Sponsored

Most Viewed

Partner Logo

Latest Cases