“The Court of Appeal has taken the unusual step of reversing a denial of contact order, by reviewing the question of the proportionality of the order in relation to the children’s right to family life under Article 8.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th September 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Lord Justice Leveson, the man behind the report into the future of press regulation, has been made the third most senior judge in England and Wales.”
BBC News, 26th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Blaming over-zealous police or irresponsible prosecutors for miscarriages of justice makes for a simple and straightforward narrative, writes Daniel Newman. As with most things, though, the reality is more complicated, and defence lawyers may also have a role to play. This being the case, the neat binary opposition we so rely on in criminal justice is somewhat obscured.”
LegalVoice, 26th September 2013
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
“One of the two men wrongly convicted over the murder of Rachel Manning said their compensation bid had been “signed off” by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).”
BBC News, 26th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A football fan has been told he faces jail for punching a police horse when his team lost to their arch-rivals.”
Daily Telegraph, 26th September 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
11 Gray’s Inn Square Chambers invites applications for tenancy from criminal law and general civil law practitioners at all levels of PQE.
The Criminal team undertakes both defence and prosecution work.
The Civil teams undertake work at all levels. Chambers is looking to expand its Employment and Immigration teams.
Application is by way of Chambers application form. For further information about 11 Gray’s Inn Square Chambers, or to request an application form, please contact the clerk to Chambers, Lloyd Addison, on 0207 405 6879 or by email at clerks@11graysinnsquare.com
The deadline for application is 25th October 2013.
ALL ENQUIRIES SHALL BE DEALT WITH IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENCE
Chambers is committed to equality of opportunity. It is Chambers policy to treat everyone equally and fairly regardless of background, race, colour, ethnicity, national origin, nationality, citizenship, sex, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation, marital or civil partnership status, disability, age, religion, belief or pregnancy and maternity status.
Chambers is committed to making reasonable adjustments in order to remove or reduce substantial disadvantage for disabled people working with Chambers or receiving legal services in Chambers.
Please note we do not have vacancies for squatters.
5 Essex Court is a specialist civil chambers and is acknowledged to be one of the leading sets practising in the field of police law. Members of chambers appear in the majority of significant cases and public inquiries and inquests concerning police forces.
In addition to police law, we have highly successful teams in public law, employment, personal injury and licensing. A high proportion of members of chambers are Treasury Counsel across all three panels.
We look to recruit high calibre pupils who will enhance our expertise and strengthen our reputation as a first-class set.
We offer a well-established pupillage programme and have an excellent retention rate of our pupils as tenants. We look for bright, articulate, highly motivated, ambitious applicants with an interest in our core practice areas and who seek a rewarding career at the Bar. No prior experience of police law is necessary.
Chambers offers up to two 12-month funded pupillages with a view to a tenancy.
5 Essex Court is a member of the Pupillage Portal / Pupillage Gateway.
“Magistrates last week upheld a London borough’s bid to tackle spitting in the street through powers normally used to enforce against litter.”
Local Government Lawyer, 25th September 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
“Is our legal right to challenge the power of government under threat? Clive Anderson and guests discuss concerns that Government proposals to limit the use of judicial review could result in unlawful decisions by government and other public bodies going unchecked.”
BBC Unreliable Evidence, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A man who admitted driving a gang to a petrol station where a cash machine was blown up has been jailed.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“It is an anti-doping violation for an athlete to refuse or fail ‘without compelling justification’ to submit to a sample collection. The violation ordinarily gives rise to a two year ban (Article 2 of the WADA Code).”
Sports Law Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 26th September 2013
Source: www.sportslawbulletin.org
“According to reports this week, the Prison Service is making preparations to prohibit smoking in prisons. They are doing more than “considering” it, it seems, as they have identified probable pilot sites and seem to have a roll-out plan in readiness if the pilot should be successful. But it is a little less than a final decision; so “making preparations” will have to do.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th September 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“This week has brought further news on the Libor interest rate fixing saga, with UK broker ICAP receiving an $87m fine.”
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 26th September 2013
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
“A ‘very serious failing’ led to the death of a suicide-risk prisoner who killed himself on his first day in prison, an inquest heard.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“There is a very good article in the most recent edition of the Law Quarterly Review. It is by Rodney Brazier, and is concerned with the nature and mechanics of royal assent. It is a fascinating read, and, as with all Brazier’s work, characterised by a dry wit. There is, however, one claim, made almost in passing, that I think is mistaken. Brazier addresses the question of when, if ever, a monarch could properly refuse to give assent to legislation. He rightly concludes that it is almost impossible to imagine situations in which assent should be refused, but leaves open the possibility that it might be appropriate for the Monarch to refuse assent if advised to do so by her Ministers. In suggesting that royal assent could be refused on ministerial advice Brazier is not alone. The assertion has also been made by Geoffrey Marshall in Constitutional Conventions, and Adam Tomkins in Public Law – and may, for all I know, have been made by others, too. On the other hand, Anne Twomey (in an article in Public Law in 2006) argued that the issue remains open, and gives a number of examples, mostly from Australia, which suggest the Monarch need not accept the advice of her Ministers to refuse assent. So which position is correct? If the Prime Minister (or the Cabinet, collectively) advised the Queen to refuse to give her assent to legislation, what, constitutionally, should she do?”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 25th September 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“The UK Treasury has launched a legal challenge against European Union (EU) plans to cap bankers’ bonuses.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Britain’s Supreme Court should make final rulings on contentious human rights cases, not the European Court of Human Rights, the Justice Secretary has said.”
Daily Telegraph, 25th September 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Two men dressed as Oompa Loompas who attacked a man on a night out have been sentenced.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Lord Sugar’s bid to recover costs from the winner of TV’s The Apprentice after she lost a constructive dismissal claim against him has failed.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024