Day: 8 January 2014

‘Scepticism about desert has been common among theorists of justice, both those who favour a social contract account and those, like Hayek, who have a different view. Yet, although the concept of desert seldom figures in contemporary contract theories of justice, it is an element in the common sense morality of modern democracies. Can we reconcile common sense thinking and social contract theory in respect of the principle of desert?’

Date: 22nd January 2014, 4.00-7.00pm

Location: UCL Faculty of Laws, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1H 0EG

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘In this talk, Professor Lessig introduces the idea of “institutional corruption,” and uses it to understand pathologies in important public institutions, especially the United States Congress.’

Date: 13th March 2014, 6.00pm

Location: Cruciform Lecture Theatre 1, UCL Cruciform Building, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘The notions of the reasonable and of the reasonable person are often attacked as decidedly not helpful to criminal law and criminal law theory (and often the claim is made with respect not just to criminal law, but law in general). I try to show that the reasonable has a great deal more going for it, for purposes of criminal law, than is often thought. Elsewhere I try to understand what the basis for the misgivings is. In this paper, I take a step back from the issues in law and criminal law theory and examine the everyday notion of reasonableness, and more specifically to reasonableness understood as a quality we attribute to (some but not all) persons. By giving it a close look we’ll be in a better position to reflect on the suitability (or lack thereof) of reasonableness for purposes to which it is put to use in the criminal law, e.g., the heat of passion defense and (the culpability level of) negligence.’

Date: 5th March 2014, 4.00-7.00pm

Location: UCL Faculty of Laws, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1H 0EG

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘Over recent years, CEO pay in public companies has increased at a stratospheric rate, while the real incomes of many private sector workers have either stagnated or fallen. Consequently, the issue of CEO/worker pay equity has become a politically live issue, both in the UK and internationally. Against this background, the seminar will explore the economic case for moderating intra-firm pay disparities. It will highlight the importance of manifestly fair organisational pay policies in sustaining the significant levels of trust and personal commitment that are necessary for the maintenance of productive employment relations. It will also demonstrate the broader function of pay equity in sustaining the corporate sector’s collective and publicly delegated license to determine prevailing private sector income distributions, outside of direct state control. Finally, the seminar will contend with the orthodox counter-argument that reduced income inequality is liable to undermine incentives for productive work practices, by showing that – contrary to popular belief – a decreased emphasis on pecuniary incentives will likely be conducive to greater levels of work effort on the part of both senior executives and ‘rank-and-file’ workers. On this basis, the claim will be advanced that achieving meaningful pay equity is important today not just as a means of achieving social justice, but also as an essential precondition for securing the continuing existence of private enterprise in its traditionally understood form.’

Date: 12th February 2014, 6.00pm

Location: UCL Faculty of Laws, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1H 0EG

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘Since the publication of details of mass surveillance operations by National Security Agency and UK Government Communications Headquarters in the Guardian, New York Times and other newspapers, the scrutiny of the security services has been brought into stark view. This has many wide ranging implications and has given rise to a number of questions about the lengths we are prepared to allow the security services to go to protect us.’

CPD hours 1.25

Date: 5th March 2014, 6.00-8.45pm

Location: The Law Society, 113 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1PL

Charge: Free

More information can be found here.

‘Speakers: Daniel Greenberg, in-house Parliamentary Counsel in the Parliamentary Team at Berwin Leighton Paisner BLP.’

Date: 17th March 2014, 6.00-7.00pm

Location: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DR

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘Professor David Ormerod QC will lecture on Contempt of Court in the Age of the Internet. The Contempt of Court Act 1981 pre-dates the internet and there are concerns that the current law cannot adequately deal with contempt committed through the new media. The lecture will consider the Law Commission Report No 340 and the recommendations to introduce a new statutory offence for jurors who intentionally seek information beyond the evidence presented in court and to create a new statutory exemption to contempt for content published prior to proceedings becoming active.’

Date: 30th January 2014, 6.30pm

Location: Main Lecture Theatre, Centre for Commercial Law Studies (CCLS) Queen Mary University of London, 67-69 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3JB

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘The Law Society’s legal aid conference will inform and prepare you for the continuing changes to the legal aid landscape. This year has seen major restructuring proposed in criminal legal aid, our conference will give you practical advice on how the changes will affect your business and how best to prepare your firm. It will provide you with the essential information you need to make business decisions regarding your criminal legal aid service. ‘

CPD hours 6.0

Date: 20th March 2014, 8.45-4.30pm

Location: The Law Society, 113 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1PL

Charge: See website for charges

More information can be found here.

‘Why, more than 60 years on, is there still no agreed definition of the term “being persecuted” within Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention? In this talk, based on an article in a forthcoming book , I will argue that the time is long overdue for attempting a working definition. Upon analysis, the warnings voiced by the drafters and others against defining persecution only constitute a valid criticism of certain approaches to definition; and, indeed, it will be argued that much of the groundwork for a valid working definition has already been done; and, as a result of Directive 2004/83/EC (the Refugee Qualification Directive (QD)), there is now for the first time a template that can be taken as a starting-point for a universal definition.’

Date: 12th March 2014, 5.30-7.30pm

Location: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DR

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘The doctrine of the margin of appreciation may be regarded as being among the most prominent judge-made legal constructs in European human rights jurisprudence. It is an analytical tool that guides the European Court in its examination of the complaints raised under many, but not all, provisions of the Convention and its Protocols. It makes for a body of human rights law that accepts pluralism over uniformity, as long as the fundamental guarantees are effectively observed. Alongside its normative function, the doctrine pursues what may be termed a systemic objective. It devolves a large measure of responsibility for scrutinising the acts or omissions of national authorities to the national courts, placing them in their natural, primary role in the protection of human rights. It is therefore neither a gift nor a concession, but more an incentive to the domestic judge to conduct the necessary Convention review, realising in this way the principle of subsidiarity. Protocol No. 15, adopted in May 2013 and currently in the process of ratification by the 47 Contracting Parties, will add to the Preamble of the Convention references to both the margin of appreciation and subsidiarity. What are the implications of this reform for the Strasbourg Court? And for national courts? ‘

Date: 20th March 2014, 6.00-7.00pm

Location: UCL Faculty of Laws, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1H 0EG

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘Speakers: Richard Howitt, MEP, Member of the European Parliament, EU Election Observer and leader of recent election observation delegations to Sierra Leone and Pakistan.’

Date: 13th February 2014, 6.30-8.00pm

Location: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DR

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘It is widely accepted that judicial and other constraints on executive powers have resulted in the acceptance of ‘unwanted’ (in contrast to targeted) immigration to liberal states. This has been shown in particular in the field of irregular migration and family migration through national case studies and small N research designs. So far, however, there has been little systematic analysis to trace variations in the constraints on executive power that exist in different destination states and how such differences have an impact on policy outcomes. This is especially so in a third area of ‘unwanted immigration’, namely the case of asylum-seekers and refugees. Drawing on a large-N dataset of OECD countries, this paper explores to what extent variation in non-majoritarian constraints on executive power is able to account for differences in domestic refugee law and protection extensiveness. We develop a cross-country and over time dataset combining mainly Lijphart’s index of judicial review to measure constraints with the IMPALA immigration policy database and UNHCR statistics to code protection regimes. Building on these variables the paper further seeks to identify and assess the effect of different choices in the setup of appeal bodies and status determination procedures in the area of asylum.’

Date: 21st January 2014, 5.30-7.30pm

Location: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DR

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.

‘Special Guest Speaker HH Geoffrey Rivlin QC.’

Date: 27th January 2014, 6.00-8.00pm

Location: Central London location

Charge: £15 per delegate, £10 UKAJLJ members or if you are retired, £5 Students/Trainees

More information can be found here.

‘This paper considers a number of ways of thinking about the concerns of dignity from within the traditions of jurisprudence rather than political theory or moral philosophy. It does so by treating questions of dignity at least in part as matters of jurisdictional arrangement. The reasons for doing so here are twofold. First it allows for the treatment of the jurisprudence of dignity as a distinct historical practice and second it draws out the sense that jurisprudences of dignity themselves recommend training on conduct. In this paper I examine an array of approaches to questions of dignity in relation to the care of the dying and the dead. I focus in particular on the work of Ronald Dworkin.’

Date: 16th January 2014, 12.30-2.00pm

Location: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DR

Charge: See website for details

More information can be found here.

‘UK lawyers used to think that advocacy was a God–given art. In the last 20 years – not more – they have discovered how to train advocacy, applying skills acquired from jurisdictions around the world. Analysis of how advocacy really works benefits from looking back at earlier periods, and then looking forward to today and beyond asking whether advocacy is for establishing the truth and whether the advocate is as if the person represented or simply advocating to win on the client’s behalf at almost any cost. This lecture may include practical demonstrations of examples of advocacy and may involve active engagement with the audience – if willing!’

Date: 5th March 2014, 6.00pm

Location: Barnard’s Inn Hall

Charge: Free

More information can be found here.

‘Where a taxpayer has overpaid tax it is now well established that, in principle, the tax can be recovered. However, the boundaries of this recovery are changing dramatically. Judgments from the European court of Justice in tax cases are demanding that remedies are given to taxpayers, even where the domestic system does not provide for them, or in a manner which is outside the domestic system. This lecture will consider the broader impact of these decisions. In particular what issues arise from the circumstances in which taxpayers with an issue at European law have a more powerful claim than those with a purely domestic issue? Where does this leave the domestic system of remedies in tax cases?’

Date: 13th March 2014, 6.00pm

Location: UCL Faculty of Laws, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1H 0EG

Charge: Free, registration required

More information can be found here.