‘Judges could determine the outcome of some information rights tribunal cases on their own in future under just-published proposals.’
OUT-LAW.com, 19th August 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘As part of its inquiry into the office of Lord Chancellor, the Constitution Committee asks whether “new” (i.e. post-2003) Lord Chancellors have actually defended judicial independence in line with their customary and now statutory duty to do so. I was asked for examples earlier this summer when appearing before the Committee (with Andrew Le Sueur and Patrick O’Brien). I tried to identify some, but rather garbled my answer. Earlier in the year I also sketched some thoughts about Lord Chancellors in Public Law, but struggled to find clear-cut examples. One reason is that collective cabinet responsibility and the confidentiality of exchanges between Lord Chancellors and judges mean that outsiders will seldom have a full picture of what has occurred behind closed doors. This is unfortunate since my impression is that many lawyers assume—mistakenly, I think—that new Lord Chancellors are neither willing nor able to defend judicial independence. This post is hopefully third time lucky in correcting this assumption. By drawing on press reports, public statements and interviews that Robert Hazell, Kate Malleson, Patrick O’Brien and I conducted between 2011-2013, I want to piece together evidence that suggests that new Lord Chancellors can and do defend judicial independence.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 18th August 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog
‘The Senior President of Tribunals, Sullivan LJ, has launched a consultation paper on altering the composition of the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) in some Information Rights cases. With the support of GRC Chamber President, Judge Warren, it is proposed to remove the requirement that a judge sit with two non-legal members and allow the Chamber President flexibility to direct that certain cases be heard by a judge alone.’
Panopticon, 18th August 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
The role of judges in human rights jurisprudence: a comparison of the Australian and UK experience (PDF)
Lord Neuberger
Supreme Court of Victoria, Melbourne, 8th August 2014
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘President of the Supreme Court admits ‘we should be more ready not to follow’ European Court of Human Rights.’
Daily Telegraph, 11th August 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The family courts system is at breaking point due to delays caused by unrepresented litigants and overstretched judges, according to the body that represents lawyers and professionals in divorce hearings.’
The Guardian, 29th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Britain’s only female Supreme Court judge says there needs to be more gender equality shown across Britain’s legal system and that by appointing more female judges the quality of justice could be greatly improved.’
The Independent, 27th July 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Lord Chief Justice speech: Dinner for Her Majesty’s Judges, 9th July.’
CrimeLine, 14th July 2014
Source: www.crimeline.info
‘The lord chief justice admitted progress on diversity is too slow, while Chris Grayling’s offer of ‘partnership’ should be eyed warily.’
The Guardian, 10th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘As part of the current debate on identifying the best values of British culture and society, the proper workings of the British legal system, would surely have to occupy a prominent place. After all, it is the judiciary that would enhance the sense of wellbeing of its citizen every time that justice is felt to have been established.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 9th July 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Last night saw the House of Lords’ first reaction to the Government’s proposed changes to judicial review as the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill had its second reading. Already dissected at some length in this blog, the proposals have been roundly criticised by both the senior judiciary and the Joint Committee on Human Rights. Consultations responses, including from JUSTICE, expressed concern that the measures appear, by design or coincidence, to undermine the rule of law, inhibit transparency and shield the Government from judicial scrutiny. Two key concerns arise from the Government proposals: restricting access for individuals without substantial means and limiting the courts’ discretion to do justice in the public interest. Yesterday’s debate was robust and eloquent, with former Law Lords joined by bishops and backbenchers alike to condemn the new measures.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 1st July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Byron James, barrister, Fourteen considers some of the less publicised consequences of the reform of the family justice system.’
Family Law Week, 27th June 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
Women in the Judiciary (PDF)
Lady Hale
Fiona Woolf Lecture for the Women Lawyers’ Division of the Law Society, 27th June 2014
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘The appointment of Alison Russell QC reminds us of the legal system’s diversity deficit.’
The Guardian, 22nd May 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Lord Chief Justice has said the country has a “once in a lifetime” opportunity to build a proper court IT system, and failing to make a success of it would be a “disaster”. In a strongly-worded speech highly critical of previous court IT failures, Lord Thomas said that if the Courts Service and the judiciary squandered the £300-£400m promised by the Treasury, it would “not be forgotten” and “we would not be given that money again”.’
Litigation Futures, 21st May 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Response of the Judicial Executive Board, drafted with input from the Association of Her Majesty’s District Judges and the Council of Her Majesty’s Circuit Judges.’
Judiciary of England and Wales, 13th May 2014
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
‘Senior judges have launched their most scathing attack yet on the government’s cuts to civil legal aid. In written evidence responding to the government’s consultation on the first year of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act, the Judicial Executive Board said courts have faced an ‘unprecedented increase’ in numbers of litigants in person (LiPs).’
Law Society’s Gazette, 14th May 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘There has been a large increase in unrepresented claimants, outbreaks of courtroom violence, extra litigation and increased costs, according to senior judges who have criticised the impact of legal aid cuts in the family courts.’
The Guardian, 14th May 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Why were drug courts set up?
The introduction of drug courts in the UK has followed a slightly different trajectory to other jurisdictions, where drug courts filled an important gap in the range of community-based sanctions available to the courts to deal with drug-related crime.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 13th May 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘The tide of interest (among those who care about these things) in the idea of a written, codified constitution for the United Kingdom rises and falls. At the moment the tide is quite high, but certainly not high enough to flow into the estuaries of government policy making.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 14th May 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2025