‘A parole board has refused to release a prisoner trapped under an abolished indefinite jail term described as “torture”. Earlier this month Nicholas Bidar became the first IPP prisoner to have his parole bid held in public after new laws came into force to increase transparency around parole decisions.’
The Independent, 27th March 2024
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal against a judge’s decision to refuse permission for prospective adopters to attend a final adoption hearing either in person or remotely, and to refuse their request for a transcript of the hearing.’
Local Government Lawyer, 25th March 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Victims could attend full Parole Board hearings for criminals hoping to be freed from jail for the first time as early as next month.’
The Independent, 4th May 2022
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Legal action against the attorney general and the Queen’s private lawyers has been initiated over a decision to ban media organisations from a court hearing about the Duke of Edinburgh’s will.’
The Guardian, 18th November 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The rule which currently requires all parole hearings to be held in private will be relaxed as part of the government’s efforts to increase public confidence in the process.’
Ministry of Justice, 8th February 2021
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
‘The head of the Parole Board has backed proposals to hold hearings to decide whether dangerous prisoners should be released in public, a significant shift from the current closed system.’
The Guardian, 20th October 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘UK taxpayers and third parties have no right to attend a tax tribunal hearing to consider the issue of notices by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) requiring the provision of information relevant to tax enquiries, the first-tier tax tribunal has decided.’
OUT-LAW.com, 12th December 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Sir James Munby, who retired as President of the Family Division at the end of July, has attracted a good deal of media attention over the years and has been innovative and enthusiastic about constructively engaging with the media. He was vocal as early as 2013 (in a speech to the Society of Editors) about his wish for the family courts and the Court of Protection to become more open and the important role of the media (the press in particular) to make the workings of the family justice system accessible to the public. Although the government had seemingly thrown in the transparency towel after the failed legislation of 2010, he was determined to address the perceived problem of lack of confidence in “secret” family courts.’
Transparency Project, 6th August 2018
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘Excessive court reporting restrictions, inadequate listing information and difficulties in obtaining documents are preventing scrutiny of economic crimes and bribery cases, according to a report by Corruption Watch UK.’
The Guardian, 16th July 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Openness and Privacy in Family Proceedings. Sir Nicholas Wall Memorial Lecture 2018, Gray’s Inn, London. Lady Hale, President of The Supreme Court.’
Supreme Court, 15th May 2018
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘Nurses and midwives will rarely be subject to public misconduct hearings and could avoid any sanctions for errors if they admit blunders early, under controversial new plans.
The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) wants to replace “cumbersome and adversarial” fitness to practice processes with a system that could mean most cases being heard behind closed doors.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th March 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Secrecy in family courts could be allowing judges to get away with mistakes, the most senior family judge in England and Wales has said. Speaking at an event on Tuesday evening, Sir James Munby, president of the high court’s family division, said that judges were “grotesquely overworked” and “tired” and so more likely to make errors.’
Daily Telegraph, 14th March 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Civil Procedure Rules Committee (CPRC) has backed rule changes to ensure that courts sit in public “irrespective of the parties’ consent” unless certain strict conditions are met.’
Litigation Futures, 13th February 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘What legal principles connect publicity for the 17 year-old Charlie Pearce (born 3 July 2000), a double rapist and attempt murderer (R v Pearce (Press Restrictions) Haddon-Cave J (7 December 2017)) and privacy for a stalking mother who, with her cohabitant (‘Mr JM’) tried to disrupt her 10 year-old daughter T’s foster placement (Re T (A Child) [2017] EWCA Civ 1889 (23 November 2017)).’
Transparency Project, 31st January 2018
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A default position that all court hearings should be conducted in public, and parties and witnesses named, is under consideration by the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) as part of a push to emphasise the importance of open justice, it has emerged.’
Litigation Futures, 7th November 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
The first episode from the Public Law Seminar given by members of 1 Crown Office Row is now available for podcast download here or from iTunes under Law Pod UK. Look for Episode 13: Tackling radicalisation through the civil courts.
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th October 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Martin Downs and Shaheen Rahman QC talk about their experiences of tackling radicalisation in the civil courts, and the use of closed hearings. Recorded at the 2017 Public Law event at King’s College London.’
Law Pod UK, 26th October 2017
Source: audioboom.com
‘RSPB, Friends of the Earth & Client Earth v. Secretary of State for Justice [2017] EWHC 2309 (Admin), 15 September 2017, Dove J. In my March 2017 post here, I explained that amendments to the costs rules for public law environmental claims threatened to undo much of the certainty that those rules had achieved since 2013. Between 2013 and February 2017, if you, an individual, had an environmental judicial review, then you could pretty much guarantee that your liability to the other side’s costs would be capped at £5,000 (£10,000 for companies) if you lost, and your recovery of your own costs would be limited to £35,000 if you won. In this way, the rules sought to avoid the cost of such claims becoming prohibitively expensive and thus in breach of Art.9(4) of the Aarhus Convention.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 16th September 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A disciplinary hearing of six police officers who have been accused of gross misconduct over the death of a 23-year-old man who died after a prolonged period of restraint seven years ago will begin in secret on Monday.’
The Guardian, 11th september 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Foreign Office is asking the high court to sit in secret when former foreign secretary Jack Straw faces a damages claim over his alleged role in the abduction and torture of a Libyan dissident and his pregnant wife.’
The Guardian, 29th June 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024