British Indian Ocean Territory

The UK government has agreed with Mauritius - (a nation within the Commonwealth) - to settle historic sovereignty claims over British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Negotiations started in 2022 under the previous (Conservative) government.

Mauritius will assume sovereignty over BIOT with the UK authorised to exercise the sovereign rights of Mauritius regarding Diego Garcia - an island with a military base of importance to UK, USA and others.

The government's announcement notes that the agreement is "political" and will be the subject of a treaty yet to be finalised.

UK-Mauritius deal to protect national security – safeguarding the operation of strategic military base - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)k)

General material:

Some recent new material

The Supreme Court of the UK has been operational for 15 years. See the report from the House of Commons LIbrary 

The UK Supreme Court - House of Commons Library (parliament.uk)

The Criminal Cases Review Commission has published online a Case Library

Case Library - Criminal Cases Review Commission (ccrc.gov.uk)

HM Inspectorate of Prisons has published

A decade of declining quality of education in young offender institutions: the systemic shortcomings that fail children - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

R v Plummer and Holland ~ Criminal Damage at the National Gallery

On 14 October 2022, "Just Stop Oil" protesters, Phoebe Plummer (age 23) and Anna Holland (age 22) committed criminal damage at the National Gallery, London. Tomato soup was thrown at a Van Gogh painting - "SUNFLOWERS" - with the result that the patina on the frame (value £8 - 10,000) was damaged. Because of a glass protective cover, the painting itself was not actually damaged but there was a possibility that it might have been.

In July 2024, the two women were convicted after trial and were sentenced on 27 September by His Honour Judge Hehir. 

Plummer was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment for criminal damage and to an additional 3 months for "Interfering with key national infrastructure" (Public Order Act 2023 s.7). Plummer also received a 3 years Criminal Behaviour Order. It should be noted that she had previous relevant convictions and was on bail at the time of the criminal damage offence.

The interfering with national infrastructure offence related to "slow walking." Further details are not provided in the sentencing remarks.

Holland was sentenced to 20 months imprisonment for the criminal damage. The Judge was invited by counsel to suspend the custodial sentence but he was of the opinion that immediate custody was the only appropriate sentence because the "need for punishment and deterrence entirely outweighs the factors which might point towards suspending the sentence. ..."

The Sentencing Remarks of Judge Hehir are published on the Judiciary website and should be read in full - Rex -v- Plummer and Holland - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Key National Infrastructure

R v Hugh Edwards - Sentencing Remarks

Mr Hugh Edwards (63) has been sentenced by a court to a sentence of imprisonment - 6 months suspended for 2 years. He resigned from the BBC in 2024, during a police investigation into possession of indecent images of children to which he pleaded guilty. At the BBC, Edwards anchored coverage of state and international events including the Coronation of King Charles III.

The suspended prison sentence is subject to requirements and also to notification requirement under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 - (see HERE). Nobody ought to be under the illusion that any of the requirements are an easy option. They are rigorously by the Probation Service and breaches will usually be referred back to court.

The Sentencing Remarks are available - EDWARDS SENTENCE REMARKS FINAL (judiciary.uk)

The requirements applying to this sentence are -

Inquiries - House of Lords committee calls for reform

The House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee has published a report urging a major overhaul of the way public inquiries are set up and conducted. The report calls for significant improvements to the inquiry system, to make them more efficient and effective and to avoid the costly and wasteful process of inquiries “reinventing the wheel”.

The 63 page report is HERE (pdf) and see Lords committee calls for major overhaul of public inquiries - UK Parliament

Among the main recommendations of the House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee are:

Winter Fuel Regulations

Politically, the new (Labour) government made a choice to remove Winter Fuel payments from all the elderly apart from those who qualify for pension credits. Many Labour backbench MPs - often with slim majorities from the recent general election - are unhappy -see

Keir Starmer under pressure as row grows over cut to winter fuel payments | ITV News and 

Is there a £22bn ‘black hole’ in the UK’s public finances? - BBC News.

Of course, millionaires hardly need a winter fuel payment but it is risible to describe, as some have, the majority of pensioners as "millionaires" and thousands fail

House of Lords Reform ~ Hereditary Peers to be completely excluded

On 5 September 2024 the government introduced the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament

See also the Explanatory Notes (pdf)

The Bill seeks to implement a Labour Party manifesto commitment to remove 'the remaining connection between hereditary peerage and membership of the House of Lords; to abolish the jurisdiction of the House of Lords in relation to claims to hereditary peerages ..'

The majority of hereditary peers were excluded from the House of Lords by the House of Lords Act 1999 (legislation.gov.uk) but a compromise was reached and section 2 of that Act provided for 90 such peers to continue as members. In addition the Earl Marshal and Lord Great Chamberlain were excepted. 

The Bill states

In modern times. claims to hereditary peerages are rare and the Bill will abolish the ancient jurisdiction of the House of Lords over such claims. 

If any claims arise

Grenfell Tower Fire 14 June 2017 ~ Final Report and earlier reports

With updates - 5, 6, 7 and 8 September

Grenfell Tower Inquiry

Grenfell Tower Inquiry - YouTube

On 14 June 2017, a fire occurred in Flat 16 at Grenfell Tower, Kensington. The resident promptly contacted emergency services but the fire spread rapidly and engulfed the whole tower block. That was principally due to cladding on the building which contained Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) with a polyethylene core. 72 lives were lost and many made homeless.

The Prime Minister, then Theresa May, set up an inquiry to be held under the Inquiries Act 2005 and appointed a former Lord Justice of Appeal - Sir Martin Moore-Bick - as its chair.

Here are the reports from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. I will add links to any commentaries as they become available.

October 2019 - Phase 1 report | Grenfell Tower Inquiry

September 2024 - Phase 2 report | Grenfell Tower Inquiry

Prosecutions for rail fare avoidance ~ use of Single Justice Procedure ~ Ruling by Chief Magistrate

Senior District Judge Goldspring (Chief Magistrate) has issued an 18 page ruling (dated 15 August 2024) relating to private prosecutions by Northern Trains Ltd and Greater Anglia in connection with avoidance of fares. 

The prosecutions were brought under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 section 5 and were dealt with in Magistrates' Courts using "Single Justice Procedure (SJP)."

This was not permissible .....

Free speech has limits

19 October 2022 - House of Lords Library -

Freedom of expression online: Communications and Digital Committee report - House of Lords Library (parliament.uk)

The rights and limits to freedom of expression

Freedom of expression is the right to express and receive opinions, ideas and information. Expression and exchanges of views increasingly take place online, including through social media platforms, websites and search engines.

The right to freedom of expression is balanced by the responsibilities held by government, media and technology, and citizens. It is not an unrestricted right

Serious Violence Reduction Orders

On 8 August 2024, in the Crown Court at Liverpool, two men were sentenced to imprisonment for offences connected to recent public disorder.

John O' Malley (age 43) and William Nelson-Morgan (age 69) each received 32 months for separate offences of violent disorder (Public Order Act 1986 s.2). 

Nelson-Morgan also received a concurrent sentence of 6 months for possession of an offensive weapon and also a serious violence reduction order (SVRO) which will take effect on his release from custody and will last for 2 years.

The sentencing remarks

DPP says CPS will consider terrorism in disorder cases

Mr Stephen Parkinson has been Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) since 1 November 2023. He is the 17th holder of the office which dates from 1880. The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, was DPP from 2008 to 2013. Crucially, the DPP is the Head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) - see Prosecution of Offences Act 1985.

Against the background of the public disorder of late July and early August, Mr Parkinson is reported to have said that "terrorism offences" would be considered . "Where you have organised groups planning activity for the purposes of advancing [an] ideology... planning really, really serious disruption then yes, we will consider terrorism offences." 

The term "terrorism" is interpreted

A note on compensation for riot damage ~ the Riot Compensation Act 2016

One of the consequences of the disorder experienced over recent days will be claims for compensation but what can be claimed?

Compensation used to be governed by the Riot (Damages) Act 1866 (now repealed). The 1866 Act was tested after the 2011 riots but, in Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co [2016] UKSC 18, the Supreme Court held that the Act did NOT cover consequential losses. For example, a claim under the Act was possible if (say) business premises were directly damaged but loss of profits could not be claimed.

Following the 2011 disorder, the Home Secretary - (then Theresa May) - commissioned a review of the 1866 Act and this reported in November 2013.    On 8th November 2013, the Home Office published -  New proposals to reform Riot Damages Act.

The outcome was

R v Axel Muganwa Rudakubana ~ Southport attack, Serious Disorder

At Liverpool on 1 August 2024, Axel Muganwa Rudakubana (aged 17) was remanded to youth detention accommodation. He is charged with the murders of Bebe King (age six); Elsie Dot Stancombe (age seven), and Alice Dasilva Aguiar (age 9). He is further charged with the attempted murders of ten  others (8 children and 2 adults) and also with possession of a bladed article. The alleged offences occurred at a dance class at the Hart Space in Southport.

The Honorary Recorder of Liverpool (HHJ Andrew Menary KC) ruled that the young person could be named - see Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 section 45 (legislation.gov.uk). Certain other reporting restrictions apply.

A plea hearing was set for 25 October 2024. Any trial will be in 2025 and a potential trial date of 20 January was set - Live updates as Southport stabbing suspect named in court - Liverpool Echo

There was considerable online misinformation about the identity of the suspect who was actually born in Wales and is not an asylum seeker.

The Prime Minister:

Serious violence took place not only in Southport but also in many other locations and it

R v Hallam ~ M25 protests ~ conspiracy to intentionally commit public nuisance

A Law Commission report in 2015 recommended the replacement of the common law offence of public nuisance. Government took no action on this aspect of the report until the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 section 78.

The section is a new statutory offence of "Intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance" and it has a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. The section also provides a defence of "reasonable excuse" - see section 78(3). 

The 2022 Act was a further step

Covid-19 Inquiry - First report

The UK Covid-19 Inquiry, chaired by Baroness Heather Hallett, has issued its first report which deals with Module 1 - Resilience and Preparedness - Module 1 Report - UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk)

Module 1 Report - The resilience and preparedness of the United Kingdom - UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk) - 240 pp. (pdf)

Module 1 Report 'In Brief' summary - The resilience and preparedness of the United Kingdom - UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk) - 4 pp (pdf)

The report has to be read in full and it speaks for itself. I am therefore avoiding either analysis or precis. In any event, this report is the first of several. Each "module" will be followed by its own report.

That said, Baroness Hallett notes

King's Speech ~ State Opening of Parliament ~ 17 July 2024

 The State Opening of Parliament took place on 17 July 2024 amid the usual pomp and circumstance. In the House of Lords, HM King Charles III read 'The King's Speech' setting out the new (Labour) government's legislative plans -

The King's Speech 2024 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

FINAL - 17/07/24 King's Speech 2024 background briefing final GOV.uk.docx (publishing.service.gov.uk)

King’s Speech 2024: Full list of bills - Politics.co.uk

King's Speech 2024: Research and reading lists - House of Lords Library (parliament.uk) - research briefings and reading lists by subject area

The history and ceremonial of the State Opening are described at - State Opening of Parliament -history and ceremonial

References to Liz Truss removed from King’s Speech papers after ex-PM complains (msn.com)

New Secretary of State for Justice / Lord Chancellor, and Law Officers

On Monday 15 July, the newly elected Labour government's appointees as Secretary of State for Justice / Lord Chancellor and Law Officers were sworn in at the Royal Courts of Justice.  

Swearing in of the new Lord Chancellor - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Joshua Rozenberg describes the occasion on his substack - Rule of law - by Joshua Rozenberg - A Lawyer Writes (substack.com). 

The appointees

The appointees are Shabana Mahmood, Richard Hermer KC (as Attorney-General) and Sarah Sackman MP as Solicitor General.

Shabana Mahmood has

Emergency action to be taken on prison population

Updated 18 July 2024

The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor is now Shabana Mahmood MP and found herself in the unenviable position of having to announce action to defuse prison ‘time-bomb’ - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). At 12 July, the prison population stood at 87,505 against a useable operational capacity of 88,956 - (here). 

I use the word "unenviable" because it is bound to lead to accusations from political opponents that the government is putting the population in danger or that it has gone soft on crime. Because of this, I urge readers to look carefully at Mahmood's statement - Lord Chancellor sets out immediate action to defuse ticking prison ‘time-bomb’ - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

It is now 30 years

Pollution of the Manchester Ship Canal

Could the Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCC) bring a private law claim in nuisance and / or trespass against United Utilities Ltd (UU) in respect of unauthorised discharges of untreated foul water by UU into the canal?

In June 2022, the Court of Appeal (Asplin, Arnold, Nugee LJJ) said not - The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 852 (27 June 2022) (bailii.org)

The Supreme Court has reversed that - The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd (Appellant) v United Utilities Water Ltd (Respondent) No 2 - The Supreme Court

See the Judgment (PDF) and the Press summary (PDF)

It was argued for United Utilities that such private law claims were excluded because of the statutory scheme for regulating sewerage established by the Water Industry Act 1991 (legislation.gov.uk)

As the summary notes - The implication of the Court of Appeal's judgment was that "no owner of a canal (or other watercourse or body of water) can bring a claim based on nuisance or trespass against a sewerage undertaker in respect of polluting discharges into the water, unless the sewerage undertaker is guilty of negligence or deliberate wrongdoing. A claim of this kind would be prevented even if the polluting discharges were frequent and had significant and damaging effects on the owner’s commercial or other interests, or on its ability to enjoy its property." 

The Supreme Coutr held that the 1991 Act does not prevent the Canal Company from bringing a claim in nuisance or trespass when the canal is polluted by discharges of foul water from United Utilities’ outfalls, even if there has been no negligence or deliberate misconduct. 

Discharge of sewage into watercourses is a major concern and