Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change (July 2025)

On 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change. 

The opinion was requested on 29 March 2023 by the United Nations General Assembly - (Resolution 77/276).

The Resolution requested opinion on two questions

(a) What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for States and for present and future generations? 

(b) What are the legal consequences

Criticism of the Attorney General's handling of the recent unduly lenient case

A post of 2 July considered the Court of Appeal judgment in the "unduly lenient" reference by the Attorney General - Law and Lawyers: The King and X Y Z (References under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988) [2026] EWCA Crim (845)

It was noted that -  

' ... the court made some comments about the administration of justice more generally. It expressed its concern about the inaccurate reporting and misinformed and inappropriate commentary by members of Parliament, the media and elsewhere that preceded this review and whilst legal proceedings were still ongoing. 

The court was particularly critical of the conduct of the Crown Prosecution Service, which published a formal press release following the sentencing hearing which they knew, or should have known, was neither a fair nor accurate representation of the factual basis for sentence. It was this inaccurate press release that appeared to be the root of the misconceptions that followed, in particular the misconception that the offending involved a knife-point rape and that C2 had been forced to give up her phone to avoid tracking. This portrayed the offending as even more serious than it already was. It took almost three weeks for the Crown Prosecution Service to correct the inaccuracies.

Whether

Police detention - how long may it last?

Following arrest, for how long may a suspect be held in Police detention?

The basic limits are set out section 41 to 43 of PACE - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 section 41, section 42, section 43. The maximum time is 96 hours and (usually) runs from the time of arrest.

When an individual is arrested under under terrorism legislation (e.g. Terrorism Act 2000 section 41) it becomes possible for detention to extend up to 14 days. 

Ann Widdecombe:

On 9 July the former Member of Parliament

Ruth Ellis granted conditional pardon

Ruth Ellis was the last woman to be executed in England for murder and has now been granted a conditional pardon in light of evidence that she was a victim of domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour - Ruth Ellis, last woman hanged in UK, granted posthumous conditional pardon | UK criminal justice | The Guardian

Back in 2020, this blog looked at the case - Law and Lawyers: Looking back - Ruth Ellis.

The case is a reminder of the rigour of the common law of murder as it was back in 1955.. 

The grant of a pardon is an exercise of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy - ​The royal prerogative of mercy | Feature | Law Gazette

Lawrence and others -v- Associated Newspapers Limited - comprehensive defeat for the claimants

Seven claimants, including Prince Harry (Duke of Sussex) brought claims against Associated Newspapers Ltd (publishers of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sundays and MailOnline. The case consumed a considerable amount of High Court time including a 46-day trial which took place between 19 January and 31 March 2026.

The claimants alleged misuse of private information and, in one case, breach of confidence arising from unlawful information gathering (UIG).

Misuse of private information is a tort (civil wrong) and is discussed in an article

Parliamentary Standards - investigations

Nigel Farage - leader of the Reform UK party has announced that he will resign as MP for Clacton and will contest the necessary by-election.

Mr Farage was under investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards over financial matters.

How an MP "resigns" is described in this previous post - Law and Lawyers: MP appointed to the "Chiltern Hundreds" - (Stoke, Desborough and Burnham).

What happens to the investigation is covered by the "Procedural Protocol" 

Mohindru KC - High Court judgment

Anurag Mohindru is a King's Counsel (KC) - one of those lawyers (usually, but not always, barristers) granted that pre-eminent status by the Crown. They are appointed via a process set out at King's Counsel Appointments | Excellence in Advocacy

Mohindru was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2004 and was appointed KC ("took silk") in 2020. 

Mohindru appealed to the High Court against an order of a disciplinary tribunal of the Bar Standards Board (BSB) that he be disbarred. The BSB decision was in October 2025 and the conduct in question took place over a short period of time in February 2013.

The High Court judgment is at - Mohindru v The Bar Standards Board [2026] EWHC 1604 (Admin) (30 June 2026).

The details of the conduct