tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-61107948541464847212024-03-28T09:08:53.692+00:00Law and LawyersResponsible and sometimes critical comment on topical legal matters of general interest. This blog does not offer legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for professional legal advice.
Pro Aequitate DicereObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comBlogger2405125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-56981018516267372592024-03-19T10:02:00.001+00:002024-03-19T10:23:13.335+00:00Criminal Damage Act 1971 - damage caused by protesters and the defence of lawful excuse<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGxG08ezl8rn2U_jLom7o39Dz_Q2ungjSsQkah4MafrwlMqp661P51lhqE0RJ6Q0UyIHOPsOUXDDc6nwKrOAOo6OGFrevIGcMpPxBc2pPP4jcLWXyj9EFUT7fO85hUokwMHXZhvG_GL-4w5Psq_AW7g5ELNfeFDHY53sfI_6zN0Ua3_8d4Mf1cf1TDnv3p/s474/Hampton%20Court%20Maze.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="315" data-original-width="474" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGxG08ezl8rn2U_jLom7o39Dz_Q2ungjSsQkah4MafrwlMqp661P51lhqE0RJ6Q0UyIHOPsOUXDDc6nwKrOAOo6OGFrevIGcMpPxBc2pPP4jcLWXyj9EFUT7fO85hUokwMHXZhvG_GL-4w5Psq_AW7g5ELNfeFDHY53sfI_6zN0Ua3_8d4Mf1cf1TDnv3p/w200-h133/Hampton%20Court%20Maze.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>The <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/contents">Criminal Damage Act 1971</a> was enacted to 'revise the law of England and Wales as to offences of damage to property ...' First, a bit of history ...<p></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">History:</span></i></b></p><p>The Act was the product of the Law Commission's work (Report 29 published 23 July 1970) which, at the time, was part of a process of revising the criminal law with a view ultimately to codification. The latter has not been achieved. A link to the Commission's report is below.</p><p>The House of Lords Second Reading on the Criminal Damage Bill is worth reading for the succinct speech of Lord Hailsham (then Lord Chancellor), setting out the purpose of the Bill - <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/1971-03-15/debates/a285922f-1751-488f-bf82-200ec2a09edf/CriminalDamageBillHl">Criminal Damage Bill Hl - Hansard - UK Parliament</a>. </p><p>The Law Commission reported <span></span></p><a name='more'></a>that the criminal law relating to damage to property was 'extremely complicated and unsatisfactory.' That was well-known to practitioners at the time and very few, if any, wept for the repeal of most of the Malicious Damage Act 1861. <p></p><p>The Criminal Damage Act 1971 thus removed from the law all but a few sections of the 1861 Act and also repealed many other enactments relating to damage (e.g. Arson in Her Majesty's Dockyards etc). For years afterwards some used to insist that the dockyards offence was still one of the remaining capital offences)!</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">The 1971 Act:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/1">Section 1 </a>enacted two offences of criminal damage - see section 1(1) and 1(2). In both cases the phrase<span style="font-family: inherit;"> '<span style="background-color: white; color: #1e1e1e; text-align: justify;"><b>without lawful excuse</b>' appears. <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/2">Section 2</a> deal with threats to destroy or damage property and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/3">section 3</a> deals with possession of <span style="font-family: inherit;">'</span></span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;">anything with intent to destroy or damage property.'</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1e1e1e; text-align: justify;">The important question of what is a "lawful excuse" is addressed to some extent by <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/5">section 5</a>. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1e1e1e; text-align: justify;">The Law Commission report noted:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1e1e1e; text-align: justify;">'Clause 5(1) </span></span>whilst preserving all existing defences (see subsection (5)),
provides for <b>certain special lawful excuses, as to the impact and extent
of which, on the law as it stands, there is some doubt.'</b></p><p>The special lawful excuses were (a) an honest belief that the owner of the property concerned has
consented to its destruction or damage, or would have consented
had he known the circumstances; and (b) an honest belief that it was reasonable to destroy or damage
property to protect property belonging to oneself or another, or
to protect a right or interest (as defined in subsection (4)) which
was or was believed to ‘be vested in oneself or another.'</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Section 5(2)(a)</span></i></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhJ2CHrFFNR2K90GpjBBcA9iK9w71ESMnvJP9QZHgRel1lCt1vk2s02VH6Q2Vw7OIsT8jRbcqsBLOJkkY0uc1H_gIYiv3a9Ox6fnP63pgYpic1NB2wCMFRQRgSLfhTna9r9F1wIBMRnzHYqQ-SrzXWPAkqYX5wBRwUUsAMfW2W6my0aJAzHYcLVCHmhrAI/s916/CDA%201971%205(2)(a).JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="187" data-original-width="916" height="130" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhJ2CHrFFNR2K90GpjBBcA9iK9w71ESMnvJP9QZHgRel1lCt1vk2s02VH6Q2Vw7OIsT8jRbcqsBLOJkkY0uc1H_gIYiv3a9Ox6fnP63pgYpic1NB2wCMFRQRgSLfhTna9r9F1wIBMRnzHYqQ-SrzXWPAkqYX5wBRwUUsAMfW2W6my0aJAzHYcLVCHmhrAI/w640-h130/CDA%201971%205(2)(a).JPG" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Attorney-General Reference No 1/2023</span></i></b></p><p>Interestingly, there was only very limited authority on the interpretation of section 5(2)(a) but it became an increasingly prominent provision in the context of the activities of climate change protesters.</p><p>Now the section must be read in the light of <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2024/243.html" style="text-align: justify;">Attorney General's Reference On A Point of Law No. 1 of 2023 [2024] EWCA Crim 243 (18 March 2024) (bailii.org)</a>.</p><p>A full reading is essential but, in particular, note paragraphs 40 to 51 where the court's view of the defence is set out. The paragraphs are clearly written and there is no need for me to set them out here.</p><p>The conclusion is at paragraph 65 - </p><ol><p></p><blockquote><blockquote>i) "Circumstances" in the phrase "the destruction or damage and its circumstances" do not include the merits, urgency or importance of the matter about which the defendant is protesting, nor the perceived need to draw attention to a cause or situation.</blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>ii) "Damage and its circumstances" means the damage and the circumstances of the damage which, in protest cases, means the fact that the damage was caused as part of a protest (against a particular cause).</blockquote></blockquote></ol><p>Paragraphs 54 to 64 discuss when a trial judge is entitled to remove a defence from the jury. Essentially, the court reaffirmed the law as stated in <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2022/1259.html">Attorney General's Reference (No.1 of 2022)</a> </i>- [2022] EWCA Crim 1259.</p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>Note:</i></b> The image at the top is the maze at Hampton Court. Lord Hailsham told the House of Lords Second Reading that his research revealed about thirty <span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">different statutory offences, under diverse Acts, relating to a wide variety of valuable objects; including tomb stones, hackney carriages, gas-lit street lamps and Westminster Bridge. He described the results of this as a </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">"Hampton Court maze" which was 'often tiresome and occasionally bizarre.'</span></span></p><p><b style="font-family: Roboto; font-size: 0.8em;"><i><span style="color: red;">The Law Commission report:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/30/2016/07/LC.-029-CRIMINAL-LAW-REPORT-ON-OFFENCES-OF-DAMAGE-TO-PROPERTY.pdf">LC.-029-CRIMINAL-LAW-REPORT-ON-OFFENCES-OF-DAMAGE-TO-PROPERTY.pdf (cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com)</a></p><p><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-17569923186691777282024-03-13T17:27:00.002+00:002024-03-14T07:53:31.935+00:00Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Bill<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN2i5XIy8AtNUdmsE-Mrnw0aZ4t5KFDljoOaIaYV0nky1PPWNiJKPlwbkB0iPCCJUPEHey7s8nAzzTGeEpadn-aJQUggnZMDa-XrWads3ojkR7UyU1OS-ixZeZqSXfmszTY5kOOXgf9f55rmEStauNjs3QMuf0SAp3F1hQO9vYrFc7-5nM-vEMpfldp9AT/s200/Post%20Office%20logo.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="128" data-original-width="200" height="128" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN2i5XIy8AtNUdmsE-Mrnw0aZ4t5KFDljoOaIaYV0nky1PPWNiJKPlwbkB0iPCCJUPEHey7s8nAzzTGeEpadn-aJQUggnZMDa-XrWads3ojkR7UyU1OS-ixZeZqSXfmszTY5kOOXgf9f55rmEStauNjs3QMuf0SAp3F1hQO9vYrFc7-5nM-vEMpfldp9AT/w200-h128/Post%20Office%20logo.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><br />Today (13 March), the government introduced the Bill <span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">to - <i>'Provide for the quashing of convictions in England and Wales for certain offences alleged to have been committed while the Horizon system was in use by the Post Office; to make <b>provision about the deletion of cautions</b> given in England and Wales for such offences; and for connected purposes.'</i></span></span><p></p><p><a href="https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3694">Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Bill - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament</a></p><p>Explanatory Notes (pdf) - <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-04/0181/en/230181en.pdf">Post Office (Horizon System) Offences (parliament.uk)</a></p><p>Previous post 23 February - <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2024/02/post-office-horizon-proposed-legislation.html">Law and Lawyers: Post Office ~ Horizon ~ proposed legislation (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a></p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/13/ministers-introduce-bill-to-quash-convictions-of-horizon-scandal-victims">Ministers introduce bill to quash convictions of Horizon scandal victims | Post Office Horizon scandal | The Guardian</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-66279830918187706722024-02-23T11:11:00.002+00:002024-02-23T12:01:32.041+00:00Shamima Begum ~ deprivation of citizenship<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirtBgmSQt6F88M81oBsDJ611Vqz5koEWPpBZFTbj3wUkaSj9vVy43vfpkCnAs-s8yVaqUhWfy-bzGrGgM0DoL79u_VzmcjKxnDVGdx05YRfsei1XQe4GO7Zxeu30lyHPnfPMChTxGYhqtMgDGN0kSd5RPBnodJe7x_CWcczJonQik_cCEqggSlIyzGDeC4/s474/Shamima%20Begum.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="355" data-original-width="474" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirtBgmSQt6F88M81oBsDJ611Vqz5koEWPpBZFTbj3wUkaSj9vVy43vfpkCnAs-s8yVaqUhWfy-bzGrGgM0DoL79u_VzmcjKxnDVGdx05YRfsei1XQe4GO7Zxeu30lyHPnfPMChTxGYhqtMgDGN0kSd5RPBnodJe7x_CWcczJonQik_cCEqggSlIyzGDeC4/w200-h150/Shamima%20Begum.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>Was the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) correct to conclude that the decision (of the Home Secretary) to deprive Shamima Begum of British citizenship was lawful. Yes said the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). <p></p><p>The judgment and a summary are available at - <a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/shamima-begum-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department/">Shamima Begum -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary</a>. </p><p>The court's constitution was <span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;">The Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales, </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;">Lord Justice Bean </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;">and </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;">Lady Justice Whipple. The decision was unanimous. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;">The court commented - <i>"It could be argued that the decision in Ms Begum’s case was harsh; it could also be argued
that Ms Begum is the author of her own misfortune. But it is not for the court to agree or
disagree with either point of view. The only task of the Court was to assess whether the deprivation decision was unlawful. Since it was not, Ms Begum’s appeal is dismissed."</i></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2024/152.html">Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 152 (23 February 2024) (bailii.org)</a></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #252526; text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edeqetD1-Dc">Shamima Begum citizenship ruling at Court of Appeal - YouTube</a></span></span></p><p><b><i>23 February 2024</i></b></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-6919618976322097462024-02-23T10:39:00.003+00:002024-03-14T07:41:31.543+00:00Post Office ~ Horizon ~ proposed legislation<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPIXMoMN8bv5TPfbkSsVygv1ihackuMVVJVMeWcCIUhOi5zTw8uWxLbK0bj8lAH0TaGQ5ARjANQfKYV5WVifR2_-f3keOHhzPuuxNdHcVObEaf_1k__EbN9-Yqm9dq9mjNChC0IcalMLYKWk3YSoDmyfc5_kmv1aNJz6spMx1Uo7RbJg9z_ltKFfOn5x9s/s574/Post%20Office%20logo.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="368" data-original-width="574" height="128" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPIXMoMN8bv5TPfbkSsVygv1ihackuMVVJVMeWcCIUhOi5zTw8uWxLbK0bj8lAH0TaGQ5ARjANQfKYV5WVifR2_-f3keOHhzPuuxNdHcVObEaf_1k__EbN9-Yqm9dq9mjNChC0IcalMLYKWk3YSoDmyfc5_kmv1aNJz6spMx1Uo7RbJg9z_ltKFfOn5x9s/w200-h128/Post%20Office%20logo.jpg" width="200" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: inherit;">A Bill will be introduced by the government to "<span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">make sure that those convicted as a result of the Horizon scandal, which began in the 1990s, are swiftly exonerated and compensated" - see the </span><a href="https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2024-02-22/hcws283">Written statement 22 February 2024</a></span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">The government claims that the planned legislation <i>"</i><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"><i>does not set a precedent for the future relationship between the executive, Parliament and the judiciary"</i> but <i>"</i></span><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"><i>the scale and circumstances of this prosecutorial misconduct demands an exceptional response."</i></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">It is obvious enough that the government has, in this election year, been spurred into action<span></span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"> by ITV screening (over 1-4 January 2024) the programme "<a href="https://news.sky.com/story/mr-bates-vs-the-post-office-the-true-story-behind-drama-on-horizon-it-scandal-13042137">Mr Bates and the Post Office</a>" which truly brought the scandal to public knowledge in a way that the on-going </span><a href="https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/">Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry</a> <span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">had not.</span></span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">The intended legislation will <i>"</i></span><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"><i>quash all convictions which are identified as being in scope. That scope will be defined by a set of clear and objective criteria which will be set out in the legislation and will not require any element of discretion or subjective analysis in order to be applied. The legislation will prescribe criteria, each of which will need to have been met, to determine the convictions to be quashed."</i></span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: inherit;">The plan is to address those prosecutions brought by the Post Office itself and also those brought by the Crown Prosecution Service. Prosecutions brought by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) will not be covered since Horizon data was not relied on in those cases.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;">The legislation will apply to those convictions that arose during the<i> "</i></span><span face="National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d;"><i>period that the Horizon system (and its pilots) was in operation (with exact dates confirmed in due course)."</i></span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: inherit;">Only<i> "relevant offences"</i> will be in scope - mainly theft and false accounting.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Only sub-postmasters or their employees / officers or family members, or direct employees of the Post Office will be within the defined class of convictions to be quashed.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The convicted person will need to have been working (including working in a voluntary capacity) in a Post Office that was using the Horizon system software (including any relevant pilot schemes) at the time the behaviour constituting the offence occurred.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It is intended that the convictions in scope of this legislation will be <b>quashed at the point of commencement of the legislation</b>. </span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It appears that the legislation will apply to England and Wales only but the government states that is "working closely with other jurisdictions on this important matter and wishes to see equitable outcomes for postmasters delivered across the whole of the UK."</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>"While it is for the Scottish Government and Northern Ireland Executive to decide on, and progress, their own approaches to the quashing of convictions, we will work with them to ensure those are compatible with the UK compensation scheme - so that compensation can be paid to victims across the whole of the UK."</i></span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The legislation is likely to <i>"exonerate a number of people who were, in fact, guilty of a crime. The Government accepts that this is a price worth paying in order to ensure that many innocent people are exonerated. A condition of access to financial redress will be that the individual "signs a statement to the effect that they did not commit the crime for which they were originally convicted."</i> False statements could amount to fraud. </span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The financial redress will be substantial. but this will operate outside the legislation.<i> "Claimants will receive an interim payment of £163,000 within 28 days of applying. They can then choose between an up-front settlement offer topping up their redress to £600,000, or having their financial redress considered on an individual basis. Their reasonable legal costs will be met."</i></span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Problems?</span></i></b></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A number of those convicted are now dead. Will the scheme apply in some way to them and, if so, how?</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The Lady Chief Justice is on record as stating that the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) could handle the workload - <a href="https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/courts-could-cope-with-large-number-of-post-office-appeals-says-lcj" style="background-color: transparent;">Courts “could cope” with large number of Post Office appeals, says LCJ - Legal Futures</a>. Leaving the cases to the court would enable a <b>named</b> individual to be exonerated in a public forum as opposed to exoneration by a legislative scheme that does not name them. See <a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/flaw-in-the-ointment" style="background-color: transparent;">Flaw in the ointment - by Joshua Rozenberg (substack.com)</a>. </span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The whole idea of this legislation has received considerable criticism because Parliament and the Judiciary have their respective constitutional roles. Such criticisms appear to be based on "separation of the powers" arguments but, in reality, there </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">has never been any <b>formal</b> "separation of powers" in the English legal system although, in practice, the respective roles of executive, legislature and judiciary are recognised and usually respected. It is entirely open to Parliament to legislate to address this form of grievance. See </span><a href="https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2024/01/16/robert-craig-the-constitutional-implications-of-legislating-to-exonerate-the-post-office-sub-postmasters/" style="background-color: transparent; font-family: inherit;">Robert Craig: The constitutional implications of legislating to exonerate the Post Office sub-postmasters – UK Constitutional Law Association</a><span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Precisely what the statement means by "reasonable legal costs" is not clear. It would only add insult to injury if convicted individuals were left to have to pay any legal costs that were somehow deemed unreasonable.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The actual Bill has yet to be published.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>23 February 2024.</i></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #4d4d4d; font-family: National, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px; margin-top: 0px;"><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-43198321359536858322024-01-29T07:53:00.003+00:002024-02-29T17:16:02.036+00:00Ireland v UK ~ challenge by Ireland to UK primary legislation<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIpDwz4_p1HR7_RxvGbAqCr72X5jy0CYdo5Rq9bdSiNIulpWB7ShWkdBx0WdnvmDS-QFp8-EMZ46PLW_Am_4a5rNyY2_CIGF6VyIvEN5ZtnpEuqQbLs6ZBXODGdD_x363z3y544dd7qafJr93_CupUHW-LQInRnNJZKBVkjyg4rLQ64vNPisCMpG-6LuCA/s284/European%20Court%20of%20Human%20Rights.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><b><i><img border="0" data-original-height="188" data-original-width="284" height="132" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIpDwz4_p1HR7_RxvGbAqCr72X5jy0CYdo5Rq9bdSiNIulpWB7ShWkdBx0WdnvmDS-QFp8-EMZ46PLW_Am_4a5rNyY2_CIGF6VyIvEN5ZtnpEuqQbLs6ZBXODGdD_x363z3y544dd7qafJr93_CupUHW-LQInRnNJZKBVkjyg4rLQ64vNPisCMpG-6LuCA/w200-h132/European%20Court%20of%20Human%20Rights.jpg" width="200" /></i></b></a></span></div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><span style="color: red;"><i>Updated 29 February 2024</i></span></b> - DILLON case (High Court Northern Ireland)</span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>Ireland <span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; color: #3e5b67;">has instituted an </span><a href="https://www.echr.coe.int/web/echr/inter-state-applications" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; text-decoration-line: none;">inter-State action</a><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; color: #3e5b67;"> against the United Kingdom - </span></span><a href="https://www.echr.coe.int/w/new-inter-state-application-brought-by-ireland-against-the-united-kingdom">New inter-State application brought by Ireland against the United Kingdom - ECHR - ECHR / CEDH (coe.int)</a><p></p><p><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; font-family: inherit;">The application is a challenge to sections of the </span><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/41/enacted" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; font-family: inherit; text-decoration-line: none;">Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023</a><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; font-family: inherit;">, which received Royal Assent on 18 September 2023. <span style="font-family: inherit;">See also the </span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/41/notes/division/1/index.htm" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; text-decoration-line: none;">Explanatory Notes</a><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; color: #3e5b67;"> issued by the UK government. </span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;">The </span><a href="https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_ENG" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; text-decoration-line: none;">European Convention on Human Rights</a> enables Ir<span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;">eland to seek enforcement of human rights no matter who holds power at either Westminster or Belfast. </span></span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;">Human rights underpin much of the </span><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/619500728fa8f5037d67b678/The_Belfast_Agreement_An_Agreement_Reached_at_the_Multi-Party_Talks_on_Northern_Ireland.pdf" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; text-decoration-line: none;">1998 Belfast (“Good Friday”) Agreement</a>.<span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;"> </span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;"><br /></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;">This is one to keep an eye on although it is perhaps unlikely that much will happen before the next UK general election.</p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><br /></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;">The European Court of Human Rights Press Release provides fuller details .....<span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><br /></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIkHOfTNwh7JgnWxlfvsQJdJiW5iU2EpPFwWAW4qY57Ksn4F9NS4uu4UJmWW623dyu_gVsZVBdwsqNiy2xQ-1MNlUwnh8qhmVdv8RaXX6o4zFP6YQWjiNWqBmSA7mrGmChjW6ZjYhH-wzNY1xM7GqYKe1vEknvq5Yw7PEvZAxSdGrIZ1fu4_L9593VhCfk/s790/Press%20release%20Ireland%20v%20UK%20January%202024.webp" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="790" data-original-width="588" height="670" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIkHOfTNwh7JgnWxlfvsQJdJiW5iU2EpPFwWAW4qY57Ksn4F9NS4uu4UJmWW623dyu_gVsZVBdwsqNiy2xQ-1MNlUwnh8qhmVdv8RaXX6o4zFP6YQWjiNWqBmSA7mrGmChjW6ZjYhH-wzNY1xM7GqYKe1vEknvq5Yw7PEvZAxSdGrIZ1fu4_L9593VhCfk/w498-h670/Press%20release%20Ireland%20v%20UK%20January%202024.webp" width="498" /></a></div><br /><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: red; font-family: inherit; font-size: large;"><b><i>Update 29 February 2024</i></b></span><div><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;"><span face="Spectral, serif, -apple-system, system-ui, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"" style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 19px;">According to the High Court of Northern Ireland, </span></span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;"><span face="Spectral, serif, -apple-system, system-ui, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"" style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 19px;">"The provisions in the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 relating to immunity from prosecution, namely sections 7(3), 12, 19, 20, 21, 22, 39, 41 and 42(1), are incompatible with article 2 of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol/Windsor Framework" and <b>should be disapplied</b>.</span></span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;"><span face="Spectral, serif, -apple-system, system-ui, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"" style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 19px;">See the judgment of Colton J at</span></span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><a href="https://www.judiciaryni.uk/sites/judiciary/files/decisions/Dillon%2C%20McAvoy%2C%20McManus%2C%20Huges%2C%20Jordan%2C%20Gilvary%2C%20and%20Fitzsimmons%20Application.pdf" style="background-color: transparent;">IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND (judiciaryni.uk)</a> and</p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><a href="https://www.judiciaryni.uk/sites/judiciary/files/decisions/Summary%20of%20Judgment%20-%20In%20re%20Dillon%20and%20others%20-%20NI%20Troubles%20%28Legacy%20and%20Reconciliation%29%20Act%202023_0.pdf">Summary of Judgment - In re Dillon and others - NI Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023_0.pdf (judiciaryni.uk)</a></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><br /></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;"><span face="Spectral, serif, -apple-system, system-ui, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"" style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 19px;"><br /></span></span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span><span style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></p><p style="--tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: #f5fcff; color: #3e5b67; font-family: "SF Pro Display", -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, Inter, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"; font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><br /></p></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-77705729268541945042024-01-11T10:20:00.004+00:002024-01-11T11:45:34.397+00:00UKSC - Paul and others v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust - Tort - Negligence<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilc3H-D34tZAdOcEd5ERvYf4cvLLZypRNe1Ga3WOrBrZ6nu4XPQrS1ylquzIzBepdnC82BmdSJidB6DbuM88ve9meASVgSBknheTTT7dE7j_ZaPFKVP45pYstMdAmDSnT6BCuMr-VhefDRTeTcDVyzQ9Cn0O4r9e49JMhFiMdNUWuIujGjD1PH4JGj4RkW/s306/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="204" data-original-width="306" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilc3H-D34tZAdOcEd5ERvYf4cvLLZypRNe1Ga3WOrBrZ6nu4XPQrS1ylquzIzBepdnC82BmdSJidB6DbuM88ve9meASVgSBknheTTT7dE7j_ZaPFKVP45pYstMdAmDSnT6BCuMr-VhefDRTeTcDVyzQ9Cn0O4r9e49JMhFiMdNUWuIujGjD1PH4JGj4RkW/w200-h133/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><p>This post is an early look at the Supreme Court's decision in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0038.html">Paul and another (Appellants) v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a> which considered the question - <i>"Can an individual make a claim for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or other horrifying event of a close relative as a result of earlier clinical negligence?"</i></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Tort:</span></i></b></p><p></p><p>The law of tort is largely judge-made and is often traceable back for centuries. There have been only occasional interventions by Parliament. Claims for damages in tort frequently arise where a claimant (C) argues that a particular defendant (D) owed C a <b><i><span style="color: #2b00fe;">duty of care</span></i></b> and that D <b><i><span style="color: #2b00fe;">negligently breached that duty</span></i></b> thereby<b><i><span style="color: #2b00fe;"> causing</span></i></b> <span style="color: #2b00fe;"><b><i>reasonably foreseeable damage</i></b></span> (e.g. personal injury) to C.</p><p>In some situations the liability of D may be relatively easy to establish but there are particular situations where that is far from being the case. In those particular situations, a claimant <span></span></p><a name='more'></a>will have to surmount considerable legal obstacles before a defendant's liability is established.<p></p><p>Claims for "<b><i><span style="color: #2b00fe;">psychiatric illness</span></i></b>" arsing from witnessing a tragic event such as the death of a loved one are one of the most difficult areas in which to establish liability. Naturally there will be grief and sorrow in the aftermath of any such events but tort claims require that genuine psychiatric illness has been caused and that requires professional medical opinion.</p><p>Particularly since the House of Lords decision in <i><a name="para2">Alcock v. Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police </a><a href="https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?path=/uk/cases/UKHL/1991/5.html" title="Link to BAILII version">[1992] 1 AC 310</a> ,</i> there has been a distinction between primary victims of a tort and secondary victims. The classification is basically a control mechanism aimed at limiting the range of possible claimants and thereby preventing an excessive extent to liability.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">The cases appealed to the Supreme Court:</span></i></b></p><p>Litigation has been on-going for around four years in three cases brought by secondary victims of alleged clinical negligence. The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) handed down judgment in January 2022 ruling that the secondary victims in question were unable to claim but permission was granted for an appeal to the Supreme Court - see <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/12.html">Paul & Ors v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (13 January 2022) (bailii.org)</a>. The Court of Appeal was bound by the House of Lords decision in Alcock and also by another Court of Appeal decision - <a name="para4"><i>Crystal Taylor v. A. Novo (UK) Ltd </i></a><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/194.html" title="Link to BAILII version">[2013] EWCA Civ 194</a>,</p><p>In two of the cases (Parminder Singh Paul and Esmee Polmear), the death occurred in the presence of close relatives, causing them psychiatric injury. In the case of Evelyn Purchase, the close relative came upon the primary victim immediately after her death, again causing her (the mother in that case) psychiatric injury. The question in each case was whether the necessary legal proximity existed between the defendant and the close relative (the secondary victim).</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Supreme Court 11 January 2024:</span></i></b></p><p>The Supreme Court (Lord Briggs, Lord Sales, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows, Lady Rose, Lord Richards, Lord Carloway) heard argument in May 2023. Judgment was delivered on 11 January 2024.</p><p>By a majority of 6 to 1 (Lord Burrows dissenting) the appeals of the claimants were dismissed. </p><p>Held that while doctors owe a duty of care to protect the health of their patients, they do not owe a
duty of care to members of the patient’s close family to protect them against the risk of
illness from the experience of witnessing the death or medical crisis of their relative from a
condition which the doctor has negligently failed to diagnose or treat. The Court of Appeal’s
order dismissing the claims was, therefore, upheld.</p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0038.html">Paul and another (Appellants) v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0044.html">Polmear and another (Appellants) v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0049.html">Purchase (Appellant) v Ahmed (Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><ul style="border: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Helvetica; font-size: 16px; list-style: none; margin: 10px 15px 15px 40px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><li style="border: 0px; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.2em; list-style: disc; margin: 8px 0px 0px 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="more" href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2022-0038-0044-0049-judgment.pdf" style="border: 0px; color: #2c6eba; font-size: 1em; margin: 8px 0px 6px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Judgment (PDF)"><span style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Judgment (PDF)</span></a></strong></li><li style="border: 0px; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.2em; list-style: disc; margin: 8px 0px 0px 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="more" href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2022-0038-0044-0049-press-summary.pdf" style="border: 0px; color: #2c6eba; font-size: 1em; margin: 8px 0px 6px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Press Summary (PDF)"><span style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Press Summary (PDF)</span></a></strong></li></ul><p>The court noted that for centuries, under the common law, the general rule has been that a person cannot claim
compensation for the effect on them, however severe, of the death or injury of another person. </p><p>However, an exception developed which allows a person to claim compensation for personal injury
(typically, psychiatric illness) caused by witnessing an accident (or the immediate aftermath
of an accident) brought about by the defendant’s negligence, in which a close family member
(or other loved one) is killed or injured (or put in peril of death or injury).</p><p>An
“accident” in this context refers to an unexpected and unintended event in which injury (or
the risk of injury) is caused by violent external means: for example, a road accident. </p><p>The claimants argued that this exceptional category of case ought to be extended to cases where, as a result of a doctor’s negligence, a person
dies or manifests injury from a disease which proper treatment would have prevented. The Supreme Court rejected that argument. The majority view was that no analogy can reasonably be drawn between
cases involving accidents and cases where the claimant does not witness an accident but
suffers illness as a result of witnessing a death or medical crisis brought about by an untreated
disease.</p><p>The court noted that - Accidents are discrete events. It is usually clear and easy to determine whether someone was
present at the scene of and directly perceived an accident. Witnessing an accident involving a
close family member is likely to be a disturbing and upsetting event. A person who suffers
psychiatric injury when their own life or safety is put at risk by a defendant’s negligent
conduct is entitled to claim compensation and it would be difficult and arbitrary to distinguish
between psychiatric injury caused by fear for the claimant’s own safety and by fear for the
safety of a close family member.</p><p>By contrast, in the medical context there is often no event comparable to an accident, as the
symptoms of disease or injury may develop over days, months or years. How traumatic it is
to witness such events is also highly variable.</p><p>Further, in cases where there is no accident, there is no possibility of
psychiatric injury caused by fear for the claimant’s own safety or bodily integrity]. </p><p>It was also necessary to consider the nature of a doctor’s role and the purposes for which
medical care is provided to a patient. The responsibilities of a doctor, and the purposes for
which care is provided, do not extend to protecting members of the patient’s close family
from exposure to the traumatic experience of witnessing the death or manifestation of disease
or injury in their relative.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Commentaries:</span></i></b></p><p>Links to be added as commentaries are published.</p><p><br /></p><div><br /></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-28523842422453845832024-01-02T18:50:00.008+00:002024-02-23T11:29:22.445+00:00Happy New Year 2024<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0LZfAkZIbY-4NkE29rbqLAcadcAq8uBWQkVpQTS1ayBiiDcnSycH22tgbp7lc4bKa3qXoN_lnU-eHPbQoejCqrTHAp0Sxhz2ZyBcsKceOrREL5BRZ3Wb1vjQvD_RPHrr-LWQg4CfdSA6waByZJ2z_gGrEBk2bmxwru7SQDhEG8IRsTAhTYvhWWnC9pzFH/s1024/Xmas%20Wreath.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><b><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1024" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0LZfAkZIbY-4NkE29rbqLAcadcAq8uBWQkVpQTS1ayBiiDcnSycH22tgbp7lc4bKa3qXoN_lnU-eHPbQoejCqrTHAp0Sxhz2ZyBcsKceOrREL5BRZ3Wb1vjQvD_RPHrr-LWQg4CfdSA6waByZJ2z_gGrEBk2bmxwru7SQDhEG8IRsTAhTYvhWWnC9pzFH/w200-h200/Xmas%20Wreath.jpg" width="200" /></b></a></div><br /><b><span style="color: #a64d79;">HAPPY NEW YEAR 2024 </span></b>to all who visit this blog and it is good to note that a considerable number still do,<p></p><p>The blog is still alive but posts will not be all that frequent because I now wish to confine things to issues of major importance or significance. </p><p>The first of those is likely to be the Supreme Court's judgment in Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (<a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0038.html">UKSC News</a>) about whether an individual can make a claim for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or other horrifying event of a close relative as a result of earlier clinical negligence?</p><p>My Twitter (X) account remains active but I have decided that I will not usually engage in discussion on the platform.</p><p>Here's to a great New Year and let's hope that various conflicts around the world can be resolved.</p><p><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-43823267419247069872023-12-22T13:07:00.003+00:002024-02-04T10:16:49.234+00:00Murder of Brianna Ghey ~ "excepting direction" regarding anonymity of Defendants<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimT1g0kAOZiE44FvUFoelfMSPQLZBdBhmvL1gwFgn8MZsCrY4iB0Kr545KM2QKRgvnoF9Hrucq1VAIOHXldR04CpC9e7ge9BcR1amWNKsIghGKCjMJia9q3F6hL3qoeuMZ2_mSJPfrqM9s14bAYi3PLUz8ttgi9qrANzVz_4EeXQ3S2OOaX3q7tQ_4djAo/s474/Brianna%20Ghey.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="color: red;"><img border="0" data-original-height="355" data-original-width="474" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimT1g0kAOZiE44FvUFoelfMSPQLZBdBhmvL1gwFgn8MZsCrY4iB0Kr545KM2QKRgvnoF9Hrucq1VAIOHXldR04CpC9e7ge9BcR1amWNKsIghGKCjMJia9q3F6hL3qoeuMZ2_mSJPfrqM9s14bAYi3PLUz8ttgi9qrANzVz_4EeXQ3S2OOaX3q7tQ_4djAo/w200-h150/Brianna%20Ghey.jpg" width="200" /></span></a></div><div><span style="color: red;"><b><i>Update 2 February 2024:</i></b></span></div><div><br /></div>Two defendants (under age 18) have been convicted of the murder of Brianna Ghey (age 16). Sentencing is to take place on 2 February 2024.<p></p><p>Due to the age of the defendants, an order has been in place throughout the proceedings under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (“the Act”) restricting publication of any information that would be likely to identify them as the defendants in these proceedings.</p><p>This <b><u>Order remains in force</u></b> but the judge - Mrs Justice Yip - has decided that X and Y will be named but not until the sentencing hearing when the judge will give clarity as to the point at which the restrictions cease to apply.</p><p>The reasons for the decision are set out at <a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/R-v-X-and-Y-Ruling-on-reporting-restrictions.pdf">R-v-X-and-Y-Ruling-on-reporting-restrictions.pdf (judiciary.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/23/section/45">Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (legislation.gov.uk)</a></p><p>For the principles of law involved see the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) decision in <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/200.html">KL v R. [2021] EWCA Crim 200 (19 February 2021) (bailii.org)</a></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">2 February 2024 - Sentencing:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/r-v-scarlett-jenkinson-and-eddie-ratcliffe/">R -v- Scarlett Jenkinson and Eddie Ratcliffe - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-63547879279618686892023-12-21T09:59:00.002+00:002023-12-21T09:59:24.632+00:00Could the terms of the Covid 19 Inquiry be changed?<p><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUH218DLZBTxGZWI1XENl604anLtylpVCGbCtBprU1D0EldieJrWFPppqpQnxJmnTVrwQjZ0JYDskHa439MCEyDZ3-zJbNQlipiuomj6WmtGomcFrWdFcjfma7piuCheGpM5ZnBkFfAGFoaj2fTzguCE9hesjSQBCXosK0vn7z9b40YMaxnYBoaNwIM3er/s465/Downing%20Street%20door.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="310" data-original-width="465" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUH218DLZBTxGZWI1XENl604anLtylpVCGbCtBprU1D0EldieJrWFPppqpQnxJmnTVrwQjZ0JYDskHa439MCEyDZ3-zJbNQlipiuomj6WmtGomcFrWdFcjfma7piuCheGpM5ZnBkFfAGFoaj2fTzguCE9hesjSQBCXosK0vn7z9b40YMaxnYBoaNwIM3er/w200-h133/Downing%20Street%20door.png" width="200" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: inherit;">The Telegraph reports that <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/mps-and-peers-fear-the-covid-inquiry-has-already-decided-lockdowns-were-not-hard-enough/ar-AA1lM9Jf">MPs and peers fear the Covid Inquiry has already decided lockdowns were not hard enough (msn.com)</a>.</span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">According to the article, a group of MPs and Peers have the opinion that the Inquiry seems to have already decided that lockdown was necessary and that the inquiry has been focused on whether <span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;"> </span><a class="ck-custom-link" data-t="{"n":"destination","t":13,"b":1,"c.t":7}" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/12/rishi-sunak-covid-inquiry-science-lockdown-whitty-vallance/" style="text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">pandemic interventions</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;"> should have been implemented </span><a class="ck-custom-link" data-t="{"n":"destination","t":13,"b":1,"c.t":7}" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/28/covid-inquiry-uk-news-latest-michael-grove-dr-jenny-harries/" style="text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">“harder, sooner and for longer”.</a></span></p><p>It is reported that -<span style="font-family: inherit;"> '<span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;">The scathing comments come in a letter sent to Mr Sunak on Wednesday and signed by more than 20 MPs, peers and scientific experts, demanding he intervenes to change the </span><a class="ck-custom-link" data-t="{"n":"destination","t":13,"b":1,"c.t":7}" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/14/covid-inquirys-final-bill-set-to-exceed-146m/" style="text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">official scope of the inquiry</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;">.'</span></span></p><p>Would it be possible to change the official scope of the inquiry? The simplistic answer <span></span></p><a name='more'></a>is Yes but it may prove to be a problematic course of action. <p></p><p>The UK Covid 19 Inquiry was set up by the Prime Minister - then Boris Johnson - with Baroness Hallett appointed to chair the inquiry and with <a href="https://www.covid19.public-inquiry.uk/documents/terms-of-reference/">Terms of Reference</a> agreed with her.</p><p>The Inquiry operates under the Inquiries Act 2005.</p><p>Scotland is operating a separate Inquiry but co-operation with the UK Inquiry has been agreed.</p><p>Wales and Northern Ireland are covered by the UK Inquiry but would doubtless have a view about any proposal to alter the terms of reference.</p><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/12/section/5" style="text-align: right;">Inquiries Act 2005 section 5</a> provides that the Minister may at any time after setting out the terms of reference ... amend them if he considers that the <b>public interest</b> so requires.</p><p>BUT</p><p>there is a requirement to consult the chair of the Inquiry.</p><p>Naturally, the Inquiry chair would have a view about any proposals to alter the terms of reference and is not under any legal obligation to continue in post if government opted to press ahead with a change against any objections.</p><p>Whether to impose a "lockdown" in early 2020 was ultimately a decision for Ministers would had legal powers under the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/22/contents">Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984</a> to make Regulations. Those powers included an emergency power (section 45R) which was used extensively throughout the pandemic. Ultimately, all legislation was subject to approval by Parliament.</p><p>Clearly then, any proposal to alter the terms of reference will be politically sensitive and may give an appearance of government attempting to obtain an outcome more favourable to itself. Whatever the term "public interest" means in section 5 of the Act, it cannot be equated with the interest of any political party.</p><p>Whether a lockdown ought to have been imposed appears to have become a far more controversial point than it was back in 2020. Other nations had imposed "lockdowns" in varying degrees to try to limit the spread of what was a dangerous virus (and maybe still is for some people). Medical advice was generally in favour of a lockdown in the UK but the final decision was for government. Furthermore, in early 2020, there were no vaccines available.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-13153128425750818992023-12-20T10:36:00.006+00:002023-12-24T09:28:59.346+00:00Furore over PPE<p><span style="background-color: white; color: red;"><i><b></b></i></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; color: red;"><i><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAxuce6KKrc7VVL1eGJYbX9UIIa3GKw1tX-3Ze0ZDI2rYEPFV35tDoCR8ekognHdFfo-81bBEgoSh6rq58tNMQa_CH1zK-S-oOEyNZo_m_PYfIG7ZOYmGhadxprSvFpQmr0OCPcF9tXFueTij-3TE5ggeMtWDFXkeEIyfhUgJ1gqJGJbO9aDCg9vl6WgFu/s1024/PPE%20gowns.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1024" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAxuce6KKrc7VVL1eGJYbX9UIIa3GKw1tX-3Ze0ZDI2rYEPFV35tDoCR8ekognHdFfo-81bBEgoSh6rq58tNMQa_CH1zK-S-oOEyNZo_m_PYfIG7ZOYmGhadxprSvFpQmr0OCPcF9tXFueTij-3TE5ggeMtWDFXkeEIyfhUgJ1gqJGJbO9aDCg9vl6WgFu/w200-h200/PPE%20gowns.jpg" width="200" /></a></b></i></span></div><span style="background-color: white; color: red;"><i><b>Background:</b></i></span><p></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><i>'Shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) at the front-line in the first wave of the
pandemic was one of the biggest concerns in March and April 2020. </i></span><i><span style="background-color: white;">As well as NHS front line workers there were others front-line workers who required high grade PPE – particularly in social care settings, which were mainly private businesses.</span>' </i></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">That statement of well-known facts is from </span><span style="background-color: white;">the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee 42nd report of Session 2019-21 - </span><a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/4607/documents/46709/default/">COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of personal protective equipment (parliament.uk)</a>.</p><p>The report continues - '<span style="background-color: white;">At each stage the Department for Health and Social Care maintain that no setting
actually ran out of PPE. We heard compelling evidence from organisations representing
front-line workers that stocks ran perilously low; single use items were reused; some was
not fit for purpose and staff were in fear that they would run out. </span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">Government thought it was well-placed<span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><span style="background-color: white;"> to manage the COVID-19 pandemic because
it had a plan and a stockpile of personal protective equipment. However, these were
designed for an influenza pandemic and the plans, stockpile and PPE distribution
arrangements were inadequate for a coronavirus pandemic.</span><p></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">The NHS’s existing
suppliers of PPE (mostly from overseas) could not increase supply quickly enough to
meet the extreme demand and urgency of the global situation. As well as the urgent
need to procure PPE, government also needed to procure a wide range of other goods
and services quickly during the pandemic. By 31 July 2020, it had awarded over 8,000
contracts for goods and services, such as PPE and professional services, in response to
the pandemic, with a value of £18 billion.'</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: red;"><b><i>The high-priority lane (aka 'VIP' Lane):</i></b></span></p><p>The PAC report also stated - <i>'Government’s PPE buying team, within
the parallel supply chain, received over 15,000 offers to supply PPE. This cross government PPE buying team set up a <b><span style="color: red;">high-priority lane</span></b> to separately assess and
process high-priority leads that it considered more credible, which sat alongside
an ordinary lane to process other leads. <span style="color: #2b00fe;"><b>Leads that were considered more credible
were those from government officials, ministers’ offices, MPs and members of the
House of Lords but it is not clear why this assumption was made.</b> </span>The priority lane
did not include organisations with expertise in the health and social care sector
that had existing relationships with suppliers through their members or directly
and were well-placed to assess the credibility of potential PPE suppliers, such as the
British Medical Association. Around one in ten suppliers that came through the
high-priority lane were awarded a contract compared with one in a hundred for
the ordinary lane. There were no written rules to support those making referrals
in deciding which leads to put forward ... '</i></p><p>The Public Accounts Committee returned to the topic in its 66th report of Session 2022-23 - <a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/40919/documents/199374/default/">PPE Medpro: awarding of contracts during the pandemic (parliament.uk)</a>. The report comments - <i>'Because there was no national centralised model for procuring and allocating PPE to
the health and social care sectors that needed it at the time, the Department established a
parallel supply chain and a ‘High Priority Lane’ (known generally as the ‘VIP’ lane). This
allowed referrals of potential suppliers from MPs, Peers, ministers, and senior officials.
Later, in January 2022, the High Court ruled that the use of the High Priority Lane was
unlawful. PPE Medpro was one of the private companies awarded valuable contracts having
been referred through this High Priority Lane by Baroness Michelle Mone. PPE Medpro
was set up on 12 May 2020. It was awarded its first contract, worth £81 million, a month
later on 12 June to supply 210 million face masks. The Department awarded a second
contract a couple of weeks later on 26 June, worth £122 million for sterile surgical gowns.'</i></p><p><i><b><span style="color: red;">PPE Medpro:</span></b></i></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">A company known as Medpro PPE Ltd was incorporated on 12 May 2020 - </span><a href="https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12597000">PPE MEDPRO LIMITED overview - GOV.UK (company-information.service.gov.uk)</a><span style="background-color: white;">.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: red;"><b><i>Baroness Mone:</i></b></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">Michelle Georgina Mone was created a Life Peer in the 2015 Dissolution Honours list issued on 27 August 2015. Some 50 life peerages have the same date - <a href="https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/lln-2021-0002/">Lords Appointments: Life peerages created since 1958 - House of Lords Library (parliament.uk)</a> </span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;"><span style="color: red; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>High Court:</i></b></span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;"><span style="color: red; font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2022/46.html">Good Law Project Ltd & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2022] EWHC 46 (TCC) (12 January 2022) (bailii.org)</a></span></span></p><p><a href="https://www.blakemorgan.co.uk/use-of-high-priority-lane-unlawful/" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;">Use of High Priority Lane unlawful - BM Insights - Blake Morgan</a></p><p><a href="https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/vip-lane-for-ppe-contracts-unlawful-high-court-rules/5111112.article">‘VIP lane’ for PPE contracts unlawful, High Court rules | News | Law Gazette</a></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;"><span style="color: red; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>National Crime Agency (NCA):</i></b></span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #121212; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The National Crime Agency (NCA) opened an investigation in May 2021. This is on-going. </span></span><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/26/matt-hancock-michael-gove-questioned-ppe-medpro-inquiry-national-crime-agency">NCA questions Matt Hancock and Michael Gove in PPE Medpro inquiry | NCA (National Crime Agency) | The Guardian</a></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">House of Lords Commissioners for Standards:</span></i></b></p><p>January 2022 - the House of Lords Commissioners for Standards announced that
Baroness Mone was subject to an inquiry relating to her alleged involvement in procuring
contracts for PPE Medpro leading to potential breaches of the House of Lords Code of
Conduct. </p><p>6 December 2022 - It was announced that Baroness Mone would be taking a leave of absence from the House of Lords.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Legal Proceedings:</span></i></b></p><p>On 19 December 2022 the Government commenced legal proceedings against PPE Medpro on one of the contracts worth £122 million for the supply of gowns. The Department has stated that it does not believe that these gowns were fit for use. This is a claim that PPE Medpro deny.</p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #141414;">Further details of the government's claim appeared in a Financial Times article dated 23 February 2023 - </span></span><span class="ssrcss-hmf8ql-BoldText e5tfeyi3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #141414; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.ft.com/content/fbe4eb9d-4d2a-496d-935f-e92b2bf1f3e9" style="font-weight: bold;">PPE Medpro fights back against UK government claim of contract breach (ft.com)</a><b>. </b>This article reported that the government alleged that PPE supplied was not in accordance with the terms of the contract. </span></span><span style="color: #141414;">The government is seeking repayment of £122mn for the gowns, along with costs incurred as part of the case.</span></p><p><span style="color: #141414;">The legal action is said to be based on <b>breach of contract</b> and <b>unjust enrichment </b>- (see note below).</span></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Freedom of Information requests:</span></i></b></p><p>The Cabinet Office was asked to provided correspondence between Ministers and Baroness Mone (Michelle Mone), PPE Medpro and Anthony Page (a director of PPE Medpro). </p><p>The Cabinet Office initially withheld this information on the basis of section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. </p><p>During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation of this complaint the Cabinet Office sought to rely on section 23(1) (security bodies) of FOIA. The Commissioner held that the requested information was exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 23(1) of Freedom of Information Act 2000.</p><p><b class="ssrcss-hmf8ql-BoldText e5tfeyi3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #141414; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKICO/2023/149867.html&query=(%22ppe+medpro%22)">Cabinet Office (Central government) [2023] UKICO 149867 (25 May 2023) (bailii.org)</a></span></b></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">A Timeline:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/17/how-the-michelle-mone-scandal-unfolded-200m-of-ppe-contracts-denials-and-a-government-lawsuit">How the Michelle Mone scandal unfolded: £200m of PPE contracts, denials and a government lawsuit | Michelle Mone | The Guardian</a></p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">The controversy:</span></i></b></p><p>The controversy lies more in the allegations against Baroness Mone and her husband Barrowman than in the fact that there was a high-priority lane to acquire PPE. </p><p>Procurement is to be the subject of Module Five of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry - <a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/modules/procurement-module-5/">Procurement (Module 5) - UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk)</a></p><p>When the government published the PPE Medpro contracts, the links with Baroness Mone and her husband's Isle of Man based <a href="https://knoxgroupplc.com/">Knox Group</a> came to light. According to its website, Knox Group is <span style="font-family: inherit;">an <i>'<span style="background-color: white; text-align: center;">independent, dynamic group of businesses offering fiduciary services, investment sourcing and asset management to a diverse and expanding client base. </span></i></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: center;"><i>Each company is autonomously managed yet strategically aligned and are headquartered in Douglas, Isle of Man.'</i></span></p><p>In December 2020, Mone and Barrowman denied involvement <span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>- <span style="background-color: white; color: #121212; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures;">any suggestion of an association between Mone and PPE Medpro would be “inaccurate”, “misleading” and “defamatory.”</span></i></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In November 2021, a lawyer acting for Mone stated that she had <i>'taken the very simple, solitary and brief step of referring PPE Medpro as a potential supplier to the office of Lord Agnew, our client did not do anything further in respect of PPE Medpro.' </i>Also<i>, '“Baroness Mone did not declare any interest as she did not benefit financially and was not connected to PPE Medpro in any capacity.”</i></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In early 2022, involvement with PPE Medpro continued to be denied but, in March 2022, The Guardian reported that Mone introduced PPE Medpro to both Michael Gove MP and Lord Agnew - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/24/michael-gove-private-emails-ppe-deals-tory-linked-firms" style="background-color: transparent;">Private emails reveal Gove’s role in Tory-linked firm’s PPE deals | Michael Gove | The Guardian</a></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In April 2022, the NCA <a data-link-name="in body link" href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/29/nca-launches-investigation-ppe-firm-linked-to-michelle-mone" style="border-bottom: 1px solid var(--article-link-border); border-image: initial; border-left: 0px; border-right: 0px; border-top: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">executed search warrants</a> at Mone and Barrowman’s homes in London and the Isle of Man, and PPE Medpro’s offices - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/29/nca-launches-investigation-ppe-firm-linked-to-michelle-mone" style="background-color: transparent;">Michelle Mone’s home raided as PPE firm linked to Tory peer investigated | Conservatives | The Guardian</a></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In November 2022, The Guardian revealed that Mr Barrowman was paid at least £65m from PPE Medpro’s profits - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/nov/23/revealed-tory-peer-michelle-mone-secretly-received-29m-from-vip-lane-ppe-firm" style="background-color: transparent;">Revealed: Tory peer Michelle Mone secretly received £29m from ‘VIP lane’ PPE firm | Michelle Mone | The Guardian</a>. It was also revealed that Barrowman then transferred £29m to an offshore trust known as Keristal of which Baroness Mone and her three adult children were beneficiaries.</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A year later, in November 2023, Mone and Barrowman first acknowledged that they were involved with PPE Medpro - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/06/michelle-mone-admits-involvement-with-vip-lane-ppe-company" style="background-color: transparent;">Michelle Mone admits involvement with ‘VIP lane’ PPE company | Michelle Mone | The Guardian</a></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In <span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">December 2023, both Barrowman and Mone were interviewed by the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg. Mone admitted being untruthful with the press but stated that she had done so to protect her family from press attention - </span></span><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-67736521" style="font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit;">Michelle Mone and her husband Doug Barrowman speak to the BBC - BBC News</a></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Mediation?</span></i></b></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;">Alternative Dispute Resolution methods such as mediation are usually encouraged in order to avoid costly court hearing held (usually) in public. Mediation can be an 'attractive' option for parties to a dispute since confidentiality terms are frequently included in agreements.</p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;">There can be little doubt that all parties to the PPE Medpro matter would wish it to 'go away' but that is maybe unlikely given the general public interest in knowing that public moneys are properly managed even in times of national difficult such as the pandemic. Nonetheless, one can imagine that with a general election due in 2024 the government would rather than matter be settled out of court as soon as possible.</p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><a href="https://www.commediate.co.uk/insight/michelle-mone-and-mediation-should-any-deal-be-confidential/">Michelle Mone and mediation - should any deal be confidential | COMMediate</a></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;">As at 20 December that is where the story appears to be and doubtless there is more to come.</p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">----- 00000 -----</span></b></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Breach of contract:</span></i></b></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span>This depend on the precise terms of any contract and whether defendant adhered fully to those terms.</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span>Any specifications / standards relating to PPE will be likely to be relevant - </span><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/designated-standards-ppe" style="background-color: transparent;">Designated standards: PPE - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Unjust enrichment:</span></i></b></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;">Unjust enrichment is an area of law that has seen considerable development in recent times and, in particular, since the <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414;">House of Lords decision in </span><a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1988/12.html" style="background-color: transparent;">Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale [1988] UKHL 12 (06 June 1991) (bailii.org)</a><span style="background-color: transparent;">.</span><span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">Today it is possible to purchase many books on this topic such as the practitioners book "</span><b style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">Unjust Enrichment</b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">" (Goff and Jones) now in its 10th Edition. </span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">This is a complex topic but one example might be that A issues a bank transfer in favour of B but, unknown to A, the funds are paid to C who refuses to return the money. </span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">Basically, the cases establish that there are 3 elements:</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">1. The defendant has been enriched (e.g. has received money or assets)</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">2. The enrichment of the defendants is viewed by the law as unjust</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">3. The defendant was enriched at the expense of the claimant.</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;">Various defences are available..</span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #141414; font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2017/29.html">Revenue and Customs v The Investment Trust Companies [2017] UKSC 29 (11 April 2017) (bailii.org)</a></span></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65824896.amp">New boss of Mone-linked PPE firm was censured in tax probe - BBC News</a></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><a href="https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07014344">AML TAX (UK) LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK (company-information.service.gov.uk)</a></p><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/19/lawyer-apologises-for-saying-michelle-mone-was-not-linked-to-ppe-firm">Lawyer apologises for saying Michelle Mone was not linked to PPE firm | Michelle Mone | The Guardian</a></p><br /><p class="dcr-1kas69x" style="--source-text-decoration-thickness: 2px; background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #121212; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Manrope, sans-serif; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-size: 18px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.15px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></p><p><br /></p><div><br /></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-36403182919329055982023-12-12T12:39:00.003+00:002023-12-12T13:03:55.030+00:00Parliamentary Sovereignty ~ legal rule or assumption ~ either way it is unsatisfactory<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTJVbNyhd6_IoU8oayFNEGQXs2KynK7BofgCsXnEShTD2Ph1ixuOK9aZQVq1y5hILHoq0dBhNjJJzka-Uofr-RmP0al5dsrQzfxM5kbaemvbvLSTEOZHTJveAL3S2Fr18nGAjzv-O2TD7mmTLI32xYl3lJAiGQCSzeY3YTmzZTJC1N8iYOwt0Cjr2NL8eI/s1600/Parliament%201.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1189" data-original-width="1600" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTJVbNyhd6_IoU8oayFNEGQXs2KynK7BofgCsXnEShTD2Ph1ixuOK9aZQVq1y5hILHoq0dBhNjJJzka-Uofr-RmP0al5dsrQzfxM5kbaemvbvLSTEOZHTJveAL3S2Fr18nGAjzv-O2TD7mmTLI32xYl3lJAiGQCSzeY3YTmzZTJC1N8iYOwt0Cjr2NL8eI/w200-h149/Parliament%201.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>There has been considerable debate about the government's "Rwanda Bill" - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safety-of-rwanda-asylum-and-immigration-draft-bill">Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Draft Bill - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a>. In particular, there is discussion within legal circles about whether the courts could somehow "disapply" this if it were to actually become an Act of Parliament (i.e. pass both Houses of Parliament and receive Royal Assent).<p></p><p>The legal discussion has arisen because of a letter published by the Daily Telegraph - <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/10/back-rwanda-bill-or-risk-the-sovereignty-of-parliament/">Back the Rwanda Bill or risk the sovereignty of Parliament, say KCs (telegraph.co.uk)</a> - in which former Attorney-General Sir Geoffrey Cox KC and three other leading barristers comment that -<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> "<span style="background-color: white;">[T]he assumption that Parliament is entirely sovereign is only that — an assumption, which the courts have long indicated could be revisited in the event that Parliament did the unthinkable."</span></span></i></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The word "<b>assumption</b>" certainly caused constitutional lawyers to go to their keyboards<span></span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> and mobile phones. Is "Parliamentary Sovereignty" just an assumption?</span></span><p></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">The "<i>assumption that Parliament is entirely sovereign"</i> refers, of course, to the traditional (at least English) doctrine that there are no legal restraints on Parliament's legislative power. According to this view, Parliament is competent to legislate on any subject-matter AND, when it has done so, no court or other body may decide on the validity of the legislation.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This blog has touched on the topic of "parliamentary sovereignty" before. </span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In a post of <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2019/10/sovereignty-and-accountability.html#more">11 October 2019</a> it was noted that, in </span></span><a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2019/41.html" style="background-color: white; color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;">Miller v Prime Minister [2019] UKSC 41</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> (the prorogation case), the Supreme Court referred (para 41) to</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> "Two fundamental principles of our constitutional law .. First, the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty. Secondly, Parliamentary accountability." </span></p><p>In a second <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2021/08/uk-constitutional-arrangements.html">post of 18 August 2021</a>, I commented that - <i>"<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">The law textbooks </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">and legal commentaries contain many pages and much detail about [Parliamentary Sovereignty]but just think about it. Parliament may legally do whatever it wishes. Isn't this the first rule that autocratic politicians would invent to assist them in building State power?</span></i></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><i>The rule is a form of double-edged sword. On the one hand it enables Parliament to respond to any new crisis or other developments. Parliament is also free to change the law when change appears to be required or needed. On the other hand, the rule is capable of assisting politicians to make highly contentious alterations to the law."</i></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">The Rwanda Bill purports to do highly contentious things including reversing a key <b>factual </b>finding of the courts that Rwanda is not, at present, a safe country to which to send asylum seekers. A possible objection to this lies in the judicial oath - to administer justice according to the laws and usages of the Realm. Isn't it a requirement of this oath that cases be decided on a proper factual basis as determined by the judges having heard argument placed before the court?</p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">Professor Mark Elliott has provided two posts about the Rwanda Bill. They are on his "Public Law for Everyone" blog and I recommend a full reading. Professor Elliott notes that some senior judges have asserted that, perhaps in extreme cases, the courts could reject a statute as unconstitutional. (There are also contrary views).</p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><a href="https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2023/12/06/the-rwanda-bill-and-its-constitutional-implications/" style="font-size: 15.4px;">The Rwanda Bill and its constitutional implications – Public Law for Everyone</a></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><a href="https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2023/12/11/could-the-supreme-court-reject-the-rwanda-bill-as-unconstitutional/" style="font-size: 15.4px;">Could the Supreme Court reject the Rwanda Bill as unconstitutional? – Public Law for Everyone</a><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> </span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">Elliott does not reject the idea that the courts could find legislation to be "unconstitutional". He argues that we cannot be confident that a court would never do this and it would not necessarily be unconstitutional if they did so.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">The courts have from time-to-time referred to important constitutional principles. I have already noted above the prorogation case. </p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">The Unison case 2017 (<a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0233-judgment.pdf">here</a>) was concerned with secondary legislation ("the Fees Order") but the Supreme Court held that the Order was unlawful. The court noted a <span style="font-size: 15.4px;">constitutional right of access to the courts inherent in the rule of law. The Order was unlawful because it effectively prevented such access. </span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><span style="font-size: 15.4px;">On the one hand, if Parliamentary Sovereignty is to be seen as a rule of law (maybe "<b>the</b> constitutional fundamental") then it is an unsatisfactory rule because it permits unfettered potential for Parliament to introduce oppressive and undemocratic legislation. In short, to wreak injustice.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><span style="font-size: 15.4px;">If, on the other hand, </span><span style="font-size: 15.4px;">Parliamentary Sovereignty is to be seen as an "assumption" then the obvious question arises as to what limits exist. I am not aware of some "list" of "no go areas" applicable to Parliament. Even if Angels fear to tread, is is not clear that Parliament may not ! </span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><span style="color: red; font-size: 15.4px;"><b><i>Notes:</i></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">Parliamentary Sovereignty was the subject of an obiter dictum by Lord Cooper in <a href="https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1953/1953_SC_396.html" style="font-size: 15.4px;">McCormick v Lord Advocate [1953] ScotCS CSIH_2 (30 July 1953) (bailii.org)</a>. - <i>"<span style="background-color: transparent;">The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law. It derives its origin from Coke and Blackstone, and was widely popularised during the nineteenth century by Bagehot and Dicey, the latter having stated the doctrine in its classic form in his Law of the Constitution. Considering that the Union legislation extinguished the Parliaments of Scotland and England and replaced them by a new Parliament, I have difficulty in seeing why it should have been supposed that the new Parliament of Great Britain must inherit all the peculiar characteristics of the English Parliament but none of the Scottish Parliament, as if all that happened in 1707 was that Scottish representatives were admitted to the Parliament of England. That is not what was done."</span></i></p><p style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">In <a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2005/56.html" style="background-color: transparent;">Jackson & Ors v. Her Majesty's Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56 (13 October 2005) (bailii.org)</a>, </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Lord Steyn famously commented (obiter) at para 102 -<i> " .... <span>The classic account given by Dicey of the doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament, pure and absolute as it was, can now be seen to be out of place in the modern United Kingdom. Nevertheless, the supremacy of Parliament is still the </span><span>general</span><span> principle of our constitution. It is a construct of the common law. The judges created this principle. If that is so, it is not unthinkable that circumstances could arise where the courts may have to qualify a principle established on a different hypothesis of constitutionalism ...."</span></i></span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><a href="https://binghamcentre.biicl.org/publications/safety-of-rwanda-asylum-and-immigration-bill-a-preliminary-rule-of-law-analysis-for-house-of-commons-second-reading">Safety of Rwanda Bill - Preliminary Rule of Law Analysis (biicl.org)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/a-novel-and-contentious-policy">A novel and contentious policy - by Joshua Rozenberg (substack.com)</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-15020870080522107472023-12-06T12:37:00.025+00:002024-03-21T06:57:18.289+00:00Rwanda ~ Now there is a treaty and a Bill<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLbA3Rw7JPvmr7tL-0LFEIf9eHhRdzclpfUlt3LEVh51QkwmA8pVEhmi0ZIRfhArVYFq1lXun4DCr_FT7z4Wup_pOpTI3wsvUH-xGdFYaFayhHUAPZ-3ovlVuDX5zKbG3cRhr1N5G0dty2DSmw257HJCwMtQJAJHQ_OTHs3K_w50ISa-xrZGRg63z6ZmEB/s306/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="204" data-original-width="306" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLbA3Rw7JPvmr7tL-0LFEIf9eHhRdzclpfUlt3LEVh51QkwmA8pVEhmi0ZIRfhArVYFq1lXun4DCr_FT7z4Wup_pOpTI3wsvUH-xGdFYaFayhHUAPZ-3ovlVuDX5zKbG3cRhr1N5G0dty2DSmw257HJCwMtQJAJHQ_OTHs3K_w50ISa-xrZGRg63z6ZmEB/w200-h133/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Updated 18 January 2024</span></i></b> (after House of Commons Third Reading).</div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Updated 20 March 2024 </span></i></b>- note on Lords amendments</div><div><br /></div>Following the judgment of the Supreme Court on 15 November 2023 (<a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/11/rwanda-judgment-15-november-2023.html">previous post</a>), the governments of the UK and Rwanda have acted "at pace" to turn what was a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in to what is now described as an "agreement." The text may be seen at -<p></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/656f51d30f12ef07a53e0295/UK-Rwanda_MEDP_-_English_-_Formatted__5_Dec_23__-_UK_VERSION.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Agreement between UK and Rwanda for the provision of an asylum partnership to strengthen international commitments on the protection of refugees and migrants </a>(publishing.service.gov.uk)</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">In international law, the agreement is a treaty and, as such, will be legally binding on both States once it is ratified. The word "treaty" is used in other material published by the government - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/treaty-signed-to-strengthen-uk-rwanda-migration-partnership">Treaty signed to strengthen UK-Rwanda migration partnership - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">The UK Foreign Secretary (James Cleverley MP) has said that<span style="font-family: inherit;"> -</span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>'<span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;">Rwanda is a safe country that cares deeply about supporting refugees. It has a strong history of providing protection to those that need it, hosting over 135,000 asylum seekers who have found sanctuary there.'</span></i></span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">That statement is undoubtedly at odds with views of the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/">UNHCR</a> which influenced both the Court of Appeal's majority judgment and the Supreme Court's unanimous November judgment. </span></span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The UNHCR's </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; font-family: inherit;">evidence (see <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2023-0093-press-summary.pdf">Press Summary</a>) pointed to serious and systematic defects in Rwanda’s
procedures and institutions for processing asylum claims. In summary, these include: <b>(i)</b>
concerns about the asylum process itself, such as the lack of legal representation, the risk that
judges and lawyers will not act independently of the government in politically sensitive cases,
and a completely untested right of appeal to the High Court, <b>(ii)</b> the surprisingly high rate of
rejection of asylum claims from certain countries in known conflict zones from which asylum
seekers removed from the UK may well emanate, <b>(iii)</b> Rwanda’s practice of refoulement,
which has continued since the MEDP was concluded, and <b>(iv)</b> the apparent inadequacy of the
Rwandan government’s understanding of the requirements of the Refugee Convention.</span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; font-family: inherit;">There was plainly irritation in the Rwandan government at the UNHCR view. </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; font-family: inherit;">Whether, and to what extent, the treaty will have addressed the UNHCR concerns is a moot point.</span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><span style="background-color: white;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Bill:</span></i></b></span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">The government introduced a Bill which, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safety-of-rwanda-asylum-and-immigration-draft-bill">according to government material</a>, is intended to make clear <span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">that Rwanda is a safe country for asylum seekers, and that people who have come to the UK illegally can be removed there swiftly. This will build on the legally binding treaty signed by the UK and Rwanda.</span></span></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safety-of-rwanda-asylum-and-immigration-draft-bill">Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Draft Bill - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Secretary James Cleverly has made the following statement undersection 19(1)(b) of the <u><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents">Human Rights Act 1998</a></u>: </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><i>"I am unable to make a statement that, in my view, the provisions of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum
and Immigration) Bill are compatible with the Convention rights, but the Government nevertheless
wishes the House to proceed with the Bill."</i></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">* Clause 1 *</span></b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1 starts by stating the purpose of the legislation - "<i>The purpose of this Act is to prevent and deter unlawful migration, and in </i><i>particular migration by unsafe and illegal routes, by enabling the removal of </i><i>persons to the Republic of Rwanda under provision made by or under the </i><i>Immigration Acts."</i></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1(2)(b) states "<i>this Act gives effect to the judgement of Parliament that the Republic </i><i>of Rwanda is a safe country."</i></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">It is not at all clear how Parliament can form such a judgment other than by simply accepting Ministerial views. It is a view that, as things stand, is not in line with UNHCR views.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1(3) sets out obligations of Rwanda<i> </i>in accordance with the
Rwanda Treaty.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1(4) states - <i> It is recognised that - </i><i>(a) the Parliament of the United Kingdom is sovereign, and </i><i>(b) the validity of an Act is unaffected by international law. </i></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">This seems legally superfluous and may have been inserted purely for political effect.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1(5) proceeds to define the meaning of "safe country"</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 1(6) sets out what the term "international law" includes - e.g. the Human Rights Convention, Refugee Convention, Convention against Torture etc.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><b>* Clause 2 </b></span><span style="text-align: left;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Safety of the Republic of Rwanda </span></b></span><b style="color: #2b00fe;">*</b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><span style="text-align: left;">Clause 2(1) - "Every decision-maker must conclusively treat the Republic of Rwanda as a
safe country."</span></p><div>By Clause2(2) the term decision-maker means - <b>(a)</b> the Secretary of State or an immigration officer when making a decision
relating to the removal of a person to the Republic of Rwanda under
any provision of, or made under, the Immigration Acts;
<b>(b)</b> a court or tribunal when considering a decision of the Secretary of
State or an immigration officer mentioned in paragraph (a). </div><div><br /></div><div>Hence, officials and judges are placed in a position where they are legally bound to accept that Rwanda is generally "safe" even if there is evidence to the contrary. This goes well-beyond the usual position with legal presumptions which normally yield to contrary evidence. However, see Clause 4 regarding particular individual circumstances.</div><div><br /></div><div>Clause 2(3) prevents a court or tribunal from considering - </div><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(a) any claim or complaint that the Republic of Rwanda will or may
remove or send a person to another State in contravention of any of
its international obligations, including in particular its obligations
under the Refugee Convention, </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(b) any claim or complaint that a person will not receive fair and proper
consideration of an asylum, or other similar, claim in the Republic of
Rwanda, or </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(c) any claim or complaint that the Republic of Rwanda will not act in
accordance with the Rwanda Treaty.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">* Clause 3 *</span></b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 3(1) and 3(2) disapply certain provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 - i.e. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(a) section 2 (interpretation of Convention rights) - and see Clause 3(3)</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(b) section 3 (interpretation of legislation), - and see Clause 3(4)</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(c) sections 6 to 9 (acts of public authorities).- and see Clause 3(5) </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><br /></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">* Clause 4 *</span></b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 4 is concerned with decisions based on particular individual circumstances </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">The presumption that Rwanda is generally safe (Clause 2) is not to </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(a) prevent the Secretary of State or an immigration officer from deciding whether Rwanda is a safe country for the person in
question, based on compelling evidence relating specifically to the
person’s particular individual circumstances (rather than on the
grounds that the Republic of Rwanda is not a safe country in general), or</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">(b) a court or tribunal considering a review of, or an appeal against, a
relevant decision to the extent that the review or appeal is brought
on the grounds that Rwanda is not a safe country for
the person in question, based on compelling evidence relating
specifically to the person’s particular individual circumstances (rather
than on the grounds that the Republic of Rwanda is not a safe country
in general).</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">However, Clause 4 continues to say that this doers not permit a decision-maker to consider any matter,
claim or complaint to the extent that it relates to the issue of whether the
Republic of Rwanda will or may remove or send the person in question to
another State in contravention of any of its international obligations (including
in particular its obligations under the Refugee Convention). </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">The clause goes still further to place restriction on the power of a court or tribunal to grant an interim remedy to an individual. The court or tribunal may grant an interim remedy that prevents or delays,
or that has the effect of preventing or delaying, the removal of the person to Rwanda only if the court or tribunal is satisfied that the person
would, before the review or appeal is determined, face a real, imminent and
foreseeable risk of serious and irreversible harm if removed to Rwanda. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Please read Clause 4 in FULL.</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">* Clause 5 *</span></b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 5 reflects UK government annoyance that the European Court of Human Rights (E Ct HR) issued an interim measure - (<a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2022/06/removal-to-rwanda-interim-measures.html">post 17 June 2022</a>). The E Ct HR has subsequently modified its stance regarding interim measures - see <a href="https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contact-or-visit-us/press-office/press-releases/european-court-of-human-rights-clarifies-its-procedure-on-interim-measures">Law Society 15 November 2023</a>..</p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 5 will apply where the E Ct HR indicates
an interim measure in proceedings relating to the intended removal of a
person to Rwanda under, or purportedly under, a provision
of, or made under, the Immigration Acts. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 5(2) states - <i>"It is for a Minister of the Crown (and only a Minister of the Crown) to decide
whether the United Kingdom will comply with the interim measure."</i></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 5(3) - "Accordingly, a court or tribunal must not have regard to the interim measure
when considering any application or appeal which relates to a decision to
remove the person to Rwanda under a provision of, or made
under, the Immigration Acts. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 5(4)(b) - a reference to a Minister of the Crown is to a Minister of the Crown
acting in person. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">* Other Clauses *</span></b></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Clause 6 Consequential provision, Clause 7 Interpretation, Clause 8 Extent, Clause 9 Commencement and transitional provision, and Clause 10 Short title. </p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []" style="text-align: center;"><b>***</b></p><div>To the annoyance of some of its more vociferous MPs, the government has <b>not </b>denounced the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which, in any event, has crucial importance in relation to the Northern Ireland Peace Process and also to the UK's Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the EU.</div><div><br /></div><div>Interestingly, it may be that the Bill would have gone further but for the fact that Rwanda said it would not agree to the scheme if the UK abandoned the human rights convention - <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/06/rwanda-uk-deportation-deal-international-laws-quit/">Rwanda says it would have quit deportation deal if UK ignored international human rights laws (telegraph.co.uk)</a></div><div><br /></div><div>That said, the Bill disapplies key sections of the Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to asylum claims. The legal consequences of that may yet come before the courts.</div><div><br /></div><div>Further, for all the Bill's assertions of parliamentary sovereignty, the UK's international law obligations remain in place. For instance, the Refugee Convention continues to apply to the UK on the international plane.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the event that an individual case reaches the E Ct HR and that court decides that an interim measure is appropriate then it appears that a Minister can just step in and say that the UK will not comply. That could result in a serious denial of justice for the individual in question and would. I believe, constitute a serious breach by the UK of its convention obligations.</div><div><br /></div><div>Please also see</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2023/12/06/the-rwanda-bill-and-its-constitutional-implications/">The Rwanda Bill and its constitutional implications – Public Law for Everyone</a></div><div> who comments that -<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i> " ... <span style="background-color: white; color: #404040;">the bill reveals an astounding level of hypocrisy in the sense that it is premised on a policy that presupposes that Rwanda will honour its obligations in international law while demonstrating that the UK is prepared to breach its own obligations."</span></i></span></div><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []"><a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/a-triumph-of-hope-over-experience">A triumph of hope over experience - by Joshua Rozenberg (substack.com)</a></p><p data-pm-slice="1 1 []">The Treaty has to be ratified by both States. The Bill has to pass through Parliament where it seems likely that some changes will be made.</p><div><a href="https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v45/n24/tom-hickman/rwanda-redux">Tom Hickman · Rwanda Redux (lrb.co.uk)</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/prime-ministers-emergency-asylum-legislation">What is in the prime minister’s ‘emergency’ asylum legislation? | Institute for Government</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://binghamcentre.biicl.org/publications/safety-of-rwanda-asylum-and-immigration-bill-a-preliminary-rule-of-law-analysis-for-house-of-commons-second-reading">Safety of Rwanda Bill - Preliminary Rule of Law Analysis (biicl.org)</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/a-novel-and-contentious-policy">A novel and contentious policy - by Joshua Rozenberg (substack.com)</a></div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Second Reading of the Bill - 12 December 2023:</span></i></b></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-12-12/debates/FA4DDF9F-19EF-4954-9BFA-6997E4A74E79/SafetyOfRwanda(AsylumAndImmigration)Bill">Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - Hansard - UK Parliament</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2023/dec/12/how-did-your-mp-vote-on-the-rwanda-bill">How did your MP vote on the Rwanda bill? | UK news | The Guardian</a></div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Third Reading of the Bill - 17 January 2023:</span></i></b></div><div><br /></div><div><div><a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-01-17/debates/5D699C11-620A-4804-97A6-E49E3F870A23/SafetyOfRwanda%28AsylumAndImmigration%29Bill">Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - Hansard - UK Parliament</a> (1)</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-01-17/debates/87C04B7F-2159-4F09-8825-3FC68BE13256/SafetyOfRwanda%28AsylumAndImmigration%29Bill">Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - Hansard - UK Parliament</a> (2)</div><div><br /></div><div>Recommended reading - George Peretz KC - <a href="https://georgeperetzkc.substack.com/p/legislating-a-lie-and-drafting-dishonesty?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2">Legislating lies and drafting dishonesty: the Safety of Rwanda Bill (substack.com)</a></div><div><br /></div><div>The Bill now moves to the House of Lords.</div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Other:</span></i></b></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></i></b></div><div><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/25/rwanda-flights-britain-reminded-of-obligation-to-obey-echr-orders">Rwanda flights: Britain reminded of obligation to obey ECHR orders | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68126734">Rwanda Bill criticised by peers at first stage in House of Lords - BBC News</a></div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Update - Lords amendments</span></i></b></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></i></b></div><div>The Bill was amended extensively by the House of Lords. The amendments and explanatory notes are at <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-04/0182/en/230182en.pdf">230182en.pdf (parliament.uk)</a>. The House of Commons, with the large majority held by the Conservative Party, rejected all the amendments.</div><div><br /></div><div>On 20 March 2024, the Bill was returned to the House of Lords but suffered further defeats - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/20/rwanda-bill-likely-to-be-stalled-at-least-till-april-after-seven-defeats-in-the-lords">Rwanda bill likely to be stalled at least till April after seven defeats in the Lords | Rishi Sunak | The Guardian</a></div></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-48799675641087114522023-11-28T17:11:00.000+00:002023-11-28T17:11:11.770+00:00Criminal Justice / Sentencing ~ New Bills <p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiph6CAGVaTnA0HqMFwnxk21S8_QAYxMaO3nnsNExqQGudUTyPj5CbMcTIPvlIahsQ1C75apgKyC1b5GbJgJAu2WxrJrdVx2GYhrGDamT0a01TUfJ2C0df-M1JN4_L6JNP-yhhvaRbelbOEOuzfIe1j3hujjamiY8kIf6ddgIH8Sf7oJ4ygo5YE0V4O20Qc/s912/Old%20Bailey%201.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="912" data-original-width="590" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiph6CAGVaTnA0HqMFwnxk21S8_QAYxMaO3nnsNExqQGudUTyPj5CbMcTIPvlIahsQ1C75apgKyC1b5GbJgJAu2WxrJrdVx2GYhrGDamT0a01TUfJ2C0df-M1JN4_L6JNP-yhhvaRbelbOEOuzfIe1j3hujjamiY8kIf6ddgIH8Sf7oJ4ygo5YE0V4O20Qc/w129-h200/Old%20Bailey%201.jpg" width="129" /></a></div>Following the King's Speech on 7 November 2023, the government introduced two Bills touching on criminal justice <p></p><p><a href="https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3510">Sentencing Bill</a> - and see <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sentencing-bill-2023">UK Government Policy Paper</a></p><p><a href="https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3511">Criminal Justice Bill</a> - and see <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-justice-bill-2023">UK Government Information</a> + <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/criminal-justice-bill-2023-factsheets">UK Government Factsheets</a>. There is also a <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9899/">House of Commons Library Research Briefing</a></p><p><b><i><span style="color: #990000;">Sentencing Bill:</span></i></b></p><p>This is a relatively short Bill of 11 Clauses and 3 Schedules. It makes provision relating to </p><p>1. Whole life orders <span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>2. Sexual offences attracting special custodial sentence for offenders of particular
concern </p><p>3. Special custodial sentence for sex offenders of particular concern aged under
18 at time of offence </p><p>4. Special custodial sentence for adult sex offenders of particular concern </p><p>5. Special custodial sentence for sex offenders of particular concern: service law</p><p>6. Duty to impose suspended sentence order for sentences of 12 months or less
Release of offenders </p><p>7. Removal of early release for certain sex offenders</p><p>8. Extension of home detention curfew </p><p><b><i><span style="color: #990000;">Criminal Justice Bill:</span></i></b></p><p>Offences related to things used in serious crime, theft or fraud - Clauses 1 -10</p><p>Offences of encouraging or assisting serious self-harm - Clauses 11 - 12</p><p>Offences relating to intimate photographs or films and voyeurism - Clause 13</p><p>Criminal liability of bodies corporate and partnerships - Clauses 15 to 21</p><p>Sentencing - Clauses 22 - 24</p><p>Transfer of prisoners to foreign prisons - Clauses 25 -29</p><p>Management of Offenders - Clauses 30 - 31</p><p>Proceeds of Crime - Clauses 32 - 33</p><p>Serious Crime Prevention Orders - Clauses 34 - 37</p><p>Nuisance begging etc - Clauses 38 - 50</p><p>Nuisance rough sleeping - Clauses 51 - 62 (and two supplemental clauses 63 - 64)</p><p>Antisocial Behaviour - Clauses 65 - 71</p><p>The Police - Clauses 73 - 74</p><p>General - Clauses 75 - 79.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: #990000;">Comments:</span></i></b></p><p>Analysis and commentary about aspects of these Bills will doubtless arise. I will try to add links below.</p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-31905597585665849922023-11-26T09:38:00.006+00:002023-11-29T08:57:24.231+00:00Bona Vacantia ~ Get a will drawn up !<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMrwQX1aNp_0exmIXjuvBfmhzbAihST2EimAMdkpPeGgf8Xzog6gJJGZpYUtS7fhLzFG4YnKdNSfO9HKkq580mSahckEvBNhyphenhyphenhfMOGg2w_YbpBsDmLtm2EsLd57Q8PpQGhvuMYUwYoqaAnE7B0olpx1BI1fN0c-ejaU-wvqTycZE3Zvdanmz3rp0-kYjFC/s800/Old%20Man%20Image.webp" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="534" data-original-width="800" height="134" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMrwQX1aNp_0exmIXjuvBfmhzbAihST2EimAMdkpPeGgf8Xzog6gJJGZpYUtS7fhLzFG4YnKdNSfO9HKkq580mSahckEvBNhyphenhyphenhfMOGg2w_YbpBsDmLtm2EsLd57Q8PpQGhvuMYUwYoqaAnE7B0olpx1BI1fN0c-ejaU-wvqTycZE3Zvdanmz3rp0-kYjFC/w200-h134/Old%20Man%20Image.webp" width="200" /></a></div><div>A legal topic known as <b><span style="color: #cc0000;">BONA VACANTIA</span></b> has resulted in much comment this week - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/how-royal-estates-use-bona-vacantia-to-collect-money-from-dead-people-king-charles">How royal estates use bona vacantia to collect money from dead people | King Charles III | The Guardian</a></div><div><br /></div><div>Let's imagine an elderly man Joe. He is 85, lives in a small house, he has a small "nest egg" and survives on low income. His wife died a couple of years ago but they had no children. There are no known relatives and Joe has <b>not</b> made a will but has often told a few friends that he wants what he owns to pass to a couple of charities supported by his late wife.</div><div><br /></div><div>When Joe dies, what will happen to his property? His <span><a name='more'></a></span>total <b>estate</b> is essentially the value of his small house which could easily be worth (say) about £200,000 at present values and also his small nest -egg (say £1500 in a building society account).</div><div> </div><div>This excellent "infographic" provided by Co-op Legal Services describes what might happen - <a href="https://assets.ctfassets.net/r0he32jel541/6jcsLA89TuwOwOrWEmHzYD/9165daaed0d6f45851e4c054e47442a6/LEG_COP86725_Intestacy_610876.pdf">Here's what happens to an estate when someone dies without making a will</a>. The inforgraphic has a RED column and it would be likely to apply to our fictitious Joe. </div><p>The result is that Joe's property would end up as Bona Vacantia and then pass either to the Crown (which is represented by HM Treasury) or, <i>for property in certain parts of the country</i>, to the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duchy of Cornwall.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/">Duchy of Lancaster</a> had, at the end of March 2023, £641.2m of net assets under its control - (<a href="https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/properties-and-estates/">Duchy lands and property</a>). King Charles III is Duke of Lancaster. The <a href="https://duchyofcornwall.org/">Duchy of Cornwall </a>is a similar arrangement with The Prince of Wales as Duke of Cornwall. The Duchy explains how it deals with <a href="https://duchyofcornwall.org/bona-vacantia.html">Bona vacantia</a>.</p><p>The moral of the story is clear enough. Make a will and then keep it up-to-date. By doing this, Joe could ensure that his property went to the charities and not to the Crown.</p><p><b>ALWAYS</b> get your will drawn up by a professional such as a solicitor who practises in this work. Most "high street" firms of solicitors do and they will be aware of the important legal requirements applicable to wills.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Additional Notes:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://thenbs.org/practical-support/bona-vacantia">Bona Vacantia: Guide to Ownerless Property & Assets (thenbs.org)</a></p><p>"Companies" can also be the subject of bona vacantia - e.g. <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2021/1524.html">Potier v Solicitor for the Affairs of Her Majesty's Treasury Crown Nominee for Bona Vacantia [2021] EWHC 1524 (Ch) (14 June 2021) (bailii.org)</a></p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/bona-vacantia">Bona Vacantia - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-74204750268594716502023-11-24T07:21:00.000+00:002023-11-24T07:21:23.038+00:00Truss - Her selection as Conservative Party leader<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidWPaccTw8t0co4jGk-Y_5yh0lKrjzThl6jm1f_d3pSSD2RAK43IygAK5gYPJLhD29m0ccRctOdMGbnSjp6mUDyxTs5-K0Mg0rmQTXeC0DAcLj_AiVELEY090fP3ft76ZvH9UoE_aOkutYlsJidotUp-0iNXnPnC8YASgs2N4SHA-Zh-Odp_hjPdifI8cP/s465/Downing%20Street%20door.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="310" data-original-width="465" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidWPaccTw8t0co4jGk-Y_5yh0lKrjzThl6jm1f_d3pSSD2RAK43IygAK5gYPJLhD29m0ccRctOdMGbnSjp6mUDyxTs5-K0Mg0rmQTXeC0DAcLj_AiVELEY090fP3ft76ZvH9UoE_aOkutYlsJidotUp-0iNXnPnC8YASgs2N4SHA-Zh-Odp_hjPdifI8cP/w200-h133/Downing%20Street%20door.png" width="200" /></a></div>Boris Johnson led the Conservative Party to election victory in December 2019 but resigned as party leader in July 2022. The background to that is in a previous post <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> - </span><a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2022/07/johnson-announces-his-departure.html" style="background-color: white; color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;"> Johnson announces his departure</a>. <p></p><p>His resignation required the party to choose a new leader and a lengthy process took place which culminated in a ballot of party members with Elizabeth Truss emerging as leader. As I wrote at the time, the effect was that there was <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2022/07/a-club-choosing-next-prime-minister.html">a "club" choosing the next Prime Minister?</a></p><p>On 6 September 2022, just two days before her death, Queen Elizabeth II duly appointed Truss as Prime Minister.</p><p>The appointment of Prime Minister is<span></span></p><a name='more'></a>, in law, a matter for the Sovereign but constitutional convention requires that the appointment goes to the individual best able to command the confidence of the House of Commons. For this reason, HM The Queen was not, in practice, free to appoint anyone other than Truss.<p></p><p>Truss resigned on 25 October 2022- (details in <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2022/09/appointments-lord-chancellor-attorney.html">this previous post</a>). It then fell to HM King Charles III to appoint her successor, Rishi Sunak MP, as Prime Minister. Sunak was also chosen by the Conservative Party but, in the event, a ballot of members was not required because he emerged as "winner" from ballots held by Conservative MPs in their 1922 committee.</p><p>Mr Justice Fordham, sitting in the High Court, has heard an application by Tortoise Media which seeks to bring a legal challenge against the Conservative Party after it declined to answer nine questions over the status and demographics of its members who chose Truss as leader in 2022.</p><p><a href="https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-party-facing-bid-to-bring-high-court-challenge-over-leadership-election/ar-AA1kqr7h">Tory party facing bid to bring High Court challenge over leadership election (msn.com)</a></p><p>The Conservative Party opposes the application arguing that its leadership election was not the exercise of a <b>public function or governmental power</b>. After all, says the party, it was the Queen who was responsible for appointing Truss. </p><p>Counsel for Tortoise Media (Alan Payne KC) argued that the case touched on <span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“fundamental matters of transparency and accountability” and related to “one of the least democratic aspects in the constitutional process in electing the Prime Minister”. Whilst Tortoise was not challenging the actual outcome of the leadership election, there was a public interest </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">in information relating to the integrity of the election process - e.g. "foreign influence, checks carried out to ensure that members are eligible to vote, confirmation as to whether members under the national voting age are able to vote in the election etc.”</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b; font-family: inherit;">One may have sympathy with the wish to have greater transparency of the process, this </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;">may be an area where angels fear to tread. </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;">The judge will hand down his decision in writing at a later date.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #2b2b2b;"><a href="https://www.tortoisemedia.com/">Home - Tortoise (tortoisemedia.com)</a></span></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-2288152051259842692023-11-22T14:02:00.002+00:002023-11-22T14:03:41.105+00:00Lucy Letby - fuller details of the Inquiry announced<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuiiXM7pYwuEG2c9BrJn36aB-mwhi7obSxEe24cEz9ECeunXMM6AJ6IWJwKKdaZR_YeCoYnBrN28fCqim86id2Lie4WG70YABUGf1-WbbnWSNkkBP1jDsqbjIrwGhrtASEniHDF7_jasZpPSHguGc6bIEwbE7IEr_09gfqj2BTNmP6LzHH50GPrSAhwkYw/s200/Countess%20of%20Chester%20Hospital.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="120" data-original-width="200" height="120" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuiiXM7pYwuEG2c9BrJn36aB-mwhi7obSxEe24cEz9ECeunXMM6AJ6IWJwKKdaZR_YeCoYnBrN28fCqim86id2Lie4WG70YABUGf1-WbbnWSNkkBP1jDsqbjIrwGhrtASEniHDF7_jasZpPSHguGc6bIEwbE7IEr_09gfqj2BTNmP6LzHH50GPrSAhwkYw/s1600/Countess%20of%20Chester%20Hospital.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>In August, Lucy Letby was sentence to a whole life order having been convicted of the the murders of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital - <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/08/letby-sentenced-to-whole-life-term.html">Law and Lawyers: Letby sentenced to Whole Life Term (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a><div><br /></div><div>An Inquiry was announced - see earlier post<div><p></p><p><a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/09/lady-justice-thirlwall-to-chair-letby.html">Law and Lawyers: Lady Justice Thirlwall to chair "Letby" inquiry (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a></p><p>The latest information, including terms of reference, may now be seen at the Inquiry website</p><p><a href="https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/">The Thirlwall Inquiry</a></p><p><br /></p></div></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-40099794464167842302023-11-15T11:38:00.002+00:002023-11-16T07:25:33.302+00:00Rwanda judgment 15 November 2023<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEIo9FEnqHF_7FzKCdZWlVXSAfqHReYvq-3o2sZ74EZcoQqxVaJV5gEmH8ZEO9qKaCglt6veqOxN7G7dpnpcFH3XAcemUxYLB5g3TZKcvQoGMzvMm6U_gM6j_ds4VPiifjCQUPG-FAmcdZOpGhNnzYRQgsL21P0ynmqLrB29p_uv0JWpRLRbj4W-VJ3xkW/s306/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" style="clear: left; display: inline; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="204" data-original-width="306" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEIo9FEnqHF_7FzKCdZWlVXSAfqHReYvq-3o2sZ74EZcoQqxVaJV5gEmH8ZEO9qKaCglt6veqOxN7G7dpnpcFH3XAcemUxYLB5g3TZKcvQoGMzvMm6U_gM6j_ds4VPiifjCQUPG-FAmcdZOpGhNnzYRQgsL21P0ynmqLrB29p_uv0JWpRLRbj4W-VJ3xkW/w200-h133/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><p></p><p><br />The UK Supreme Court has (unanimously) dismissed the Home Secretary’s appeal in the Rwanda cases. The court upheld the Court of Appeal's conclusion that the Rwanda policy is unlawful.</p><p>This is because there are
substantial grounds for believing that asylum seekers would face a real risk of ill-treatment by
reason of refoulement to their country of origin if they were removed to Rwanda. </p><p>Full details are on the court's website -</p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2023-0093.html">R (on the application of AAA and others) (Respondents/Cross Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant/Cross Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><p>Recation of Prime Minister (Rishi Sunak MP) - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/15/rishi-sunak-to-bring-in-emergency-law-after-courts-rwanda-ruling">Rishi Sunak to bring in emergency law after supreme court’s Rwanda ruling | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian</a></p><p>Reaction of Home Secretary (James Cleverly MP) - <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-11-15/debates/B5A7AB50-06A1-4504-8FCB-554338FB8FA7/IllegalImmigration">Illegal Immigration - Hansard - UK Parliament</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-8846559093675287402023-11-14T11:13:00.002+00:002023-11-29T08:54:42.108+00:00The Foreign Secretary in the House of Lords.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4vrnqztnYB-mN4WDvDt22XoIcU9PByPh3CeTKrzWQ8INUTcbcI5tBoYCxuqdokqWq2LpgRQ52tENKRQZXzk1gpG9MRVgeVSx3d-rXqgqIH7FBN7I23lDS2rRj4n1HsksHhcJTv9lMDZsGki_kIJaav-LVTzeRAnyCTRYC9uBJBO81cu6kNWGv9j2gtt27/s1600/Parliament%201.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1189" data-original-width="1600" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4vrnqztnYB-mN4WDvDt22XoIcU9PByPh3CeTKrzWQ8INUTcbcI5tBoYCxuqdokqWq2LpgRQ52tENKRQZXzk1gpG9MRVgeVSx3d-rXqgqIH7FBN7I23lDS2rRj4n1HsksHhcJTv9lMDZsGki_kIJaav-LVTzeRAnyCTRYC9uBJBO81cu6kNWGv9j2gtt27/w200-h149/Parliament%201.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><i><div><i><span style="color: red;">Update 29 November 2023</span></i></div><div style="font-weight: bold;"><b><i><br /></i></b></div><b>How </b></i><span style="color: #383838;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>can a prime minister make someone who isn’t an MP foreign secretary?</i></b> </span></span>It's a fair question to ask and the answer is set out in the article that asked the question -<p></p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/david-cameron-returns-how-can-a-prime-minister-make-someone-who-isnt-an-mp-foreign-secretary-and-what-happens-now-217601">David Cameron returns: how can a prime minister make someone who isn't an MP foreign secretary? And what happens now? (theconversation.com)</a></p><p>The elevation of former Prime Minister David Cameron to a life peerage is perfectly lawful though there are some questions about how and when the House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC) is involved in the process. </p><p>Cameron served <span></span></p><a name='more'></a>as Prime Minister from May 2010 to July 2016 but resigned in July 2016 when, having argued for remaining in the EU, the 2016 EU referendum went against him. He left Parliament in September the same year but now returns as a member of the House of Lords and will serve as Foreign Secretary.<p></p><p>Ministers, even those who attend Cabinet, may sit in the Lords. That is perfectly lawful and there are many previous examples but, in modern times, it has a somewhat unsatisfactory feel about it. Military conflict in Ukraine and in Israel / Palestine have placed UK foreign policy higher in the political agenda. How then will the elected House of Commons be able to scrutinise Cameron's work? Of course there are other Foreign and Commonwealth Office Ministers in the Commons but not the most senior Minister. The Speaker of the House of Commons has asked for clarification - (<a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-11-13/debates/65151760-0049-49D0-B746-6B8E1237643E/Speaker%E2%80%99SStatement">Statement 13 November 2023</a>).</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Update 29 November 2023:</span></i></b></p><p>This issue is to be considered by the House of Common Procedure Committee - <a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/work/8053/commons-scrutiny-of-secretaries-of-state-in-the-house-of-lords/">Commons scrutiny of Secretaries of State in the House of Lords - Committees - UK Parliament</a> which is undertaking an inquiry to explore options for MPs to effectively scrutinise Secretaries of State in the House of Lords and the work of their departments.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Some links:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://consoc.org.uk/the-constitution-explained/parliament/#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20role%20of%20the%20United%20Kingdom%E2%80%99s,activity%20and%20making%20sure%20it%20explains%20its%20decisions.">Parliament - The Constitution Society (consoc.org.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/the-commission-2">The Commission – House of Lords Appointments Commission (independent.gov.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/vetting-appointments-to-the-house-of-lords/">Vetting appointments to the House of Lords - House of Lords Library (parliament.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://consoc.org.uk/house-of-lords-appointment-commission/">House of Lords Appointment Commission (HOLAC) – Chronicle of a Death Foretold? - The Constitution Society (consoc.org.uk) July 2023</a></p><p><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/joining-and-leaving-house-lords#:~:text=Appointments%20through%20all%20these%20routes%20are%20overseen%20by,non-political.%20HOLAC%20leads%20on%20the%20nomination%20of%20these.">Joining and leaving the House of Lords | Institute for Government</a></p><p><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/direct-ministerial-appointments-house-lords">Direct ministerial appointments to the House of Lords | Institute for Government</a></p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/david-cameron-returns-how-can-a-prime-minister-make-someone-who-isnt-an-mp-foreign-secretary-and-what-happens-now-217601">David Cameron returns: how can a prime minister make someone who isn't an MP foreign secretary? And what happens now? (theconversation.com)</a></p><p><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Accountability_modern_government_WEB.pdf">Accountability_modern_government_WEB.pdf (instituteforgovernment.org.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/peerages-awarded-to-former-prime-ministers/">Peerages awarded to former UK prime ministers - House of Lords Library (parliament.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/browse/?part=1&chapter=1">Erskine May - UK Parliament</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-10721505677386698382023-11-12T10:13:00.008+00:002023-11-16T09:28:38.031+00:00Rwanda judgment to be handed down on 15 November 2023 <p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt4JlsB9xxlFxutdI2XTLVMRKT96DGMupzY0v-_hLkfLJFu3mUoEvLFnH0Wyf-OlxLOaeL_Jjt6QYDtMkEcj8MnI-mByakDwwurAE7J1PkGoXogMqsh-cpL8bZzKvPUvmMRneUttIq3aURdh8q76rNxEQ8Lq68thB-L-ms2fZjIt8axfpeVe4s6zwNUcdg/s1199/UK%20Supreme%20Court.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1199" height="134" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt4JlsB9xxlFxutdI2XTLVMRKT96DGMupzY0v-_hLkfLJFu3mUoEvLFnH0Wyf-OlxLOaeL_Jjt6QYDtMkEcj8MnI-mByakDwwurAE7J1PkGoXogMqsh-cpL8bZzKvPUvmMRneUttIq3aURdh8q76rNxEQ8Lq68thB-L-ms2fZjIt8axfpeVe4s6zwNUcdg/w200-h134/UK%20Supreme%20Court.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>On Wednesday 15 November the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom will hand down its judgment in what may be referred to as the Rwanda appeals.<p></p><p>The court has published further details of the appeals - <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2023-0093.html">R (on the application of AAA and others) (Respondents/Cross Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant/Cross Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><p>The judgment appealed is at <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2023/745.html">AAA (Syria) & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev1) [2023] EWCA Civ 745 (29 June 2023) (bailii.org)</a> </p><p>and this was itself an appeal from the High Court - <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2022/3230.html">AAA v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rwanda) [2022] EWHC 3230 (Admin) (19 December 2022) (bailii.org)</a></p><p>The Court of Appeal judgment is discussed on this blog at <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/06/aaa-v-secretary-of-state-for-home.html">Law and Lawyers: A note on AAA v Secretary of State for the Home Department ~ removals to Rwanda (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a></p><p>The current Home Secretary (Suella Braverman KC MP) doubtless has a lot of political capital riding on the outcome. </p><p>A government "win" will probably<span></span></p><a name='more'></a>encourage the government to put into practice its agreement with Rwanda at the earliest possible moment. If the government "loses" then there will doubtless be further cries from some politicians for the UK to denounce the European Convention on Human Rights.<p></p><p>In truth, whatever the outcome, the judgment will be unlikely to give the government a blank cheque to just simply remove individuals to Rwanda. In every single case it is likely that the decision will require that a deportation is lawful <b><i>in the particular case</i></b> and, if it is, the government will have to ensure that <b><i>procedural safeguards</i></b> are applied scrupulously.</p><p>We shall see ..... I leave comment about Braverman's political position to those who write and comment about politics !</p><p>Here is a list of the appeals as published by the court .....</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEPrN4KcIkUKXjyyjuTo-QG-M7muAtb5gRRjKa-2aXuQwgmCsxzuR7ddXaXfLt6zPE8adDk7Vzmin5UpZhc1HMdh5sgSB-q6d3S3ye7pJoTW7R1jV-ZV-eq3lo80Q0pNTvNo9-Gi1hieOU7uFFNQKlqE5sClUu5XDrwyL-OVS3bSxWgwtzjWr5HHpzxVlO/s590/Rwanda%20appeals.PNG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="367" data-original-width="590" height="233" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEPrN4KcIkUKXjyyjuTo-QG-M7muAtb5gRRjKa-2aXuQwgmCsxzuR7ddXaXfLt6zPE8adDk7Vzmin5UpZhc1HMdh5sgSB-q6d3S3ye7pJoTW7R1jV-ZV-eq3lo80Q0pNTvNo9-Gi1hieOU7uFFNQKlqE5sClUu5XDrwyL-OVS3bSxWgwtzjWr5HHpzxVlO/w374-h233/Rwanda%20appeals.PNG" width="374" /></a></div><br /><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Update 16 November 2023:</span></i></b></p><p>Braverman left the government on 13 November and was replaced as Home Secretary by James Cleverly MP.</p><p><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-90292872711982767862023-11-09T09:30:00.007+00:002023-11-10T10:12:15.154+00:00May Sir Mark Rowley stop a planned Armistice Day protest?<div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCmCkQ-Jrg7mPL2ZqmBUx2kDy206R-jVBsaMwIrCyHGq7i6h0F9ivbX77Eumh26hRUIaC3ZwDL3750eLUpntBw8dUsIIDZtnPzm2Ic592kzrA9I10Y_oLgv_eGaaAo-sGPgGQ_qEGd49iPBmmHQLCTAMrD7DYbfCjTndDDS8mmtUQCY7ltysz9TTrWV6w-/s976/Palestine%20protest%202021.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="549" data-original-width="976" height="113" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCmCkQ-Jrg7mPL2ZqmBUx2kDy206R-jVBsaMwIrCyHGq7i6h0F9ivbX77Eumh26hRUIaC3ZwDL3750eLUpntBw8dUsIIDZtnPzm2Ic592kzrA9I10Y_oLgv_eGaaAo-sGPgGQ_qEGd49iPBmmHQLCTAMrD7DYbfCjTndDDS8mmtUQCY7ltysz9TTrWV6w-/w200-h113/Palestine%20protest%202021.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>Huge controversy has arisen over plans to hold a "Pro-Palestine" protest in London on Saturday 11 November 2023. The date is significant because it is "<a href="https://www.britishlegion.org.uk/get-involved/remembrance/about-remembrance/armistice-day">Armistice Day</a>." </div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-palestine-protest-london-route-map-b2444309.html">Pro-Palestine protest route: Saturday’s Armistice Day protest in London mapped | The Independent</a></div><div><br /></div><div>It will not be the first such protest in London - e.g. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/21/about-100000-turn-out-in-london-for-pro-palestine-rally">About 100,000 turn out in London for pro-Palestine rally | Israel-Hamas war | The Guardian 21 October 2023</a></div><div><br /></div><div>The Metropolitan Police Commissioner (Sir Mark Rowley) has clearly decided that the legal conditions required to actually prohibit a procession are <b><u>not</u></b> met - <a href="https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/armistice-day-demo-to-go-ahead-as-law-gives-no-absolute-power-for-ban-met-362605/">Armistice Day demo will go ahead - Met Police (thelondoneconomic.com)</a></div><div><br /></div><div>Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said that the planned marches are "disrespectful" and that his job is to hold the Metropolitan Police Commissioner accountable for his decision - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/08/sunak-vows-to-hold-met-chief-accountable-over-armistice-day-march">Sunak to hold Met chief ‘accountable’ for decision not to ban pro-Palestine march | Metropolitan police | The Guardian</a>. </div><div>Precisely what the Prime Minister had in mind when he spoke of "accountable" is not clear. The Commissioner is supposedly independent of the government regarding operational decisions.</div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Law:</span></i></b></div><div><br /></div><div>1] The European Convention on Human Rights Articles<span><a name='more'></a></span> 10 and 11 are concerned, respectively, with with Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association - <a href="https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/human-rights-act/article-11-freedom-assembly-and-association">Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association | EHRC (equalityhumanrights.com)</a>. These rights are "convention rights" for the purposes of the<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents"> Human Rights Act 1998</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>2] The <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/contents">Public Order Act 1986</a> (Part II) deals with Public Processions and Assemblies. The rules relating to each of those forms of protest have similarities but there are some significant differences.</div><div><br /></div><div>3] The Police must normally be given advance notice of planned processions (<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/11">section 11</a>) and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/12">section 12</a> permits the Police to <b>impose conditions</b> on a procession. The "Senior Police Officer" must reasonably believe that the procession may "<span style="font-family: inherit;">result <span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;">in serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community." Any conditions must appear to the Senior Police Officer to be necessary to prevent such disorder, damage, disruption, impact or intimidation and conditions may be applied to the procession route and may prohibit a procession from entering any public place specified.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: justify;">A power to prohibit processions is in </span><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/13" style="font-family: inherit; text-align: justify;">section 13</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: justify;">. Section 13(4) states -</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"> "</span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;">If at any time the Commissioner of Police for the City of London or the<b> Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis</b> reasonably believes that, because of particular circumstances existing in his police area or part of it, the powers under section 12 will not be sufficient to prevent the holding of public processions in that area or part from resulting in serious public disorder, he <b>may with the consent of the Secretary of State</b> make an order prohibiting for such period not exceeding 3 months as may be specified in the order the holding of all public processions (or of any class of public procession so specified) in the area or part concerned."</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;">Hence, there is a power to prohibit processions but the consent of the Secretary of State is required before the Police can make an order. That is, in practice, the Home Secretary. </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: justify;">Constitutionally, the Home Secretary would be answerable to Parliament for any part played in imposing a prohibition.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;">4] Public Assemblies are the subject of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/14">section 14</a>. It is a lengthy section enabling conditions to be applied by the Police to public assembles with a view to preventing serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the community.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"><br /></span></span></div><div>That appears to be the relevant law. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner is within his legal rights to assess the plans for any protest and it is for him to decide whether conditions will suffice to meet any concerns about possible disorder. With the Home Secretary's consent, an order prohibiting processions is possible - (subject to section 13).</div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">Terrorism:</span></i></b></div><div><br /></div><div>The <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/part/II">Terrorism Act 2000</a> proscribes certain organisations and one of them is Hamas <span style="font-family: inherit;">(<span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;">Harakat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah)</span></span><span face=""GDS Transport", arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; font-size: 1.1875rem;"> - </span><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2/proscribed-terrorist-groups-or-organisations-accessible-version">Proscribed terrorist groups or organisations - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/part/II/crossheading/offences">Sections 11 to 13</a> of the 2000 Act provide for various offences relating proscribed organisations including supporting such organisations. The penalties can be severe - including in some instances up to 14 years imprisonment.</div><div><br /></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;">End notes/links:</span></i></b></div><div><b><i><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></i></b></div><div><span>October 2023 - protest - </span><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/21/about-100000-turn-out-in-london-for-pro-palestine-rally">About 100,000 turn out in London for pro-Palestine rally | Israel-Hamas war | The Guardian</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/18/israel/palestine-videos-hamas-led-attacks-verified">Israel/Palestine: Videos of Hamas-Led Attacks Verified | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)</a></div><div><br /></div><div>On 27 October, the UN General Assembly called for a humanitarian truce. The UK government abstained. <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142932">Gaza crisis: General Assembly adopts resolution calling for ‘humanitarian truce’, civilian protection | UN News</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-palestine-protest-london-route-map-b2444309.html">Pro-Palestine protest route: Saturday’s Armistice Day protest in London mapped | The Independent</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/06/pro-palestine-rallies-hate-marches-solidarity-helplessness-frustration">Pro-Palestine rallies aren’t ‘hate marches’ – they’re an expression of solidarity, helplessness and frustration | Nesrine Malik | The Guardian</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/suella-braverman-pro-palestine-protest-ban-met-police-5wrhtkf2k">Suella Braverman brands Met Police biased over pro-Palestinian protest (thetimes.co.uk)</a> - £</div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-29564876717519738402023-10-11T10:59:00.015+01:002024-02-29T17:37:56.326+00:00A trip around the Inquiries ~ An Update<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPviMYpISu0TIAmsQ7yakWt_0lIUaRo1Vlep47HMLfHygp_u_U3SzRy0pE2QgdAA5YeBiP7Vubda7B1eOtVIshFsMHOKgyUBOTy_CIxazyA9icz7RkN8aeHQpxTBEst6qmOJP1Ajp79WHz5DFir9Dpfl5zdLpqM-2V2MTiOL7kx5hrND4bkHnPYSjmvBAT/s1600/Inquiry%20Image.webp" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1158" data-original-width="1600" height="145" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPviMYpISu0TIAmsQ7yakWt_0lIUaRo1Vlep47HMLfHygp_u_U3SzRy0pE2QgdAA5YeBiP7Vubda7B1eOtVIshFsMHOKgyUBOTy_CIxazyA9icz7RkN8aeHQpxTBEst6qmOJP1Ajp79WHz5DFir9Dpfl5zdLpqM-2V2MTiOL7kx5hrND4bkHnPYSjmvBAT/w200-h145/Inquiry%20Image.webp" width="200" /></a></div><br /><b><i><span style="color: red;">Updated 13 October 2023 and 26 October 2023</span></i></b><div><span style="color: red;"><b><i>Also 29 February 2024<br /></i></b></span><div><br /><div>What do we think when the word Inquiry is mentioned? Is an Inquiry a useful fact-finding exercise leading to the Inquiry Chair (who is usually, but not always, a judge or retired judge) making recommendations which government is then free to accept or reject? Or, are inquiries just a way for politicians to push difficult issues aside albeit at sometimes huge expense to the public purse?<p></p><p>In March 2018, the estimable Institute for Government (IfG) published an analysis of such questions - <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/public-inquiries">Public inquiries | Institute for Government</a>.</p><p>Whatever stance one takes on Inquiries in general, the fact is that there are several on-going inquiries as well as some that have recently completed their task. Here is a brief round-up.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Afghanistan:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.iia.independent-inquiry.uk/" style="font-family: inherit;">Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan – Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan (iia.independent-inquiry.uk)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">On 15 December 2022 the Secretary of State for Defence <span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><span style="font-family: inherit;">announced the Government’s decision to formally establish an independent Inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 to investigate certain matters arising from the deployment of British armed forces to <b>Afghanistan</b> between mid-2010 and mid-2013. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">The terms of reference were updated on 19 September 2023 to reflect the confirmation from the Secretary of State for Defence that United Kingdom Special Forces were involved in the matters which are being investigated. This </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Inquiry is chaired by the </span><a href="https://www.iia.independent-inquiry.uk/about-us/" style="font-family: inherit;">Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Haddon-Cave</a> and commenced hearings this week.<p></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">The allegations are that numerous unlawful killings were carried out by members of the Special Forces in Afghanistan and that these were covered up. Further, it is said that the subsequent investigations by the Royal Military Police were inadequate.</p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">Haddon-Cave intends to hear as much evidence as he can in public but it will be necessary to have <b>closed hearings</b> to ensure the protection of sensitive material and the security of witnesses. Special Advocates are likely to be used and there may be restrictions on what can be published.</p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Covid-19:</span></i></b></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/">UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">Here is an Inquiry which looks set to last for a long time. The costs will be huge. The Inquiry has adopted a modular approach to its task and the Chair - Baroness Hallett - has promised reports at the various stages. The first 4 modules are - </span><span face=""Proxima Nova", system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, sans-serif" style="color: #212529; font-size: 24.4048px;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/modules/resilience-and-preparedness/" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0b0c0c; text-decoration-color: var(--colour-link-decoration); text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-underline-offset: 0.25em;">Resilience and preparedness (Module 1)</a><span style="color: #212529;">, </span><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/modules/core-uk-decision-making-and-political-governance-module-2/" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0b0c0c; text-decoration-color: var(--colour-link-decoration); text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-underline-offset: 0.25em;">Core UK decision-making and political governance (Module 2)</a><span style="color: #212529;">, </span><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/modules/impact-of-covid-19-pandemic-on-healthcare-systems-in-the-4-nations-of-the-uk/" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0b0c0c; text-decoration-color: var(--colour-link-decoration); text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-underline-offset: 0.25em;">Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on healthcare (Module 3)</a><span style="color: #212529;"> and </span><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/modules/vaccines-and-therapeutics-module-4/" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0b0c0c; text-decoration-color: var(--colour-link-decoration); text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-underline-offset: 0.25em;">Vaccines and therapeutics (Module 4)</a><span style="color: #212529;">.</span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #212529;">Public hearings for Module 2 commenced on 3 October. </span></span><a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/hearings/core-uk-decision-making-and-political-governance-module-2-public-hearings/" style="background-color: transparent;">Core UK Decision-making and Political Governance (Module 2) – Public Hearings - UK Covid-19 Inquiry (covid19.public-inquiry.uk)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.itv.com/news/2023-10-03/boris-johnson-faces-particular-scrutiny-as-covid-inquiry-continues">'No 10 chaos as usual': Whatsapp messages read at Covid-19 inquiry expose 'toxic' government | ITV News</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #212529;">It cannot be denied that the topics under examination are highly important but public concern appears to be more centred on the millions in public funds spent on PPE via a fast-track contract process. That is too extensive a topic to examine in any detail here but vast sums of public money were handed to supposed PPE manufacturers and, in some cases, to newly created companies with no proven track-record of manufacturing this equipment.</span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #212529;">A further concern is the on-going health effects of Covid-19 (and its variants) and the possible health impact of the continuing programme of vaccinations.</span></span></p><p style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: white; color: #404040; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;">The World Health Organization is now seeking a new Pandemic Preparedness Treaty which is currently in draft form. The proposal is explained in this House of Commons Library publication - </span><a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9550/" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0;">What is the proposed WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty?</a></span> and <span style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;">What is referred to as the “Conceptual Zero Draft” is </span><a href="https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb3/A_INB3_3-en.pdf" rel="nofollow ugc noopener" style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;">available HERE</a><span style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; font-family: inherit;">.. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">If such a Treaty is ultimately adopted, nation States may find that they have much less individual decision-making powers to deal with any future pandemic. Little has been said about this by British politicians.</span></p><p style="--tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; background-color: white; color: #404040; line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0 0 var(--size-20) 0;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Horizon - Post Office IT:</span></i></b></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/about-inquiry">About the Inquiry | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry (postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry is led by retired high court judge Sir Wyn Williams.. The Inquiry was set up on 29 September 2020 but was then a non-statutory inquiry. It became a statutory inquiry from 1 June 2021.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">Sir Wyn is tasked with ensuring there is a public summary of the failings which occurred with the Horizon IT system at the Post Office leading to the suspension, termination of subpostmasters’ contracts, prosecution and conviction of subpostmasters. The Inquiry will look to establish a clear account of the implementation and failings of the system over its lifetime (a period of over 20 years).</span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Letby:</span></i></b></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;"><a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/09/lady-justice-thirlwall-to-chair-letby.html">Law and Lawyers: Lady Justice Thirlwall to chair "Letby" inquiry (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a>. The Inquiry will be statutory although the original government view was that it would be non-statutory. Lady Justice Thirlwall has been appointed as Chair. Terms of Reference have yet to be issued.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Andrew Malkinson case:</i></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">Update 13/10/23 - When first published, this post omitted to mention that an inquiry was announced relating to the Andrew Malkinson case. </span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;"><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-orders-independent-inquiry-into-handling-of-andrew-malkinson-case"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Government orders independent inquiry into handling of Andrew Malkinson case - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</span></a></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">The ICLR's weekly notes state - </span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">"</span><span style="color: #1a202c;">There will also be an </span><a class="af md" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-orders-independent-inquiry-into-handling-of-andrew-malkinson-case" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" style="box-shadow: none; box-sizing: border-box; color: #6fb5d7; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">independent inquir</a><span style="color: #1a202c;">y into the circumstances and handling of </span><a class="af md" href="https://appeal.org.uk/andy-malkinson#" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" style="box-shadow: none; box-sizing: border-box; color: #6fb5d7; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">Andy Malkinson’s case</a><span style="color: #1a202c;">, after his conviction was finally quashed by the Court of Appeal in July, for which he spent over 17 years in prison, in view of new DNA evidence implicating another suspect: see </span><span class="pg" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #1a202c;">R v Malkinson (Andrew)</span><span style="color: #1a202c;"> </span><a class="af md" href="https://www.iclr.co.uk/document/2023005016/2023ewcacrim954_TNA/html" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" style="box-shadow: none; box-sizing: border-box; color: #6fb5d7; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">[2023] EWCA Crim 954</a><span style="color: #1a202c;">, CA.</span></span></i></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph nu nv fo nw b gm on ny nz gp oo ob oc nh op oe of nl oq oh oi np or ok ol om fh bj" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="ef65" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #1a202c; line-height: 1.4rem; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">The inquiry will investigate the handling and the role of Greater Manchester Police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Criminal Cases Review Commission in his conviction and subsequent appeals to ensure lessons are learned from the significant miscarriage of justice he has suffered."</span></i></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;"><a href="https://www.iclr.co.uk/blog/weekly-notes/weekly-notes-legal-news-from-iclr-2-october-2023/">Weekly Notes: legal news from ICLR, 2 October 2023 - ICLR</a></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">See also</p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/13/police-watchdog-to-investigate-handling-of-andrew-malkinson-case">Police watchdog to investigate handling of Andrew Malkinson case | Police | The Guardian</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/our-work/investigations/andrew-malkinson-greater-manchester-police">Andrew Malkinson - Greater Manchester Police | Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">The government announcement (24 August) of this inquiry stated that - <i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"<span style="color: #0b0c0c;">After careful consideration, and consultation with other bodies, a non-statutory inquiry was found to be the most appropriate option, building on the approach taken in other individual cases."</span></span></i></p><p style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.31579; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 20px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">One wonders whether a non-statutory inquiry will prove to be satisfactory particularly in the event that difficulties arise with evidence from the Police, We must wait and see. This concern is discussed at - </span><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/18/andrew-malkinson-says-wrongful-conviction-inquiry-should-be-statutory" style="background-color: transparent;">Andrew Malkinson says wrongful rape conviction inquiry should be statutory | Police | The Guardian</a></p><p style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.31579; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 20px;">26 October - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/andrew-malkinson-inquiry-terms-of-reference/andrew-malkinson-inquiry-terms-of-reference" style="background-color: transparent;">Andrew Malkinson Inquiry: terms of reference - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p><p style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.31579; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 20px;">26 October - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/judge-appointed-to-chair-independent-malkinson-inquiry">Judge appointed to chair independent Malkinson Inquiry - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a></p><p style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.31579; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 20px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">Other Inquiries:</span></i></b></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">The <a href="https://www.ucpi.org.uk/about-the-inquiry/">Undercover Policing Inquiry</a> was set up in 2015. </p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">Evidence for "<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #022d40; font-family: Lato; font-size: 16px;">Tranche 1: Special Demonstration Squad officers and managers and those affected by deployments (1968–1982)’</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #022d40; font-family: Lato; font-size: 16px;"> </span> was heard in phases from November 2020 to May 2022 and an interim report was issued in June 2023. - <a href="https://www.ucpi.org.uk/2023/06/15/undercover-policing-inquirys-tranche-1-interim-report-to-be-published/">Undercover Policing Inquiry’s Tranche 1 interim report to be published - Undercover Policing Inquiry (ucpi.org.uk)</a>.</p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #022d40; font-family: Lato; font-size: 16px;">The Inquiry has announced its intention to commence its Tranche 2 evidence hearings from Monday 1 July 2024. </span><span style="color: #022d40; font-family: Lato; font-size: 16px;">In these hearings, the Inquiry will hear from undercover officers, non-state witnesses and those in the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) supervisory chain of command between approximately 1983 to 1992.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #022d40; font-family: Lato; font-size: 16px;">The Grenfell Tower Fire Inquiry has also been going for some time - </span><a href="https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/" style="background-color: transparent;">Homepage | Grenfell Tower Inquiry</a>. It was set up following the Grenfell, Tower Fire in Kensington (London) on 14 June 2017. The Chair is retired Court of Appeal judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick. A four volume report for Phase 1 was issued in October 2019 - <a href="https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/phase-1-report" style="background-color: transparent;">Phase 1 report | Grenfell Tower Inquiry</a>. Hearings for Phase 2 have been completed but a report has yet to appear. See the <a href="https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/news/september-2023-newsletter" style="background-color: transparent;">September 2023 Newsletter | Grenfell Tower Inquiry</a></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;">25 November 2023 - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/25/grenfell-tower-inquiry-final-report-delayed-again">Grenfell Tower inquiry’s final report on cause of disaster delayed again | Grenfell Tower inquiry | The Guardian</a></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/25/the-guardian-view-on-grenfells-aftermath-the-investigations-are-taking-too-long">The Guardian view on Grenfell’s aftermath: the investigations are taking too long | Editorial | The Guardian</a></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 1.5; margin: 24px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">The Infected Blood Inquiry - </span><a href="https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/reports">Reports | Infected Blood Inquiry</a><span style="color: #0b0c0c;"> - was announced in July 2017 and Sir Brian Langstaff appointed as Chair in February 2018. Public hearings have concluded and two interim reprost issued and also a </span><a href="https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/reports/infected-blood-compensation-framework-study">Compensation Framework Study</a><span style="color: #0b0c0c;"> by Sir Robert Francis KC - </span><a href="https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/reports" style="background-color: transparent;">Reports | Infected Blood Inquiry</a><span style="color: #0b0c0c;">. The Study was commissioned by the government in 2021.</span></p><h2 class="og mo fo be mp oh oi oj ms ok ol om mv ns on oo op nw oq or os oa ot ou ov ow bj" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="1966" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #6fb5d7; font-family: Quattrocento, serif; font-size: 2rem; line-height: 1.2; margin: 2rem 0px 1.8rem;"><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse</span></i></b> - final report -</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> </span><a href="https://www.iicsa.org.uk/final-report" style="background-color: transparent; color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;">The Report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse | IICSA Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse</a><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> and the government's response - </span><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/response-to-the-final-report-of-the-independent-inquiry-into-child-sexual-abuse" style="background-color: transparent; color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;">Response to the final report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">.</span></h2><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">The Manchester Arena Inquiry final report issued in </span></i></b></span><span style="font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"><b><i><span style="color: red;">March 2023</span></i></b> - </span><a href="https://manchesterarenainquiry.org.uk/reports/" style="color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;">Reports – Manchester Arena Inquiry</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;"> and see </span><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/manchester-arena-inquiry-reports" style="color: #7800f3; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px; text-decoration-line: none;">Manchester Arena Inquiry reports - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a>.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Finally:</span></i></b></p><p>The Institute for Government has published an interesting piece - <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/comment/inquiry-everyone-forgot">The inquiry that everyone forgot | Institute for Government</a>. The article refers to the Northern Ireland Hyponatraemia Inquiry - <a href="https://www.ihrdni.org/index-1.htm">Home | Inquiry Into Hyponatraemia-related Deaths (ihrdni.org)</a>. </p><p>The IfG notes -<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i> "<span style="background-color: white; color: #1c2b39;">The reasons for the duration are ones that all inquiries can learn from. The most significant delays are those resulting from conflicts with police investigations. By law, inquiries cannot determine criminality, and so often give way to other investigations and court cases to avoid compromising efforts to deliver justice. In this case, however, the proceedings of the inquiry were deferred from 2005 until 2008 – a period during which no prosecutions were actually launched."</span></i></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1c2b39;">The IfG also comments that this Inquiry took <i>'nearly</i></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1c2b39;"><i> a year longer than the Saville Inquiry into Bloody Sunday, which is infamous for its excessive length and cost. Inquiries should not take this long; doing so is not only a staggering drain on public resources, it also prolongs the uncertainty and suffering of those affected.'</i></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1c2b39;">The Bloody Sunday Inquiry was created by Prime Minister Blair in January 1998 and finally reported (10 Volumes) in June 2010 - </span></span><a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2010/06/saville-bloody-sunday-report-is-issued.html">Law and Lawyers: The Saville (Bloody Sunday) Report is issued (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a>. Inquiry costs were reportedly £195 million. It was chaired by Lord Saville of Newdigate -see <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/about/former-justices.html">Former Justices - The Supreme Court</a>.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Addition 29 February 2024:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.angiolini.independent-inquiry.uk/">The Angiolini Inquiry</a> <span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">the murder of Sarah Everard. </span></span></p></div></div></div>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-32376417524066332802023-10-06T07:35:00.000+01:002023-10-06T07:35:06.813+01:00R v Jaswant Singh Chail<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyvh8oS7kqN_tK4DYmSS6M68eVxZ-ufojXOJWxNpq4DBAOyvZHj7hVHQNohsKo_9TRJa_mluPpcolGgRBXZyZENJgL4DDtDOTr1cmYi7UJ9GlUyGuGu9KqT2vi_LdSmBYq5S_u_0MEGVebS_kW9evU-Tcj9QjiCLSBTbZXA0P1SuEm3SoIi-pkyyYBgAMt/s2250/Old%20Bailey.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2250" data-original-width="1500" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyvh8oS7kqN_tK4DYmSS6M68eVxZ-ufojXOJWxNpq4DBAOyvZHj7hVHQNohsKo_9TRJa_mluPpcolGgRBXZyZENJgL4DDtDOTr1cmYi7UJ9GlUyGuGu9KqT2vi_LdSmBYq5S_u_0MEGVebS_kW9evU-Tcj9QjiCLSBTbZXA0P1SuEm3SoIi-pkyyYBgAMt/w133-h200/Old%20Bailey.jpg" width="133" /></a></div>On Christmas Day 2021, Jaswant Singh Chail (then aged 18) was arrested in a private part of the grounds of Windsor Castle in possession of a loaded crossbow. This part of the castle and grounds is never open to the general public. <p></p><p>In February 2023, Chail pleaded guilty to three offeices - </p><p>1) - Attempting to injure or alarm the Sovereign on 25th December 2021, contrary to
section 2 of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/5-6/51/contents">Treason Act 1842</a>. The maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years’
imprisonment. </p><p>2) - Having an offensive weapon, contrary to section 1 of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/1-2/14/contents">Prevention of Crime Act 1953</a>. The maximum penalty for this offence is 4 years’ imprisonment. </p><p>3) - Making threats to kill, contrary to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/100/section/16">section 16 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861</a>. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years’ imprisonment. </p><p>On 5 October 2023, Chail came before Mr Justice Hilliard for sentencing.</p><p>On Count 1 - 44 months’ imprisonment. </p><p>On Count 2 - 16 months’ imprisonment. </p><p>On Count 3 - 48 months’ imprisonment, with an extended licence period of 5 years. </p><p>The total sentences amount to 9 years’ custody with a further licence period of 5 years.</p><p>Sentencing Remarks have been published - <a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/r-v-chail/">R -v- Chail - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary</a></p><p>These are of particular legal interest because <span></span></p><a name='more'></a>of the application by the judge of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/20/contents">Mental Health Act 1983</a> including the making of directions under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/20/section/45A">section 45A</a> (Power of higher courts to make hospital admission) - usually referred to as a "Hybrid Order".<p></p><p>A full reading of the 18 pages of the sentencing remarks informs us of the psychiatric evidence available to the judge. </p><p>The judge also shows - at para 109 - that he was concerned with the eventual release of the defendant from custody. The judge said - " I am satisfied that on the defendant’s anticipated release from custody,
the particular circumstances of the case and its gravity are such that his state of mental
health and the arrangements to monitor him are likely to receive the most careful attention." ... and later ... "Conditions can be attached to any grant of a parole licence. It is likely that any community monitoring process would involve <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multi-agency-public-protection-arrangements-mappa-guidance">Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements</a>."</p><p>It was accepted by the defence that the
defendant poses a future risk of the kind that justifies an extended sentence on
Count 3 and the imposition of a further licence period, pursuant to sections 279 and 280 of
the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/contents">Sentencing Act 2020</a>. The judge considered that this concession was rightly made. <i>"At its simplest, the defendant harboured
homicidal thoughts which he acted upon before he became psychotic. There is a significant risk to members of the public of serious harm occasioned by the commission by the
defendant of further specified offences." </i>(Sentencing remarks at para 110).</p><p><br /></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-87507127456740362762023-10-02T17:08:00.001+01:002023-10-04T08:56:04.236+01:00Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfjo2xkXE0YaK3trS5GJZtb2rynv4-qD86EzcRYcmZXzZtFYxiX7pPxE2cq0rsCOUucA13iDLj2m11Ulxg4TVz895aPTAkJPCKj1qNMp1nprks1_kmGiwChBGz4B5HggvRs5hzRIyTdrXoDGzz8v-Si6IOhhyphenhyphen830zGWOXboCLWfVH6SnAPMJesiOIHGf7h/s248/High%20Court%20Strand.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="140" data-original-width="248" height="140" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfjo2xkXE0YaK3trS5GJZtb2rynv4-qD86EzcRYcmZXzZtFYxiX7pPxE2cq0rsCOUucA13iDLj2m11Ulxg4TVz895aPTAkJPCKj1qNMp1nprks1_kmGiwChBGz4B5HggvRs5hzRIyTdrXoDGzz8v-Si6IOhhyphenhyphen830zGWOXboCLWfVH6SnAPMJesiOIHGf7h/s1600/High%20Court%20Strand.jpg" width="248" /></a></div><br />Monday 2 October 2023 saw the swearing in of Dame Sue Carr as Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales.<p></p><p><a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/dame-sue-carr-sworn-in-as-lady-chief-justice/">Dame Sue Carr sworn in as Lady Chief Justice - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary</a> </p><p><a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/06/judiciary-next-lord-chief-justice-of.html">Law and Lawyers: Judiciary ~ The next Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a></p><p><a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/">A Lawyer Writes | Joshua Rozenberg | Substack 2 October 2023</a></p><p>This appointment has been welcomed and it is the first time that a female has held this office which, in its modern form, dates from the Judicature Acts 1873-75.. </p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">The current Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland is Dame Siobhan Keegan who was appointed from 2 September 2021.</p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: Arvo; font-size: 15.4px;">Scotland's senior judges are the Lord Justice General (Lord Carloway) and Lord Justice Clerk (Lady Dorrian - appointed 2016). (Scotland does not use the title Lord Chief Justice or Chief Justice).</p><p>Female Chief Justices have been appointed in The Commonwealth - e.g. Helen Winkelmann is currently Chief Justice of New Zealand.</p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sue_Carr">Sue Carr - Wikipedia</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-40290993514695540992023-09-20T12:06:00.004+01:002023-09-23T14:00:42.546+01:00Northern Ireland - new (controversial) legislation<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6bETnGJM7bpwal636s0ZAv-HvUmIR028oQB2IvyhLmkJ9HiMJt1L0oU2tGmb8de6Eo-C9aTiXSL9paZ5GtoOwdaA6bE2E7afDULLoZP-y88pUQelBUuUVK08DMdLcaVmV_eB9udZBCAdR1Js948iDH3qwrezWMxREgQnXHyGfYMGiLWub82NoYP4pJM4/s474/Northern%20Ireland%201.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="296" data-original-width="474" height="125" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6bETnGJM7bpwal636s0ZAv-HvUmIR028oQB2IvyhLmkJ9HiMJt1L0oU2tGmb8de6Eo-C9aTiXSL9paZ5GtoOwdaA6bE2E7afDULLoZP-y88pUQelBUuUVK08DMdLcaVmV_eB9udZBCAdR1Js948iDH3qwrezWMxREgQnXHyGfYMGiLWub82NoYP4pJM4/w200-h125/Northern%20Ireland%201.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>On Monday 18 September, several Acts received Royal Assent (<a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2023-09-18/debates/AE90E920-0456-4461-9CF5-F554EC835F21/RoyalAssent">here</a>). Included in the list was the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023.<p></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland argues that -<i> '</i></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>The legislation contains finely balanced political and moral choices. </i></span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c; font-family: inherit;"><i>It presents us all with a real opportunity to deliver greater information, accountability and acknowledgement to victims and families, moving away from established mechanisms that have left far too many empty-handed' </i>- </span><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ni-troubles-legacy-reconciliation-act-receives-royal-assent">NI Troubles (Legacy & Reconciliation) Act receives Royal Assent - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a>.</p><p>The government has published further explanation of the legislation - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/guidance-on-the-northern-ireland-troubles-legacy-and-reconciliation-bill">Explainers relating to the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)</a>.</p><p>The Bill <span style="background-color: white; color: #0b0c0c;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">establishes a new body, the <a href="https://icrir.independent-inquiry.uk/">Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery</a> (ICRIR). It is argued that investigations conducted by the ICRIR will be capable of fulfilling the State's obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights - Arts 2 and 3.</span></span></p><p>There are reports of unhappiness with the arrangements to be made by the Act.</p><p>One possibility is an inter-State case brought by Ireland against the UK - <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2023-06-21/ireland-will-consider-taking-interstate-case-if-uk-legacy-bill-passed-varadkar">Varadkar restates Ireland will consider taking interstate case if UK Legacy Bill is passed | UTV | ITV News</a>.</p><p>A view has been expressed that <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/barrister-ireland-would-be-advised-to-hesitate-and-consider-these-legal-points-before-suing-the-uk-over-its-legacy-act/ar-AA1gY6vb">Ireland would be advised to hesitate and consider these legal points before suing the UK over its legacy act (msn.com)</a>. A number of points are made by barrister <a href="https://austenmorgan.com/">Dr Austen Morgan</a>.</p><p>Another possibility is legal challenges in the UK courts - <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-66841363">Troubles legacy: Controversial bill facing more legal challenges - BBC News</a>. Some of those challenges may, in time, find their way to the European Court of Human Rights.</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Reading:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3160#:~:text=A%20Bill%20to%20address%20the%20legacy%20of%20the,provide%20for%20the%20validity%20of%20interim%20custody%20orders.">Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament</a></p><p><a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9553/">Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill 2022-2023 - House of Commons Library (parliament.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/30491/documents/175903/default/">Joint Committee on Human Rights 2022 - Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill (parliament.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201415/jtselect/jtrights/130/13005.htm" style="font-family: inherit;">Joint Committee on Human Rights 2015 - Human Rights Judgments - Human Rights Joint Committee (parliament.uk)</a></p><p><a href="https://icrir.independent-inquiry.uk/">Independent Commission for Reconciliation & Information Recovery (icrir.independent-inquiry.uk)</a></p><p style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red;">UPDATE 23 September 2023</span></b></p><p><a href="https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2023/06/08/news/council_of_europe_voices_serious_concern_over_the_british_government_failure_to_address_concerns_about_legacy_bill-3334376/">Council of Europe voices 'serious concern' over the British government failure to address legacy bill shortcomings - The Irish News</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-9260504842885618772023-09-18T10:49:00.002+01:002023-10-12T08:03:13.788+01:00Supreme Court - Rwanda Appeal - October 2023<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAatVNZ87hmSnJl1KCYri_AxilugiXDl_uCDH6c7-jjbQiQmoHojZ7123EYLPgYH-AN8h3Hv5v40ax41glpVvDERz8LXLGdd9OFlPoaf1fCbNnMZrOJq0ElTmLyKoZc0et3n951X00y-rOopt_O6b5uWj1qLWdRm0_HiD47mhKwvq7ugdn2NPx6-vOnDxv/s306/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="204" data-original-width="306" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAatVNZ87hmSnJl1KCYri_AxilugiXDl_uCDH6c7-jjbQiQmoHojZ7123EYLPgYH-AN8h3Hv5v40ax41glpVvDERz8LXLGdd9OFlPoaf1fCbNnMZrOJq0ElTmLyKoZc0et3n951X00y-rOopt_O6b5uWj1qLWdRm0_HiD47mhKwvq7ugdn2NPx6-vOnDxv/w200-h133/Supreme%20Court%20UK.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><br />The Supreme Court of the UK resumes hearing cases at the start of Michaelmas Term which commences on 2 October 2023 - <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/visiting/judicial-sittings-2023-michaelmas-term.html">Judicial Sittings 2023 Michaelmas Term - The Supreme Court</a>.<p></p><p>Of the appeals to be heard, it will be the government's appeal relating to the Rwanda policy that come to political and public attention. The appeal will be heard from 9 to 11 October.</p><p>The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) judgment was handed down in April 2023 - <a href="https://obiterj.blogspot.com/2023/06/aaa-v-secretary-of-state-for-home.html">Law and Lawyers: A note on AAA v Secretary of State for the Home Department ~ removals to Rwanda (obiterj.blogspot.com)</a></p><p>The legal questions to be decided by the Supreme Court are set out at <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2023-0093.html">R (on the application of AAA and others) (Respondents/Cross Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant/Cross Respondent) - The Supreme Court</a></p><p>The court's constitution is to be Lord Reed (President), Lord Hodge (Deputy President), Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs and Lord Sales. By October, those will be the five most senior Justices.</p><p>Currently the court has only one female member - Lady Rose. As Joshua Rozenberg notes - <a href="https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/justices-named-for-rwanda-appeal">Justices named for Rwanda appeal - by Joshua Rozenberg (substack.com)</a> - that is likely to change in the near future.</p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/about/biographies-of-the-justices.html">Biographies of the Justices - The Supreme Court</a></p><p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/37/contents">Illegal Immigration Act</a> received Royal Assent on 20 July 2023 - (<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/37/notes/division/1/index.htm">Explanatory Notes</a>).</p><p><b><i><span style="color: red;">Further links:</span></i></b></p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/09/rwanda-deportation-plan-uk-supreme-court">Rwanda ‘tortures and murders’, supreme court asylum plan hearing told | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian</a></p>ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.com0