*/
A Conservative government will not repeal the Human Rights Act during the Brexit process and will keep the UK signed up the European Convention on Human Rights for the next Parliament.
The party’s 88-page manifesto contained other surprises, including plans to incorporate the Serious Fraud Office into the National Crime Agency and repeal s 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which would have forced newspapers to pay the costs of libel and privacy actions even if they won. The Tories will not proceed with part two of the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press.
It promises tougher regulation of tax advisory firms, strengthened legal services regulation and a crackdown on ‘exaggerated and fraudulent’ whiplash claims.
An Independent Public Advocate will act for bereaved families in inquests and legal aid will be restricted for ‘unscrupulous law firms that issue vexatious legal claims against the armed forces’.
In their manifestos Labour and the Liberal Democrats promised to review the legal aid cuts. A Labour government would reinstate some of the 2013 legal aid cuts, including for private family law, cap court fees and open an inquiry into the 1984 ‘Battle Orgeave’ clash between miners and the police. It also pledged to introduce no-fault divorce.
The Liberal Democrats promised an ‘urgent and comprehensive review’ of the 2013 legal aid cuts, to reverse court fees and protect judicial review. It pledged to ‘secure further funding for criminal legal aid from sources other than the taxpayer, including insurance for company directors, and changes to restraint orders’.
The Bar Council and Law Society also published manifestos. In its Manifesto for Justice, the Bar Council criticised Lord Chancellor, Liz Truss for failing to ‘stand up for the judges’ when they were attacked in the press over the Brexit ruling (see 'Value of justice', Counsel, June 2017).
It called on the next government to ‘demonstrate its commitment to uphold the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law’ and to reverse some of the legal aid cuts, highlighting in particular the need to fund representation in housing, immigration and welfare cases.
In its wish-list, the Law Society’s Our vision for law and justice called for the reinstatement of legal aid, particularly in housing and family case, and the scrapping of employment fees, but it was silent on the role of the Lord Chancellor.
A Conservative government will not repeal the Human Rights Act during the Brexit process and will keep the UK signed up the European Convention on Human Rights for the next Parliament.
The party’s 88-page manifesto contained other surprises, including plans to incorporate the Serious Fraud Office into the National Crime Agency and repeal s 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which would have forced newspapers to pay the costs of libel and privacy actions even if they won. The Tories will not proceed with part two of the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press.
It promises tougher regulation of tax advisory firms, strengthened legal services regulation and a crackdown on ‘exaggerated and fraudulent’ whiplash claims.
An Independent Public Advocate will act for bereaved families in inquests and legal aid will be restricted for ‘unscrupulous law firms that issue vexatious legal claims against the armed forces’.
In their manifestos Labour and the Liberal Democrats promised to review the legal aid cuts. A Labour government would reinstate some of the 2013 legal aid cuts, including for private family law, cap court fees and open an inquiry into the 1984 ‘Battle Orgeave’ clash between miners and the police. It also pledged to introduce no-fault divorce.
The Liberal Democrats promised an ‘urgent and comprehensive review’ of the 2013 legal aid cuts, to reverse court fees and protect judicial review. It pledged to ‘secure further funding for criminal legal aid from sources other than the taxpayer, including insurance for company directors, and changes to restraint orders’.
The Bar Council and Law Society also published manifestos. In its Manifesto for Justice, the Bar Council criticised Lord Chancellor, Liz Truss for failing to ‘stand up for the judges’ when they were attacked in the press over the Brexit ruling (see 'Value of justice', Counsel, June 2017).
It called on the next government to ‘demonstrate its commitment to uphold the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law’ and to reverse some of the legal aid cuts, highlighting in particular the need to fund representation in housing, immigration and welfare cases.
In its wish-list, the Law Society’s Our vision for law and justice called for the reinstatement of legal aid, particularly in housing and family case, and the scrapping of employment fees, but it was silent on the role of the Lord Chancellor.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, discusses the upcoming changes to pensions and Inheritance Tax and the potential impact on your financial future
Save the Children UK is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
The Chief Legal Officer to the Metropolitan Police, barrister Brett Welch, tells Anthony Inglese CB about his mission and the work to turn the Met around
Barrister apprenticeships – shortly to provide the fourth pathway to the Bar – are an ideal opportunity to support local talent and ‘grow your own’, say Tim Coulson and Dr Jane Dennehy
Grok around and find out – or not? Mariya Peykova investigates the nudification scandal, what the law has to say about sexually explicit deepfakes, and whether stronger regulation is needed
Oliver Lewis spotlights an overlooked yet rapidly evolving area of law – coercive and controlling behaviour within care contexts