Justice Matters

Regaining the art of co-operation: Andrew Ritchie QC on the case for arbitration for personal injury and clinical negligence claims.  

Many shipping, building and commercial disputes are resolved by arbitration. So why is arbitration not used to resolve personal injury and clinical negligence claims? 

Of politics, schoolmasters and judges: Paul Marshall reflects upon the recent Court of Appeal decision in Denton v T H White and the fallout from the decision in Mitchell v News Group.  

If one settling a pillow by her head,  Should say, “That is not what I meant at all  That is not it, at all”  

T S Eliot, Prufrock 

The Independent Parliamentarians’ Inquiry into the Operation and Effectiveness of the Youth Court reported in June. Lord Carlile, who chaired the inquiry, explains its findings to Counsel.  

June 2014 saw the publication of a far reaching All Party Parliamentarians’ report on Youth Justice. 

Nathalie Lieven QC explains the Council of the Inns of Court’s first six funding scheme.  

As readers will know this is a very hard time for chambers that rely on publicly funded work, particularly those doing crime. One of the worst consequences of the extreme financial pressure that many chambers find themselves under has been a dramatic fall in the number of pupillages available, again particularly in criminal sets reliant on public funding. Although the reduction in pupillages is wholly understandable, it makes even worse the disparity between the number of people who complete their academic training but are unable to get a pupillage, and must place in jeopardy the future of the criminal Bar. 

Chris McWatters weighs up the pros and cons of a Law Commission proposal to make prenuptial agreements binding in court.  

Most fiancés would find the prospect of making a prenuptial agreement before their big day in church about as much in the joyful spirit of things as cold wet weather on the wedding morning. How can you make a holy vow to remain together for eternity, while at the same time calculating how the marital spoils should be divided if you separate? 

Sir Hugh Bennett assesses the progress of the family law finance arbitration scheme.  

In 2012, the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators (IFLA), a company limited by guarantee, was set up with a board of directors chaired by former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer of Thoroton. It is responsible for the implementation and administration of the family law finance arbitration scheme. The qualified arbitrators, now numbering 130 with more to come, have all been trained in arbitral techniques and have a good working knowledge of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1986). Each must become a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and is subject to its disciplinary code. Solicitors, barristers, QCs and retired judges, all of whom are, or were, full-time practicing family lawyers, comprise the corps of arbitrators under the scheme. They are therefore real specialists in the field of family finance law. 

Tom Cockroft explores the need for a new offence of failure to prevent fraud.  

“A British bank is run with precision/ A British home requires nothing less/ Tradition, discipline, and rules must be the tools/ Without them – disorder! Chaos! Moral disintegration!/In short, we have a ghastly mess!” 

(“The Life I Lead”, Mary Poppins) 

Jalil Asif QC explains how to manage your digital estate after death.  

Death and taxes have been said to be the constants in life. Barristers are always receiving offers of free tax advice so, for a change, this article is about death and its consequences. 

Jonathan Barnes examines the High Court’s effective monopoly on hearing defamation cases, and against a background of calls for county courts to get involved too asks, WHY NOT?  

On October 2011 the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the then Draft Defamation Bill considered at paragraph 87 of its First Report that the availability of county courts to hear defamation cases, particularly outside London, should increase accessibility for ordinary citizens and would, in many cases, reduce costs as well. The Committee suggested that the Ministry of Justice should implement a pilot scheme to determine how this proposal might work in practice. 

One in six people experience some form of hearing loss but are not always easy to identify. Sukhveer Kandola and Narita Bahra explain what barristers can do to secure a fair trial for clients with hearing difficulties.  

Imagine this. You are being cross-examined. You stand silently in the box, surrounded by smart people in wigs and gowns. The room is large, the ceiling is high and there is limited, if any, sound amplification. There is a constant murmur of voices in the background and an intermittent clicking sound. You stare ahead and you concentrate. You really concentrate, but it is not enough and you don’t quite catch the entire question. You ask for the question to be repeated, but you miss it again. You continue to look into the abyss because if you focus long enough, you will work out what is being asked. All eyes are on you and this is your moment to answer. Do you embarrass yourself by asking for the question to be repeated again? Or do you save face and guess what the question was and answer as best you can? You decide on the latter and you continue guessing until you are told you are no longer required and can go back and take a seat in the dock. Should you have said that you have problems with your hearing? You worry whether this will impact the outcome and whether you should say something to your counsel now. But surely he would have already noticed? So you sit down and hope it will all turn out okay.