|
Frances Gibb and Jonathan Ames bring this morning’s must-read of all things legal, including news, comment and gossip. Today - Charities forced to pay levy after poppy row
- 40% of lenient sentence appeals involve sex offences
- ‘Back door’ amendments penalise buy-to-let investors
- Glut of law degree students swells universities
- Irwin Mitchell profits tumble in wake of merger
- Judge allows paedophile to choose sentence
- Comment: should there be a separate code for in-house lawyers?
- Blue Bag diary: Corbyn rail woes fail to impress young lawyers
- More Blue Bag: Strictly handbags already from Rinder
Tweet us @TimesLaw with your views. |
|
| |
|
|
Finance levy lets small charities off hook, say lawyers
|
The country’s biggest charities are to be forced to pay a levy to finance a new regulator created in the wake of a row over the suicide of a pensioner who was bombarded with donation requests. Charity lawyers criticised the Fundraising Regulator plan, released yesterday, as being too narrow and sending the message to smaller charities that they do not have “skin in the game”. The regulator has proposed the creation of a “fundraising preference” service which would be modelled on the existing telephone and mail preference services. Vulnerable people would be able to block approaches from charities. In addition, about 2,100 of the UK’s biggest charities – those that spend more than £100,000 on fundraising each year – would be forced to fund the regulator through a levy. Chris Priestley, a partner at Withers, a London law firm, pointed out that the number of charities spending that much on funding accounted for just 1 per cent of all charities. “The Fundraising Regulator’s justification for this narrow approach is that six in every ten complaints received relate to the 1 per cent of charities with a voluntary income of over £10 million,” Mr Priestley said. “That may well be the case, but there is still something to be said for increasing the number of charities who have skin in the game by contributing towards the levy on a proportionate basis. Charities who have to pay the levy can be expected to be more invested in the success of the Fundraising Regulator and, much more importantly, it will raise the profile of the Fundraising Regulator and, crucially, the code of fundraising practice.” The spotlight fell on charity fundraising last year when Olive Cooke (pictured), a 92-year-old poppy seller, committed suicide. The inquest verdict on her death did not mention any connection with fundraising appeals. However, an inquiry by the Fundraising Standards Board said that Mrs Cooke had felt “distressed and overwhelmed” by the volume of unsolicited requests for donations she received.
|
| |
| |
|
|
•
40% of lenient sentence appeals involve sex offences
Judges imposed over-lenient sentences in more than 100 cases last year, almost 40 per cent of which were in sex offences, figures released yesterday show. The statistics from the attorney-general, who appeals against sentences that appear to be over-lenient, show that more than 713 review requests were received last year. Of those, the attorney-general referred 136 to the Court of Appeal and appeal judges agreed to increase the sentence in 102 cases. The category in which most sentences were increased was sexual offences (38), followed by robbery (18) and firearms offences (14). Seven grievous bodily harm and seven burglary sentences were also increased, as were four manslaughter, one murder and one attempted murder along with four cases of perverting the course of justice or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. The rise in sex offence sentences going to appeal reflects the increasing number of such cases before the courts – now almost one quarter of all crown court trials, partly as a result of historical abuse investigations. The attorney-general, Jeremy Wright, QC (pictured), said: “While in the vast majority of cases sentencing judges get it right, the unduly lenient sentence scheme is essential in ensuring victims, family members of victims and the general public are able to request that sentences they think are unduly lenient can be reviewed and, where necessary, increased.” Mr Wright pointed out that the 102 cases resulting in sentence increases was a small proportion of the 80,000 crown court cases heard each year. He added that the scheme was there to allow adjustment of those sentences where an increase was warranted. The number of sentences considered by the attorney-general’s office has increased by more than 108 per cent since 2010, from 342 sentences to 713. The number of sentences increased after referral to the Court of Appeal has remained steady in recent years: in 2014 it was 106.
|
•
Ministers’ ‘back door’ amendments penalise buy-to-let investors
Ministers have sneaked amendments to proposed legislation on buy-to-let properties through the back door, lawyers’ leaders complained yesterday. They claim that the move will create uncertainty as investors will be forced to pay income tax rather than a capital gains tax on investment properties. Law Society chiefs said that significant amendments to the Finance Bill were “slipped in at committee stage” and that doing so “set a disturbing precedent of avoiding proper consultation and scrutiny”. Catherine Dixon, the society’s chief executive, complained: “By introducing a significant change in this way, the government is denying the public the chance to consider and comment on these proposals. “The way these changes were introduced, in particular without consultation on the draft legislation before it was added to the bill at such a late stage, starts to feel like legislation by stealth.” In comments to the government on the Finance Bill’s land transactions clauses the society said: “The average buy-to-let investor will have assumed that it will be taxed at capital gains tax rates on ultimate disposal of the property. “If the government’s intention were to change this, then the society’s view is that this should have been subject to proper consultation on the principle, policy and the draft legislation. If the government’s intention is not to change this, then the society considers that the terms of the legislation should be amended to reflect that.” |
•
Judge allows paedophile to choose sentence
A paedophile who exposed himself to a mother at a bus stop was allowed to choose his own sentence when the judge decided to test the offender’s resolve to go straight. Michael James, 48, pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to causing a public nuisance by exposing himself. He appeared for sentencing at Nottingham crown court on Monday. Despite having 15 previous convictions for sexual offences, the defendant was allowed to choose his own punishment by Judge Timothy Spencer, QC. The move is not uncommon in magistrates’ courts where judges engage with defendants on how much, for instance, they can pay back in fines and in what instalments. It is rarer in the crown court but the judge has discretion as to the best penalty option for stopping reoffending and protecting the public. In this case, the judge ordered James, who communicates with his hands after having his voice box removed four years ago because of cancer, to raise his right arm if he wanted to go straight to prison or his left if he wanted the sentence to be suspended. He raised his left hand so was handed an 18-month prison sentence, suspended for two years. A spokesman for the judiciary said: “The defendant was already recalled to prison for a previous offence. The judge had a choice whether to pass an immediate custodial sentence, extending the sentence he was already serving by months, or to suspend the sentence for two years. “This would mean that if he reoffended in future he would go back to prison to serve a new and longer sentence. The defendant expressed a desire to stop offending and in the circumstances the judge thought it appropriate to see which option he preferred in order to test his resolve not to reoffend and to seek to protect the public for as long as possible.” Despite the judge’s leniency, James was taken back to prison after the hearing because his latest offence broke the terms of his release on licence, which runs until October. However his jail term will not now go beyond that. |
•
Irwin Mitchell profits tumble in wake of merger
High costs of a recent merger are responsible for tumbling profits at one of the country’s biggest consumer claimant law firms, legal sector observers speculated yesterday. Pre-tax profits at Irwin Mitchell, which has 14 offices in England and Scotland and four in London, fell by more than 25 per cent in 2015-16, to £12.4 million from £16.7 million. In November the firm took over Thomas Eggar, a leading practice in southeast England, to fill a gap in its geographical coverage. Both The Lawyer magazine and the website Legal Week pointed to the merger as a potential factor in the dramatically reduced profit figure. Andrew Tucker, Irwin Mitchell’s chief executive, addressed the point directly in a statement, saying that the firm’s board was “comfortable that sacrificing profit in the short term will deliver greater benefits to the business in the medium term as we reap the return on investment and the improved strength and breadth of depth the merger has given us”. In an extended bout of management jargon, Mr Tucker continued: “Our focus in 2016-17 is on completing the successful integration, maximising the opportunities for growth which arise from the greater strength and depth we now enjoy. Our vision of being the legal brand of choice continues and we have a clear strategy to ensure we maintain our progress.”
|
•
Glut of law degree students swells universities
More than 23,000 students will enrol on university law degree programmes this year, stoking fears that an increasing glut of candidates will scramble for even fewer law firm training and chambers pupillage places. Figures from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) show the number of law degree students has increased by more than 16 per cent in the past four years. That rise came despite the number of available solicitor training contracts tumbling by more than 13 per cent since the financial crisis of 2008. There are about 5,450 law firm training places available each year, down from more than 6,300 in the pre-crash boom years. Last year the number of barrister pupillage places available crashed below the 400 mark for the first time in living memory.
Reporting on the seemingly inexorable rise in law degree students, Legal Cheek, a gossip site for law students, said law degrees continue to offer “better value for money than other courses”. However, the site points out that “talk is beginning to turn to what this all means for the [legal profession] job market”. Universities and postgraduate law schools that offer the vocational training required for qualification are increasingly in the firing line over suggestions that they are not providing students with information about the harsh realities of the employment market. |
•
In Brief
Slater & Gordon prepares shareholders for A$1bn loss – The Lawyer, Legal Business and Law Gazette Addleshaws-Hunton merger talks stall amid UK and US political uncertainty – Legal Week Force family lawyers to offer fixed fees, says consumer panel – Legal Futures 'No limits' on Ireland inquiry into Olympic tickets controversy – RTE What's missing from this US anti-trans ruling? Law, facts and compassion – The Guardian |
| |
| |
|
Corbyn rail woes fail to impress young lawyers
|
Jeremy Corbyn’s recent crowded train journey from London to Newcastle is not just a talking point in the Westminster village – young lawyers are obsessed with the story. As of yesterday afternoon, the combined subject lines “The Corbyn stuff”, “Corbo car crash continues” and “Is anyone on this board supporting Corbyn?” was head and shoulders the most popular topic on Roll on Friday, the gossip website and message board popular with thrusting young bucks and does at City of London law firms. With nearly 200 comments, the Corbyn debate had more than twice as many contributions as its nearest competitor, an intriguing discussion entitled “Who here has never taken any illegal drugs…?” Judging by this comment from “Pericles”, the Labour leader is not exactly inspiring confidence among junior lawyers in the Square Mile: “What’s much more damning than the fibbing is the fact that team Corbyn are such an ineffectual shower of hapless cretins that reserving seats for Jezza and aides whilst travelling on official business is a level of organisation and management above their level of competence.” Other lawyers couldn’t resist applying a legal angle to the Corbyn train saga. Kim Roberts, an employment law specialist at the London office of US practice King & Spalding, argued that Virgin, the train operating company, could be in the frame for breaching data protection legislation. “Images captured by CCTV cameras are personal data within the meaning of the UK’s legislation on data privacy, which Virgin is entitled to capture by using CCTV cameras in their trains,” she said, leafing through the statute book. “Typically, disclosure of CCTV images can be required by law enforcement agencies for legitimate and proportionate practices, such as the detection of crime, but the question that the Information Commissioner will have to balance is whether the circumstances of this political spat justified the disclosure images of the public without breaching their privacy rights. “Were the images sufficiently obscured so as to prevent the identification of the persons concerned?”
|
Strictly handbags already from Rinder
|
Judge Rinder – aka, Robert Rinder, criminal law barrister at 2 Hare Court in the Temple – yesterday told The Brief that years of appearing regularly before judges would stand him in good stead as a contestant in the forthcoming series of the BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing. But he has been taking a much more aggressive position in the pages of the country’s leading tabloid newspaper. Rinder – who shot to fame as the UK’s version of Judge Judy with his ITV daytime programme, Judge Rinder – damned with faint praise fellow contestant Ed Balls, the former chancellor, by telling The Sun: “I’m sure he will be a much better dancer than he was a politician.”
|
| |
|
|
