|
Frances Gibb and Jonathan Ames bring this morning’s must-read of all things legal, including news, comment and gossip. Today - Truss gives green light to UK Bill of Rights
- Ministers to bin Land Registry sell-off
- Hillsborough law’ would force officials to tell truth
- Justice secretary ditches Gove’s prison reforms
- Tax evasion amnesty ‘destined to fail’
- Whistleblowing regime comes into force for banks
- City law firm envisages Brexit sunny uplands
- Comment: Sex, lies and family lawyers
- Blue Bag diary: In praise of juniors at the Bar
Tweet us @TimesLaw with your views.
|
|
| |
|
|
Truss gives green light to UK bill of rights
|
Creating a UK Bill of Rights was one of three key goals outlined by the justice secretary yesterday in her first outing before the Commons justice select committee. Liz Truss, who is also lord chancellor, confirmed that the government planned to repeal the Human Rights Act and that it would not withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the priority for Truss, who replaced Michael Gove in the role when the Brexiteer was sacked by Theresa May in the aftermath of the EU referendum, was “making our prisons places of safety". She said prison reform generally – a key plank of her predecessor’s approach – “can't be addressed without addressing issues of safety”. A second important issue for Truss was an “ambitious” programme of court reform to make the justice system “swifter” and “more accessible". Third was the creation of a UK Bill of Rights, which was a commitment in the Conservative Party manifesto. This would “protect our rights in a better way” than the Human Rights Act, Truss told MPs. She gave no further details, however, saying that thorough consultation would be needed. “There are changes that could be made but that is really a matter that we need to develop in the proposals that we will be putting forward in due course,” she said. Alex Chalk, the Tory MP for Cheltenham, asked what the point was of scrapping the Human Rights Act but staying signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights. Truss replied: “We were members of the convention long before the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act is a fairly recent phenomenon. What the British Bill of Rights will do is protect our rights but in a better way. “That is fundamentally what we are saying: that there are big problems with the Human Rights Act that are nothing to do with the convention – problems that have only emerged since the Human Rights Act came in. We are still working on it and I don't have details about the proposal." Truss, who is the first female holder of the ancient office, made it clear that she wanted more diversity in the legal profession and judiciary. She said it was an issue that the Lord Chief Justice was keen to address and one she would be discussing with him. A particular issue she will be assessing are the hurdles aspiring lawyers and judges face to entering the legal profession and being promoted to the bench. On access to justice, Truss declined to say whether she would revisit the impact of legal aid cuts implemented over the past few years, adding that the system remained “generous” compared with other countries.
|
| |
| |
|
|
•
Ministers to bin Land Registry sell-off
Controversial plans to privatise the Land Registry are likely to be dropped after the government did not include the measure in draft legislation published yesterday. The move is a significant U-turn for the government. Only three months ago, ministers at the now defunct Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said they were committed to pressing ahead with the sell-off. However, it is understood that the after the plans were not included in the Registry in the Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill, the Whitehall department now responsible will quietly drop the proposal. Lawyers welcomed the decision. “Privatising the Land Registry would create a range of serious risks to this vital piece of national infrastructure, which supports and ensures the integrity of property ownership in this country,” said Robert Bourns, president of the Law Society. He added that the decision not to include privatisation in the bill indicated the government was “taking these concerns seriously. Allowing ministers and officials more time to scrutinise before making final decisions is wise.” Tim Clayden, a partner at Wilsons, a London and Salisbury law firm, said: “It was difficult to support that case for privatisation when there was no detail at all on how the private business would be held accountable for errors.” Officially, the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, which has inherited responsibility for the Land Registry, was non-committal. “No decision has been taken on the future of the Land Registry,” a spokesman said. “A consultation on the Land Registry’s future closed in May and we are carefully considering our response. It is only right that new ministers take time to look at all their options before making a decision.”
See The Times leader column today -- The government is right to shelve proposals to privatise the Land Registry |
•
‘Hillsborough law’ would force public officials to tell truth
Lawyers representing families of the Hillsborough disaster victims have called for a law to require public officials to tell the truth and expose cover-ups and corruption. The families want the fresh legislation to ensure that any official who wilfully fails to expose a cover-up in public office, whether intentionally or recklessly, will face criminal charges. The demand comes four months after the conclusion of the Hillsborough Inquests in April this year, where the jury found that 96 Liverpool fans who died at the FA Cup semi-final in 1989 were unlawfully killed. The victims’ families fought for 27 years to get justice for their loved ones. They faced a hostile police force looking to shift the blame and inquiries marred by controversy and accusations of collusion among public officials. The so-called Hillsborough law aims to prevent a repetition of that behaviour by making it a criminal offence for public officials not to tell the truth and placing a legal duty on them to expose any cover-up in public office. Broudie Jackson Canter, the Liverpool-based legal firm that led a team representing 22 of the Hillsborough families, yesterday called for the draft law to be enacted as soon as possible. Elkan Abrahamson, the partner who headed the firm’s Hillsborough team, said the call for greater transparency and accountability in public office had a strong chance of becoming law. “The day after the jury returned its verdict of unlawful killing the then home secretary, now prime minister, Theresa May, admitted that the public bodies involved repeatedly and for 27 years failed to act in the public interest,” ” said Abrahamson. “She said the authorities, which should have been trusted, laid blame and tried to protect themselves instead.”
|
•
Justice secretary ditches Gove’s prison reforms
The future of Michael Gove’s plans for overhauling jails, announced in the Queen’s Speech, have been thrown into doubt by Liz Truss, his successor as justice secretary (Richard Ford writes). When asked by the justice select committee chairman if the bill was to go ahead, she replied: “We are looking at that at the moment. I am not committing to any specific piece of legislation at this stage. The key thing is that it has to be deliverable and we have to do things in the right order.” Bob Neill, the barrister and Conservative chairman of the committee, expressed astonishment that she could not guarantee the centrepiece of the Queen’s speech. Gove had promised that a green paper would be published this autumn and the Queen’s Speech outlined plans for a prisons and courts reform bill that would bring about the biggest reforms since Victorian times. It was to include new powers for governors, giving them control over all aspects of prison management, new performance measures and a complete overhaul of education, health and training.
|
•
Tax evasion amnesty ‘destined to fail’
A scheme designed to encourage British tax evaders to come clean before tougher rules kick in is destined to fail, according to City of London lawyers. The online worldwide disclosure facility was launched by Revenue and Customs at the beginning of the week. It has been billed as the last-chance saloon for British tax evaders to put their affairs in order before a beefed up sanctions regime comes into effect next month. However, lawyers said yesterday that the scheme “may not be attractive enough to incentivise large numbers to come forward”. The problem, say tax law experts, is that the facility offers no special terms – those using it will have to pay the outstanding tax in full, plus interest charged daily from the original due date. In addition, they may have to pay a penalty calculated as a percentage of any additional amount owed, and could still face criminal prosecution. Fiona Fernie,a partner and head of tax investigations at Pinsent Masons, a City law firm, said hose using the facility would “continue to face the risk of hefty penalties, and even criminal prosecution. It is possible that many will look at the terms and opt to do nothing in the hope that any irregularities are not picked up by HMRC. “Offering more appealing settlement terms, thereby enticing greater numbers to come forward, may be more effective, and could save the Revenue huge time and resource in the long term.”
|
•
Beefed up whistleblowing regime comes into force for banks
Banks and other businesses in the financial services sector must create clear regimes to allow employees to blow the whistle on concerns over business practices after beefed up rules came into effect yesterday. The regime, which has been implemented by the Bank of England’s Prudential Regulatory Authority (PRA) and Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), is designed to encourage staff to alert the authorities regarding a variety of types of wrongdoing and not just reportable offences under current whistleblowing laws. The new rules apply to UK deposit-takers with assets of £250 million or more, PRA-designated investment businesses and insurance companies subject to the Solvency II Directive, plus the Society of Lloyd's and managing agents. Lawyers have described the rules as “far reaching”, requiring businesses to establish an independent whistleblowing channel through which reportable concerns can be raised. Lydia Christie, an employment law specialist solicitor at Howard Kennedy, a London law firm, said the new regime includes a requirement “not to include any deterrent to whistleblowing in employment contracts and settlement agreements. They will restrict the use of warranties, where employees are asked to confirm that they have not made a whistleblowing report.” She added: “The new rules also extend to disclosures made by the self-employed, volunteers, non-executive directors, agency and contract workers, agents and suppliers.”
|
•
City law firm envisages Brexit sunny uplands
In the run-up to June’s referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, City of London law firms were unofficially almost unanimous in their opposition to Brexit – but now a big player has broken ranks. A leading partner at Eversheds, an international firm based in the capital, has said that the latest UK industrial production figures indicate that “initial uncertainty has passed” and the country is “back to business as usual”. Robin Johnson, chairman of the firm’s diversified industrial sector group, was speaking yesterday after the figures were published. The statistics caused Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse to retract earlier forecasts that the UK would slide into recession in the wake of the vote to leave. Dow Jones Business News said that an initial dip in industrial output after the vote had rebounded in August. “With Brexit at least two years down the line there is time to plan for a world of tariffs, but in the meantime manufacturing is taking advantage of a lower exchange rate to competitively compete in the global marketplace,” said Johnson. The lawyer maintained that “there is no evidence of capital expenditure plans being put on hold as a result of Brexit, and there is no evidence of supply chains changing”. He added: “Arguably, the bigger news is the attack on tax havens and planning. As evidenced by recent news headlines, these issues should now be on every company’s board agenda, along with Brexit, as a standing item.” |
•
In Brief
In this week’s Times law … Elsewhere … - Abuse inquiry judge couldn’t cope, says Rudd -- The Times
- Killer drivers face longer jail terms -- The Times
- The Archers sidelines solicitors – Solicitors Journal
- Inmates becoming Jewish to get better prison food – Daily Mirror
- Canadian judge who asked alleged rape victim why she ‘couldn’t keep her knees together’ says he shouldn't be sacked – The Independent
|
| |
| |
|
Junior grows up at the Bar
|
For those outside the legal profession, the expression “senior-junior” sounds a ludicrous oxymoron. But as Anthony Radevsky, a barrister of some 38 years’ call from Falcon Chambers in London, pointed out yesterday in the letters page of The Times, the sobriquet is worn with a badge of honour by many at the bar. Radevsky, a commercial property law specialist, was attempting to comfort junior doctors, many of whom are very experienced and bridle at the use of the term. And his letter tangentially reminds us that many senior-junior barristers consciously avoid applying for silk. Of course, the award of Queen’s Counsel brings with it the opportunity to spend thousands of pounds hosting your freeloading chums and other hangers-on at a one-off silk party, and the title can be useful when attempting to book fashionable restaurants – but there are downsides. Not least is the experience of many silks that the day after the hangover has cleared from the party, they are hit by the sobering realisation that instructions have dried to a trickle. Solicitors often assume that the addition of the two letters will translate to an increase in fee and refresher rates, only to find tumbleweed rather than cheques gathering in their freshly minted QC’s letter box. Bemoaning the loss of the grand depart Regardless of whether they are silks, senior-juniors, juniors or pupils, barristers apparently are working far too hard, according to their figurehead leader. Chantal-Aimée Doerries, QC, chairwoman of the Bar Council and a commercial barrister at Atkin Chambers in Gray’s Inn, has encouraged her colleagues to behave like Parisians by bunking off for the entire month of August. “Before the Internet,” she complained in the latest edition of Counsel magazine, “August was a time when the Bar went on holiday, or, if not on holiday, had some respite from the normal speed of life. The courts closed ... generally it was accepted that barristers didn't work in August.” But along came the Internet and mobile communication devices and before you could say “m’learned friend”, August was just like any other month. Even if a hapless barrister were able to escape to the château in the Dordogne or the Chiantishire hideaway, the irritating ping of the Blackberry accompanied. “Many of us will have taken some time off during August, but very few will have taken the whole month off,” said Doerries. “For those of us who disappeared in August, or indeed at any time during the year, it is increasingly difficult to ignore work.” One expects that workers’ hearts around the country will be bleeding ... |
A helping paw for Russia’s animals
|
Vladimir Putin is the sort of chap that likes to ride a horse roughly, wrestle bears, and generally give all sorts of beasts a fairly tough time. With a president like that, it’s no wonder that animal charities in Russia could do with a helping hand. Step up Signature, a litigation niche legal practice in the City of London, and in particular Natalia Chumak, a partner at the firm and founder of the charity Helping Animals in Russia. Signature is sponsoring an art exhibition this evening in a bid to raise funds for the charity, which presumably will be allocated in part to purchasing body armour for however many bears remain in the country. The event – Tails & Dreams – will showcase the work of 20 professional illustrators from around the world at the Cultural Dialogue Gallery in Pall Mall. Drawing on the real-life stories of abandoned cats and dogs in Russia, the artworks illustrate the animals’ dreams, set against the backdrop of the real-life conditions the animals suffer daily. Chumak’s charity aims to “ensure the safety of animals in Russia, focusing on the issue of stray overpopulation and establishing education programmes to teach school children the importance of care and responsibility for their pets”. Other lawyers involved include Simon Moore, a partner at Fieldfisher, who is a trustee of the charity, and Svetlana London, an arbitration specialist at the London office of CIS, a Russian law firm.
|
Five win pro bono awards
|
Five sets of barristers’ chambers have been honoured for their pro bono work under a joint initiative organised by the Bar Pro Bono Unit and the Free Representation Unit. Friends in Law is a new award that “recognises the financial contributions made by chambers to both organisations”. The Bar Council makes the point that neither unit receives government funding, with both relying on donations from the legal profession. The five chambers are: Devereux, 12 King’s Bench Walk, Keating, 3 Verulam Buildings and 5RB.
|
| |
| |
|
“I’m not entirely in favour of the Danish approach, put it like that.”
|
|
Liz Truss, the lord chancellor, yesterday on her first appearance before the justice committee, when she was repeatedly pressed by Philip Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, to express a view on whether Denmark’s system of conjugal visits for prisoners should be imported to the UK.
|
| |
|
|
