Category: Legal Analysis

Legal Analysis. This is not legal advice !

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is a Judgment ?

Judgment

A judgment, also known as a judicial decision or court ruling, is the final decision made by a court of law in a legal case or dispute. It represents the court’s official decision on the matters brought before it and typically resolves the legal issues in question.

It is the culmination of legal proceedings, where a judge evaluates evidence, arguments and applicable laws to arrive at a verdict. Whether it’s a criminal case, family dispute, civil dispute or administrative matter, a judgment carries significant consequences for the parties involved.

A judgment may include various elements such as:

  1. Findings of Fact: The court’s determination of what events or circumstances occurred in the case.
  2. Conclusions of Law: The legal principles applied by the court to the facts of the case to reach a decision.
  3. Decision or Disposition: The specific outcome or ruling of the case, which could include a verdict of guilty or not guilty (in a criminal case), or a judgment for the plaintiff or defendant (in a civil case).
  4. Orders: Any specific actions or remedies ordered by the court as part of the judgment, such as monetary damages, injunctions, or other relief.

A court judgment is typically written and issued by a judge or a panel of judges. It is a formal and legally binding document that concludes the legal proceedings in the case, although it may be subject to appeal or modification under certain circumstances.

Sometimes, judgment is reserved, which means withholding a final opinion until more information is available. It acknowledges the complexity of issues and avoids premature conclusions.

These are the latest judgments published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary of England and Wales.

  • Skelton -v- IOPC
    Neutral citation number: [2024] EWHC 983 (Admin)Case Number: AC-2023-LDS-000049 In the High Court of JusticeKing’s Bench DivisionAdmin CourtSitting in Leeds 26 April 2024 Before: Mrs Justice Hill DBE Between: R (on the application of) Glenn Skelton -v- Director General of the Independent Office forPolice Conductand(1) Officer B50(2) Chief Constable of Humberside Police The post Skelton -v- IOPC appeared first on […]
  • Regina -v- Iftikhar Ali
    In the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey 26 April 2024 Sentencing remarks of Her Honour Judge Anuja Dhir KC Between: Regina -v- Iftikhar Ali The post Regina -v- Iftikhar Ali appeared first on Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
  • Mitchell -v- Al Jaber
    Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWCA Civ 423Case Numbers: CA-2023-000615CA-2023-000643 In the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)On appeal from the High Court of JusticeBusiness and Property Courts of England and WalesInsolvency and Companies List (ChD) 26 April 2024 Before: Lord Justice NeweyLord Justice ArnoldLord Justice Snowden Between: 1) Greig William Alexander Mitchell2) Kenneth Melvin Krys (Joint […] The post Mitchell -v- […]
  • Sherman -v- Reader Offers Limited
    Neutral citation number: [2024] EWCA Civ 412Case Number: CA-2023-000623 In the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)On appeal from the High Court of JusticeKing’s Bench Division 26 April 2024 Before: Lord Justice Underhill(President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division)Lady Justice AsplinandLord Justice Males Between: 1) Rosemary Sherman2) Nicholas Sherman -v- Reader Offers Limited The post Sherman -v- Reader Offers Limited […]
  • Upham and others -v- HSBC
    Neutral citation number: [2024] EWHC 849 (Comm)Case Number: CL-2020-000347 In the High Court of JusticeBusiness and Property Courts of England and WalesCommercial Court (KBD) 26 April 2024 Before: Mr Justice Bright Between: Christopher Bernard Upham and others -v- HSBC UK Bank plc The post Upham and others -v- HSBC appeared first on Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
  • R (Woodcock Hill Village Green Committee) -v- SSEFRA
    Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWCA CIV 420Case Number: CA-2023-000729 In the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)On Appeal From the High Court of JusticeKing’s Bench DivisionAdministrative Court 25 April 2024 Before:Sir Keith Lindblom(Senior President of Tribunals)Lord Justice Singh andLady Justice Elisabeth Laing Between:The King(on the Application of Patricia Strack on Behalf of the Woodcock Hill Village […] The post R (Woodcock […]
  • Blake and Seymour -v- Fox
    Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 956 (KB)Case Number: KB-2021-001248 In the High Court of JusticeKing’s Bench DivisionMedia & Communications ListRoyal Courts of Justice 25 April 2024 Before:The Honourable Mrs Justice Collins Rice Between:(1) Mr Simon Blake(2) Mr Colin Seymour-v-Mr Laurence Fox The post Blake and Seymour -v- Fox appeared first on Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
  • GYT -v- Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (anonymity order)
    Claim Number: KB-2022-003308 In The High Court Of JusticeKing’s Bench Division 24 April 2024 Before:Master Stevens Between:GYT (A Protected Party by his Litigation Friend and Wife MUZ)-v-Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Anonymity Order BEFORE Master Stevens sitting in the Royal Courts of Justice, the Strand, London on 24 April 2024 remotely by Microsoft TeamsUPON […] The post GYT -v- […]
  • Andrew Hale-Byrne -v- Secretary of State for Business and Trade and another
    Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 942 (KB)Case No: KB-2022-004388 In the High Courts of JusticeKing’s Bench Division 24 April 2024 Before: Mr Justice Chamberlain Between: Andrew Hale-Byrne -v- Secretary of State for Business and Trade Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs The post Andrew Hale-Byrne -v- Secretary of State for Business and Trade and another appeared first […]
  • King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust -v- R and others
    Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 910 (FAM)Case Number: Fd23p00605 In the High Court of JusticeFamily Division 23 April 2024 Before:Mr Justice Poole Re NR (a Child: Withdrawal of Life SustainingTreatment) Between:King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust-v-(1) Mrs R(2) Mr R(3) Nr (by His Children’s Guardian) The post King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust -v- R and others appeared first on […]

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is an Adverse Inference ?

Adverse Inference

Adverse inference is a legal principle that plays a significant role in various areas of law, including criminal, civil, and family law. It arises when a party remains silent or withholds evidence, leading the court to draw a negative inference.

The CPS publish important guidance on the law and practice surrounding adverse inferences from a Defendant’s silence in certain circumstances. To avoid the drawing of an adverse inference, some Defendants will read out a pre-prepared statement and then refuse to answer any further questions.

Section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act (CJPOA) 1994

  • Section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act (CJPOA) 1994 allows an inference to be drawn if a suspect remains silent when questioned under caution before being charged and subsequently relies on a relevant fact in court.
  • If a suspect declines to answer questions during questioning, this alone does not trigger an adverse inference. However, when the suspect later seeks to provide an account or explanation, the adverse inference provision comes into play.
  • The term “fact” in Section 34 has a broad meaning, covering any alleged fact that is in issue and put forward as part of the defence case. Even if the defendant does not give or call evidence, a specific case presented by the defence advocate to a prosecution witness can be considered a relevant fact.

Sections 35 to 37 of the CJPOA 1994

  • Section 35: Deals with the effect of a defendant’s silence at trial. It allows the court to draw an adverse inference if the defendant remains silent during the trial.
  • Section 36: Addresses the effect of a defendant’s refusal or failure to account for objects, substances, or marks.
  • Section 37: Covers the effect of a defendant’s refusal or failure to account for their presence at a particular place.

Section 38 of the CJPOA 1994 – Interpretation and Savings

  1. Definitions:
    • Legal Representative: Refers to a person authorized under the Legal Services Act 2007 for activities related to the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation.
    • Place: Encompasses buildings, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and any other location.
  2. Offences Charged:
    • References to an “offence charged” include any other offense for which the accused could lawfully be convicted based on the same charge.
  3. Inferences and Proceedings:
    • Proceedings Against the Accused: An adverse inference cannot solely lead to transferring proceedings to the Crown Court, finding a case to answer, or convicting the accused.
    • Refusal to Grant Applications: A judge cannot refuse applications solely based on an inference drawn from the accused’s failure to answer questions (as mentioned in sections 34, 36, or 37).
  4. Preserving Other Legal Provisions:
    • Admissibility of Evidence: Sections 34, 35, 36, or 37 do not affect provisions that render certain answers or evidence inadmissible against the accused or others.
    • Court’s Discretion: Courts retain the power to exclude evidence at their discretion, regardless of whether it involves furnishing information, making discoveries, producing documents, or other forms of evidence.

Section 38 ensures that adverse inferences are drawn judiciously, respecting legal rights and maintaining fairness in criminal proceedings.

Preconditions for Drawing an Adverse Inference

Before an adverse inference can be drawn, the following conditions must be met:

Certainly! Let’s explore the six necessary conditions that must be satisfied before an adverse inference can be drawn in circumstances where there has been a failure to mention a relevant fact when questioned. These conditions are crucial in legal proceedings, particularly when considering a defendant’s silence. Here they are:

  1. Pre-interview Disclosure:
    • The defendant must have been informed of the allegations against them before any questioning.
    • This ensures that the defendant is aware of the specific charges they are facing.
  2. Legal Advice to Be Silent:
    • The defendant must have received legal advice regarding their right to remain silent.
    • Legal professionals must ensure that the defendant understands their options and the potential consequences of remaining silent.
  3. The Defendant Waiving Legal Privilege:
    • If the defendant voluntarily waives their legal privilege (i.e., chooses to speak), their silence during questioning can be used against them.
    • This condition ensures that the defendant’s silence is a deliberate choice rather than a lack of understanding.
  4. Prepared and Self-Serving Statements:
    • The court considers whether the defendant’s statements were prepared or self-serving.
    • If the defendant selectively chooses to mention certain facts while remaining silent about others, this can impact the inference drawn.
  5. Failure to Mention a Relevant Fact:
    • The alleged failure must relate to not mentioning a fact that is relevant to the case.
    • The defendant’s silence regarding a crucial detail can be significant in assessing their credibility.
  6. Reasonable Expectation to Mention When Questioned:
    • The defendant’s silence should pertain to a fact that, under the circumstances, they could reasonably have been expected to mention when questioned.
    • If the omission is material and relevant, an adverse inference may be drawn.

These conditions help ensure fairness and balance in legal proceedings, allowing courts to consider a defendant’s silence in a well-defined context.

Case Law Examples

  • In Webber [2004] 1 All ER 770, the House of Lords held that the word “fact” as given in Section 34 should be given a broad meaning. It covered any alleged fact which was in issue and put forward as part of the defence case. Therefore, a specific case put by a Defendants advocate to a prosecution witness can be a fact relied on, even if the Defendant does not give or call evidence.
  • In M [2012] 1 Cr App R 26, it was held that the judge had incorrectly allowed the jury to draw an adverse inference from a failure by the appellant to mention relevant facts in interview when there was no basis for drawing one. There, the officers who interviewed the appellant mistakenly asked him about the alleged rape on the wrong date. The appellant subsequently relied on facts relevant to the date that the alleged rape was said to have occurred. The Court found that it was difficult to see how in those circumstances the appellant could have reasonably been expected to say more.
  • In Lee [2015] EWCA Crim 420, it was held that the judge had correctly allowed the jury to draw adverse inferences from the Defendants silence in interview following his arrest for an assault on his partner. Although the police did not have the specific details of the allegations at that stage, the questions were clearly directed to trying to discover whether or by whom the partner had been assaulted.

Civil Law

  • Evidence Withheld: In civil proceedings, parties may withhold evidence within their possession or control.
  • Negative Inference: If a party fails to produce relevant evidence, the court may infer that the evidence would have been unfavourable to that party’s position.
  • Example: If a claimant fails to provide crucial documents related to their claim, the court may infer that those documents would not support their case.

Family Law

  • Child Custody Cases: In family law, adverse inference can arise in child custody disputes.
  • Parental Behaviour: If a parent refuses to provide relevant information about their parenting abilities or fails to disclose relevant facts, the court may infer negatively.
  • Example: If a parent avoids discussing their history of substance abuse during custody proceedings, the court may draw an adverse inference.

Conclusion

Adverse inference ensures that parties are transparent and forthcoming in legal proceedings. Whether in criminal, civil, or family law, the principle encourages honesty and accountability. Legal professionals must navigate these provisions carefully to uphold justice and fairness.

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is a Lucas Direction ?

Lucas Direction

A Lucas Direction, stemming from the case of R v Lucas (Ruth) [1981] EWCA Crim J0519-8, is a legal principle used in criminal trials to guide the jury on how to consider the evidence of lies told by a defendant. The case of Regina v Lucas (Ruth) is a landmark decision that established the criteria under which a lie can be considered as evidence of guilt.

The case involved Iyabode Ruth Lucas, who was convicted at Reading Crown Court on two counts of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition of the importation into the UK of a controlled drug, namely cannabis, contrary to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. The conviction was based on her arrival from Nigeria at Gatwick and Heathrow airports with significant quantities of cannabis. The appeal focused on whether the trial judge gave a correct direction on the question of corroboration of the evidence provided by an accomplice.

The Court of Appeal, led by Lord Lane LCJ, held that the mere fact that a defendant has lied is not in itself evidence of guilt. People may lie for various reasons, such as shame, panic, or the desire to cover for someone else. Therefore, a Lucas Direction instructs the jury that they can only consider a lie as evidence supporting guilt if certain conditions are met:

The lie must be deliberate.
The lie must relate to a material issue.
The lie must be told after the crime.
The lie must be told before there is a strong suspicion of guilt.
The jury must be satisfied that the lie was told to conceal guilt, and even then, it is not conclusive proof of guilt but merely an additional piece of evidence to be weighed with all other evidence in the case.

Lucas Direction Conditions

The Lucas Direction is significant because it protects defendants from being unjustly convicted based solely on their lies. It ensures that the jury understands that not all lies are indicative of guilt and that they must carefully consider the context and reasons for the lie before drawing any inferences.

The principles from Regina v Lucas (Ruth) have been cited in numerous subsequent cases and have become an integral part of jury instructions in criminal trials. It reflects the careful balance that must be struck in the justice system between the prosecution’s need to prove guilt and the protection of the rights of the accused.

In summary, the Lucas Direction serves as a safeguard against wrongful convictions and underscores the importance of a fair trial. It is a reminder that while the truth is paramount in the pursuit of justice, the reasons behind a person’s actions, including their lies, must be thoroughly examined and understood. The legacy of Regina v Lucas (Ruth) continues to influence the administration of justice, ensuring that juries are properly directed on how to approach evidence of lies in the context of a criminal trial.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

Can you Criticise a Judge ?

criticise the judiciary

In short, the answer is yes anyone can criticise a judge or court.

The judiciary and courts are quite rightly not immune to public criticism and comment. The rule of law applies to everyone and no one should be above the law.

Scandalising the judiciary, also known as scandalising the court or scandalising judges, was historically considered a form of contempt of court in the common law of England and Wales.

It involved any publication or speech that would undermine public confidence in the judiciary or its officers, such as judges and magistrates.

However, the Crime and Courts Act 2013 abolished the offence of scandalising the judiciary under the common law of England and Wales.

Section 33 of the Act specifically states

“Scandalising the judiciary (also referred to as scandalising the court or scandalising judges) is abolished as a form of contempt of court under the common law of England and Wales.”

Crime and Courts Act 2013 Section 33

The decision to abolish the offence was controversial, with supporters of the change arguing that it was necessary to ensure that freedom of expression was protected and that the judiciary were not immune to criticism.

While the offence of scandalising the judiciary no longer exists under the common law of England and Wales, other forms of contempt of court still apply.

These include disobedience to court orders, interference with court proceedings, and publication of material that could prejudice ongoing legal proceedings.

In conclusion, scandalising the judiciary was once considered a form of contempt of court in England and Wales, but this offence was abolished by the Crime and Courts Act 2013.

It should however be noted that libel and slander are both forms of defamation, which involve making a false statement about someone that damages their reputation.

In the United Kingdom, the laws around libel and slander are governed by the Defamation Act 2013, which replaced the previous common law rules on defamation.

Formal complaints about judges can be made at the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO).

The JCIO are an independent office which supports the Lord Chancellor and Lady Chief Justice in considering complaints about the personal conduct of judicial office holders.

The JCIO cannot accept complaints about a judge’s decision or the way a judge has managed a case.

The Law Commission published a consultation paper (no207) in 2012 entitled Contempt of Court : Scandalising the Court

cp207_Scandalising_the_CourtDownload

Check out our articles on HHJ Farquhar, HHJ Bedford, Dodgy Judges, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Etiquette and Manners in Court and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is Unlawful ?

Unlawful

In the realm of law and order, the term “unlawful” denotes actions or behaviours that run counter to established laws, regulations, or ethical standards within a given society.

It serves as a fundamental concept in delineating the boundaries of acceptable conduct, guiding individuals, institutions, and authorities in upholding justice and social order. Understanding what constitutes unlawfulness is pivotal for fostering fairness, equity, and respect for the rule of law.

At its essence, unlawfulness encompasses actions prohibited by law. These can range from minor infractions like speeding to more serious offences such as theft, assault, or homicide.

The severity of unlawfulness varies depending on the nature and impact of the transgression, with legal systems categorising offences into different degrees of seriousness, each carrying its own set of penalties and repercussions.

Central to determining unlawfulness is the existence of legal statutes or regulations that explicitly outline prohibited actions and stipulate the corresponding consequences for violating them. These laws are established through legislative processes by governing bodies, reflecting societal norms, values, and priorities.

Additionally, legal principles such as precedent, common law, and judicial interpretation play a vital role in elucidating the scope and application of these laws in specific cases.

Beyond statutory laws, unlawfulness can also arise from breaches of contractual agreements, where parties fail to fulfil their obligations or engage in actions contrary to the terms of their agreements.

Contractual unlawfulness is governed by contract law, which provides mechanisms for resolving disputes arising from such breaches, including compensation, restitution, or specific performance.

Furthermore, unlawfulness extends beyond legal statutes to encompass actions that contravene fundamental principles of morality, decency, or human rights. These may include acts of discrimination, harassment, or abuse that undermine the dignity, equality, or well-being of individuals or groups within society. While not always codified in legal statutes, such behaviours may still be subject to legal scrutiny and condemnation, particularly in jurisdictions with robust human rights legislation or constitutional protections.

The concept of unlawfulness is closely intertwined with notions of justice, fairness, and accountability. A cornerstone of the rule of law is the equal application of legal standards to all individuals, ensuring that no one is exempt from legal accountability.

Upholding unlawfulness through impartial enforcement of laws and regulations is essential for fostering trust in legal institutions and promoting social cohesion.

However, it’s important to acknowledge that perceptions of unlawfulness may vary across different cultures, societies, and historical contexts. What is deemed unlawful in one jurisdiction may be deemed acceptable or even sanctioned in another, reflecting diverse legal traditions, values, and priorities. Moreover, as societal norms evolve and legal frameworks adapt, definitions of unlawfulness are subject to change over time to address emerging challenges and meet evolving needs.

In conclusion, unlawfulness encompasses actions or behaviours that contravene established laws, regulations, or ethical standards within a given society. It serves as a guiding principle in maintaining order, justice, and social harmony, and upholding the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law is crucial for fostering trust in legal institutions and promoting a just and equitable society.

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Policing, Police News, Policing by Consent, Wasting Police Time, and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

Injustice in the Single Justice Procedure ?

HM Courts and Tribunal Service

HM Courts and Tribunal Service have published a Fact sheet entitled Single Justice Service on their website. The Fact Sheet is worryingly described as “Promotional material“.

The Single Justice Service (SJS) allows magistrates’ courts to deal with minor offences in a way that’s quicker, more straightforward and more efficient, while still being fair, transparent and rigorous. This process is known as the Single Justice Procedure (SJP).

A single magistrate, supported by a legal adviser, can decide adult, summary-only, non-imprisonable and victimless offences, including company prosecutions.

They can do this when the defendant has pleaded guilty or has not responded to notification that they’re being prosecuted.

The defendant always has the option to choose to attend a hearing in court in person.

Examples of cases covered by the SJP include:

  • using a television without a licence
  • failing to show a valid train ticket while travelling on a train service
  • driving without car insurance
  • exceeding a speed limit
  • failing to ensure a dependent child’s school attendance
  • excess vehicle load
  • lack of valid vehicle operator’s licence

Is the Single Justice Service (SJS) quicker, more straightforward and more efficient, while still being fair, transparent and rigorous ?

Justice or Injustice

Tristan Kirk who is the Courts correspondent for the Evening Standard regularly posts on X about dubious and immoral convictions using the Single Justice Procedure.

Bristol woman, 57, prosecuted for not paying for a TV Licence
“I have no family or friends…my only lifeline is a TV”
Disabled, & depressed after her daughter’s death. Struggles with opening letters. #SingleJusticeProcedure

Tristan Kirk on X
Tristan Kirk Courts correspondent for the Evening Standard

This is an absolute disgrace.

The Single Justice Procedure is clearly not justice !

pjm1kbw KC Barrister at 1KBW
Injustice in the Single Justice Procedure

Lady Chief Justice to look into flaws of controversial fast-track justice system

Tristan Kirk wrote in the Standard on the 8th February 2024 :-

The top judge in England and Wales has promised to investigate the workings of a controversial fast-track court system after an Evening Standard investigation revealed how the elderly, vulnerable and mentally ill people are convicted in closed-door hearings.

The Lady Chief Justice, Lady Carr of Walton-on-the Hill, backed the single justice procedure when questioned on the fairness of the system, calling it “proportionate” for low-level crimes.

“I think the safeguards are there, both in terms of open justice and protection for the individual involved.”

Lady Carr said she would look into how mentally ill defendants are supported in the procedure, and vowed to inspect how decisions are taken at private hearings. She even suggested she may sit in judgment on SJP cases.

Top judge to look into flaws of controversial fast-track justice system

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is Injustice ?

injustice

Injustice is a pervasive and complex concept that transcends geographical, cultural, and temporal boundaries, manifesting in various forms that deeply impact individuals and communities.

At its core, injustice refers to the violation of principles of fairness, equity, and moral rightness within social, political, economic, and legal contexts. The intricate nature of injustice makes it challenging to encapsulate in a singular definition, as its manifestations evolve and adapt to the dynamics of society.

One fundamental aspect of injustice lies in the unequal distribution of resources and opportunities.

Economic injustice, for instance, is evident when certain groups or individuals face systemic barriers preventing them from accessing basic needs, education, or employment opportunities. This form of inequality perpetuates cycles of poverty and limits the upward mobility of marginalised communities, creating a stark contrast between the privileged and the disenfranchised.

Social injustice encompasses discrimination based on race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other defining characteristics. Prejudice and bias embedded within societal structures lead to unequal treatment, limiting the rights and opportunities available to certain groups. Discriminatory practices can manifest in subtle ways, such as microaggressions, or in more overt forms like systemic racism, reinforcing power imbalances and perpetuating stereotypes that fuel inequality.

Within the legal system, injustice emerges when the application of laws and regulations favours particular groups while disadvantaging others. Legal injustices can range from biased law enforcement practices to discriminatory sentencing, ultimately eroding trust in the judicial system. In some instances, unjust laws themselves may exist, further marginalising specific communities and impeding progress toward a more equitable society.

Political injustice often stems from the abuse of power, corruption, and the suppression of dissent. When leaders prioritize personal gain over the welfare of their constituents, democratic principles are undermined, leading to a lack of representation and accountability. Authoritarian regimes, censorship, and voter suppression are among the myriad ways political injustice can manifest, stifling the voices of those who seek a fair and inclusive governance structure.

Injustice is not solely confined to a macroscopic level; it permeates interpersonal relationships as well.

In everyday life, individuals may experience injustice through bullying, harassment, or exclusion based on personal characteristics. The repercussions of such injustices extend beyond immediate harm, contributing to the perpetuation of harmful social norms and attitudes.

Efforts to combat injustice require a comprehensive approach that addresses its multifaceted nature. Education and awareness play crucial roles in dismantling stereotypes and challenging ingrained biases.

Legal and policy reforms are essential to ensure the fair treatment of all individuals, regardless of their background. Grassroots movements and advocacy are powerful tools for challenging systemic injustices, fostering a collective commitment to building a more equitable and inclusive society.

In conclusion, injustice is a complex and pervasive phenomenon that manifests in various forms across societal structures. It encompasses economic, social, legal, and political dimensions, as well as interpersonal relationships.

Understanding the intricacies of injustice is essential for fostering meaningful change, as it empowers individuals and communities to challenge systemic inequalities and work towards a more just and equitable world.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

What does Lady Justice Symbolise ?

lady justice

Lady Justice, often depicted as a graceful figure holding a sword, scales, and sometimes wearing a blindfold, is an iconic symbol of the judicial system.

Her image evokes a sense of impartiality, fairness, and the pursuit of justice. Through the ages, Lady Justice has come to embody the ideals of a just society, representing the principles upon which legal systems are built.

In this article, we will explore the history, meaning, and significance of Lady Justice, focusing on the symbolism behind her scales, sword, and blindfold.

Historical Origins and Evolution

The origins of Lady Justice can be traced back to ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. In Greece, she was known as “Themis,” the daughter of Uranus (Heaven) and Gaia (Earth). Themis was the personification of divine law, order, and justice.

The Romans adopted this concept and named her “Justitia” – the goddess of Justice within Roman mythology. Over time, her imagery and symbolism evolved to what we now recognise as Lady Justice.

The Scales of Justice

One of the most prominent features of Lady Justice is the scales she holds in her hand. The scales symbolize the weighing of evidence and arguments in a court of law. They represent the need for a balanced and impartial consideration of facts and arguments before reaching a fair judgment. Lady Justice reminds us that justice must be meted out objectively, based on the merits of each case.

The Sword

Lady Justice also holds a sword. The sword represents the power and authority of the judiciary to enforce the law and protect society. It signifies the role of justice in upholding the rule of law and maintaining order. The sword reminds us that justice has the strength to cut through falsehoods, expose the truth, and hold accountable those who have violated the law.

The Blindfold

Lady Justice’s blindfold, if depicted, is a powerful symbol of impartiality and the fair application of the law. By covering her eyes, she demonstrates her commitment to judge each case solely on its merits, without bias or favouritism. The blindfold represents the ideal that justice should be blind to factors such as wealth, status, race, or gender. It ensures that all individuals, regardless of their background, are treated equally under the law.

It has been said that the addition of the blindfold in the 16th century was intended to show Lady Justice as blind to the injustice carried on before her.

The Fight Against Injustice

Lady Justice stands as a potent symbol in the ongoing struggle against injustice. Throughout history, societies have faced numerous instances of injustice, where the principles of fairness and equity have been disregarded. There have been many cases where the blindfold has been lifted, and justice has been influenced by prejudice, political pressure, or systemic biases.

Lady Justice serves as a constant reminder of the importance of upholding these principles and working towards a just society. She encourages us to fight against corruption, discrimination, and inequality, and to advocate for the rights of the marginalised and oppressed.

‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere’

Dr Martin Luther King, Jr

Conclusion

Lady Justice, with her scales, blindfold, and sword, represents the pillars of fairness, equity, and the pursuit of justice. Her image has evolved over time, reflecting the ideals of different civilizations.

Lady Justice serves as a constant reminder of the need for a balanced consideration of evidence, an unbiased application of the law, and the power of justice to combat injustice.

As society continues to strive for a just and equitable future, Lady Justice will remain an emblematic figure, inspiring us to fight for a world where fairness and equity prevail.

Check out our article on the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board and make up your own mind.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is Section 35 ABCP Act 2014 ?

section 35

Section 35 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 grants police officers the power to direct a person to leave a specified area for up to 48 hours if certain conditions are met.

The Met Police were recently criticised for their use of Section 35 powers to arrest Tommy Robinson who was attending a march against antisemitism in London whilst working as a journalist.


(1) If the conditions in subsections (2) and (3) are met and an authorisation is in force under section 34, a constable in uniform may direct a person who is in a public place in the locality specified in the authorisation—

(a) to leave the locality (or part of the locality), and

(b) not to return to the locality (or part of the locality) for the period specified in the direction (“the exclusion period”).

(2) The first condition is that the constable has reasonable grounds to suspect that the behaviour of the person in the locality has contributed or is likely to contribute to—

(a) members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or

(b) the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder.

(3) The second condition is that the constable considers that giving a direction to the person is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of the events mentioned in subsection (2)(a) or (b).

(4) The exclusion period may not exceed 48 hours.

The period may expire after (as long as it begins during) the period specified in the authorisation under section 34.

(5) A direction under this section—

(a) must be given in writing, unless that is not reasonably practicable;

(b) must specify the area to which it relates;

(c) may impose requirements as to the time by which the person must leave the area and the manner in which the person must do so (including the route).

(6) The constable must (unless it is not reasonably practicable) tell the person to whom the direction is given that failing without reasonable excuse to comply with the direction is an offence.

(7) If the constable reasonably believes that the person to whom the direction is given is under the age of 16, the constable may remove the person to a place where the person lives or a place of safety.

(8) Any constable may withdraw or vary a direction under this section; but a variation must not extend the duration of a direction beyond 48 hours from when it was first given.

(9) Notice of a withdrawal or variation of a direction—

(a) must be given to the person to whom the direction was given, unless that is not reasonably practicable, and

(b) if given, must be given in writing unless that is not reasonably practicable.

(10) In this section “public place” means a place to which at the material time the public or a section of the public has access, on payment or otherwise, as of right or by virtue of express or implied permission.

(11) In this Part “exclusion period” has the meaning given by subsection (1)(b).

Directions excluding a person from an area Section 35 ABCP Act 2014

These conditions include the officer having reasonable grounds to suspect that the person’s behaviour has contributed or is likely to contribute to members of the public being harassed, alarmed, or distressed, or to the occurrence of crime or disorder in the area.

The direction must be given in writing (unless impractical), specify the area, and may include requirements on the time and manner of departure, including the route. Failing to comply with the direction is an offence.

The power can be exercised by a Police Constable or a Police Community Support Officer. and must be authorised by a police officer of at least the rank of inspector. Section 34 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 details the Authorisations to use powers under section 35.

(1) A police officer of at least the rank of inspector may authorise the use in a specified locality, during a specified period of not more than 48 hours, of the powers given by section 35.

“Specified” means specified in the authorisation.

(2) An officer may give such an authorisation only if satisfied on reasonable grounds that the use of those powers in the locality during that period may be necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of—

(a) members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or

(b) the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder.

(3) In deciding whether to give such an authorisation an officer must have particular regard to the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly set out in articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.

“Convention” has the meaning given by section 21(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998.

(4) An authorisation under this section—

(a) must be in writing,

(b) must be signed by the officer giving it, and

(c) must specify the grounds on which it is given.

Authorisations to use powers under section 35 Section 34 ABCP Act 2014

Challenge a Section 35 Order

There are several ways to challenge the use of Section 35 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 if you believe that the powers have been used inappropriately or unfairly :-

  1. Complain to the Police: Initially, you can make a complaint to the police force that issued the direction under Section 35. Each police force and local authority will have a formal complaints procedure.
  2. Independent Review: If you are not satisfied with the response from the police or local authority, you can seek an independent review. For police complaints, this may involve the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
  3. Judicial Review: As a last resort, you can consider a judicial review, which is a type of court proceeding where a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body. A judicial review could challenge the way in which the powers were exercised.
  4. Legal Advice: It is advisable to seek legal advice if you are considering challenging the use of these powers. A solicitor can provide guidance on the merits of your case and the appropriate course of action.

Remember, the use of these powers is subject to certain conditions and must be proportionate to the issue being addressed. The rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, as set out in the Human Rights Act 1998, must also be considered by the authorities when exercising these powers.

If you need detailed guidance or support, you may want to consult a legal professional who specialises in this area of law. They can provide personalised advice based on the specifics of your situation.

Public place” includes any highway and any other premises or place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise ”.

Section 33 Criminal Justice Act 1972

Check out our articles on HHJ Farquhar, HHJ Bedford and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

Bar Standards Board Justice ?

bar standards board justice

The Bar Standards Board published disciplinary findings against barrister Mr Thomas David Davidson on the 21st November 2023.

Thomas Davidson, a practising barrister, behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession, in that, on 7 February 2022 at Salisbury Magistrates Court, following the conclusion of a trial during which he had represented a defendant before a Bench consisting of three Lay Magistrates, and after the Chairperson raised with him the issue of his having used a German accent during the proceedings and telling him that this conduct had been inappropriate, Mr Davidson looked at the Bench and said “Jawohl” at the same time as raising a hand in a Nazi salute, which conduct was seriously offensive and discreditable.

For professional misconduct contrary to Core Duty 5 of the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales, Thomas Davidson was reprimanded and fined £250 with costs of £1,750.00.

The work that the Bar Standards Board do is governed by the Legal Services Act 2007 (the Act) as well as a number of other statutes.

The BSB Handbook contains the rules about how barristers must behave and work. Version 4.7 of the BSB Handbook came into force on the 20th September 2023.

This is hardly a punishment or deterrent by the Bar Standards Board. Where is the justice in this pathetic reprimand ?

Why was he not dealt with by the magistrates for contempt of court ?

•    setting the education and training requirements for becoming a barrister;
•    setting continuing training requirements to ensure that barristers’ skills are maintained throughout their careers;
•    setting standards of conduct for barristers;
•    authorising organisations that focus on advocacy, litigation, and specialist legal advice;
•    monitoring the service provided by barristers and the organisations we authorise to ensure they meet our requirements; and
•    considering reported concerns about barristers and the organisations we authorise and taking enforcement or other action where appropriate.

Bar Standards Board Responsibilities

Zaheer Ahmad, called by Lincoln’s Inn in October 2011, suspended from practice for 6 months after failing to comply with a court order (4th April 2024)

Stephen Taylor, called by Inner Temple in July 2002, suspended from practice for 6 months for lying (10th April 2024)

Check out our articles on Barristers, Direct Access Barristers, Bar Standards Board, Solicitors, Rule of Law and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

We recommend you should always seek formal legal advice if required, from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

We have a number of links to Free Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on our Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Read the reviews of Gavin Howe Barrister

“He is awful, underhanded and should not be practising law!”

Latest Articles

All articles can be found in our Sitemap or Legal Blog pages.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent

Access To Justice Is A Right Not A Privilege
Equal Justice Under Law