Categories
Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Bar Standards Board Justice !

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 (CD5) 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 5.0 of the BSB Handbook came into force on the 21st May 2024.

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

Check out our articles on Barristers, Gavin Howe, Eleanor Battie, Direct Access Barristers, Inns of Court, Bar Standards Board, Bar Council, Law Society, Legal Services Board, Rule of Law, Lincoln’s Inn and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary

Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (JACO)

Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman JACO

The Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (JACO) is a UK government organisation that provides an independent review of complaints about the conduct of judicial office holders and the judicial appointments process.

JACO works with the Ministry of Justice and can look into complaints about how investigating bodies have handled allegations of misconduct by judicial office holders, as well as complaints about the judicial appointments process1.

Here’s what JACO does:-

Judicial Conduct Complaints

If someone is not satisfied with how a complaint about a judge, magistrate, tribunal member, or coroner was handled, they can apply to JACO. The complaint must have already been considered by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, tribunal president, or magistrates’ advisory committee.

For judicial conduct investigations process complaints, the JACO are responsible for:

  • considering complaints about the judicial conduct investigations process
  • asking the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, a tribunal president, or magistrates’ advisory committee to re-investigate a complaint where appropriate
  • recommending changes to procedure in order to prevent the same issue from happening again
  • proposing that compensation be paid if we believe that a complainant has suffered because of maladministration

JACO Judicial Conduct Complaint Form

Complete the JACO judicial conduct complaint form to ask the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman to look into the handling of a complaint about judicial conduct.

Judicial Appointment Complaints

JACO also looks at how complaints about the judicial appointments process are handled.

For judicial appointment complaints, the JACO are responsible for:

JACO Judicial Appointment Complaint Form

Complete the JACO judicial appointment complaint form to ask the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman to look into the handling of a complaint about judicial appointment.

Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman

The current Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman is Douglas Marshall. If you need to contact JACO, their email address is [email protected]

Office of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
Postal Point 1.55
1st Floor, the Tower
102 petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
United Kingdom

JACO Important Information

It’s important to note that JACO cannot help with a court or tribunal case, investigate a judicial office holder, or say whether their actions amount to misconduct. They also cannot reopen a court or tribunal case, review a judge’s decision, reprimand the office holder, remove them from office, or force anyone to pay compensation. However, they can recommend an apology, compensation for any loss suffered, or changes to the judicial complaint process.

JACO Decisions

The ombudsman’s decision is final and cannot be appealed against. For more detailed information, you can visit the official JACO website.

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

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary

Senior President of Tribunals

Senior President of Tribunals Sir Keith Lindblom

The Senior President of Tribunals is the independent and statutory leader of the tribunal judiciary. The office of the Senior President of Tribunals is independent of both the Executive and the Chief Justices, and was established under the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

The new Senior President of Tribunals, Sir James Dingemans, was sworn in, by the Lady Chief Justice, at a ceremony in the Royal Courts of Justice on the 2nd October 2025.

Just as the Lady Chief Justice heads the judiciary in England and Wales, the Senior President heads the tribunals judiciary, although his remit extends to Scotland and Northern Ireland depending on the jurisdiction concerned (Immigration and Asylum as well as Tax are UK-wide).

The Senior President of Tribunals provides leadership for around 5,000 office-holders., all those within the First-tier and Upper Tribunals and the Employment Tribunals. This includes all the Chamber Presidents and their Tribunal Judges and members, as well as those within Employment Tribunals in England and Wales and their Scottish counterpart, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal.

The Senior President has a number of statutory responsibilities. These include representing the views of tribunals judiciary to the Lord Chancellor, parliament and ministers.

Check out our related articles on Judiciary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law Legal Analysis

Photography in Court

photography in court

Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925 (CJA 1925) makes it an offence to take any photograph, make or attempt to make any portrait or sketch of a justice or a witness in, or a party to, any proceedings before the court, either in the courtroom or its precincts. A court precinct are its buildings and land.

According to the CPS, the penalty on summary conviction is a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. A Level 3 fine is a maximum of £1,000 and is published on the Sentencing Council website. The CJA 1925, however only provides for a fine not exceeding £50.

(1) No person shall—

(a) take or attempt to take in any court any photograph, or with a view to publication make or attempt to make in any court any portrait or sketch, of any person, being a judge of the court or a juror or a witness in or a party to any proceedings before the court, whether civil or criminal; or

(b) publish any photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made in contravention of the foregoing provisions of this section or any reproduction thereof;

and if any person acts in contravention of this section he shall, on summary conviction, be liable in respect of each offence to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.

Criminal Justice Act 1925 Section 41

The Criminal Justice Act 1925 comes into effect within the precinct of a Crown Court; whereas the Contempt of Court Act 1981 comes into effect on all other HMCTS sites.

The offence at s41 CJA 1925 can be charged as a criminal offence in accordance with the Director’s Guidance on Charging, or the underlying behaviour can be dealt with by the court as a contempt in accordance with the summary procedure at Rule 48.5 of the Criminal Procedure Rules – see R v D (Contempt of Court: Illegal Photography) [2004] EWCA Crim 1271, or on a later application to the High Court by the Attorney General.

If dealt with by summons or charge normal time limits apply. The decision whether to charge a criminal offence or to bring proceedings for contempt will depend on the facts of the case, including the gravity of the interference with the administration of justice.

In Solicitor General v Cox [2016] EWHC 1241 (QB) the Solicitor General brought proceedings for common law contempt in respect of photos and videos taken in court and posted online along with derogatory comments about the judge. The court found that both the taking and publication of the illegally taken images, accompanied by pejorative comments about a judge, amounted to contempt, in circumstances where the contemnor knew phones were banned and had acted in deliberate defiance of it. The court considered the gravity of the risks and of the interference with the due administration of justice in the case and held that proceedings for contempt, rather than prosecution of the criminal offence, were appropriate.

The case of Cox highlights the extent to which the use of social media can interfere with the administration of justice and the need to take appropriate action. Prosecutors should refer to the Criminal Practice Directions (CPD I General matters 6C. This clarifies the use which may be made of live text-based communications, such as mobile email, social media (including Twitter) and internet-enabled laptops in and from courts).

Where evidence exists of an offence contrary to s.41 CJA 1925 prosecutors should assist the court by reference to the above considerations. The court initially decides on whether action must be taken by application of the summary contempt procedure at Rule 48.5. In the magistrates’ court the summary contempt procedure must be completed that day – see Practice and Procedure below. If the court does not proceed in this manner a decision has to be made on whether to proceed by charge or to refer the matter to the Attorney General having regard to the gravity of the risks and interference with the due administration of justice in the case.

Two options

  1. If the offender is apprehended on the day and the court is sitting advise court that it can deal with it as a contempt of court there and then, using the summary procedure at Rule 48.5 above, or have the police decide whether to charge an offence contrary to s.41 Criminal Justice Act 1925. If a magistrates’ court decides to deal with it there and then it may receive an apology but cannot impose a sanction – see Rule 48.5 procedure above.
  2. If the court does not deal with it there and then the normal police investigation and charge procedure applies. The offence is at s41 Criminal Justice Act 1925. Penalty is a level 3 fine. AG consent is not required so police can charge. Prosecutors note – there is no need to contact AGO when this scenario occurs unless the risks and interference with the due administration of justice was particularly grave. See Solicitor General v Cox where particularly serious issue.
Photography in court – Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Legal Guidance

Contempt of Court

Contempt of Court is conduct that denotes wilful defiance of, or disrespect towards the court, or that wilfully challenges or affronts the authority of the court or the supremacy of the law itself.

Photography Ban and the Crimes and Courts Act 2013 

According to The Law Society Gazette article Court photography ban under review in transparency drive written by Monidipa Fouzder and published on the 11th May 2023 :-

A ban imposed nearly 100 years ago on photography in courts could be lifted under ideas being floated by the government to make the justice system more transparent.

A call for evidence published by the Ministry of Justice today asks if the 1925 prohibition on photography and 1981 prohibition on sound recording remain fit for purpose.

The Crimes and Courts Act 2013 allows the ban to be disapplied in certain circumstances by secondary legislation. For instance, the Court of Appeal and Competition Appeal Tribunal can broadcast proceedings. The Crown court can broadcast sentencing remarks. The Supreme Court is excluded from the two bans because cases heard by the UK’s highest court, which was established in 2009, would have previously been heard in the House of Lords where broadcasting was allowed.

Court photography ban under review in transparency drive

Video of Crown Court and Court of Appeal Cases

The latest cases as captured by Sky News cameras in the Crown Court and Court of Appeal are published on the Sky News – Courts YouTube Channel.

Please be advised that the published videos by Sky News may contain graphic descriptions of serious crimes, including murder and sexual offences.

Check out our articles on Judiciary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Mr Justice Williams, His Honour Judge Richardson, His Honour Now His Dishonour, His Honour Judge Michael Slater, His Honour Judge Martin Davis, HHJ Farquhar, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

What is Recusal ?

judge steps down recusal

Judges have a duty to act impartially and without bias. This duty is enshrined in common law principles and is essential for upholding the rule of law.

Recusal is an important ethical and legal principle in the justice system, designed to ensure that legal proceedings are conducted fairly and impartially, and that the rights of all parties are protected. It helps maintain public trust in the legal system and upholds the principles of justice and due process.

The basic principle is that a court or tribunal hearing a case must be impartial and that justice “should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done” R v Sussex Justices

Recusal is when a judge steps down (recuses) from hearing a case on the basis that it’s not appropriate for them to deal with it. They may have a conflict of interest or there might be actual, presumed or apparent bias against a party. There may also be a real possibility that a fair-minded observer would conclude that the judge should not try the case because they cannot be impartial.

A judge can decide to recuse themselves of their own volition, or a party can make an application for recusal. The application should be made at the beginning of any hearing or proceedings.

A Practical Law article RECUSAL OF JUDGES IN CIVIL LITIGATION is published on the 3 Paper Buildings (3PB) Chambers website.

Recusal-of-judges-1-w-034-0054Download

What is a conflict of interest ?

A conflict of interest (COI) refers to a situation in which a judge is involved in multiple interests or relationships, and these interests or relationships could potentially compromise their ability to make impartial or objective decisions. In such situations, there is a risk that personal or financial considerations may unduly influence a judge’s actions or decisions.

What is bias ?

“Bias is an attitude of mind that prevents the judge from making an objective determination of the issues that they have to resolve” Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2) [2001] 1 WLR 700, Para 37.

The University of Oxford Faculty of Law published Determining Bias: A survey of the law in the United Kingdom in January 2020

Following the decision of the Court of Appeal in In Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2) [2001] 1 WLR 700, the accepted test is that laid down in Porter v Magill [2001] UKHL 67, [2002] 2 AC 357, para 103: “whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased”……. The characteristics of the fair-minded and informed observer are now well understood: he must adopt a balanced approach and will be taken to be a reasonable member of the public, neither unduly complacent or naïve nor unduly cynical or suspicious.

R v. Abdroikof (Appellant) and another (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Family Law Law

McKenzie Friend

mckenzie friend

The term McKenzie Friend stems from the landmark case of McKenzie v McKenzie in 1970 (McKenzie v McKenzie [1970] 3 WLR 472 CA), where a husband sought assistance from a non-legally qualified friend to represent him in court during divorce proceedings.

Can a McKenzie Friend Help You in Court? Everything* You Need to Know! – Alan Robertshaw Barrister

The Court of Appeal, in their judgment made in 1970, recognised that litigants, especially those without legal representation, could benefit from such support. Consequently, the role of McKenzie Friends was officially acknowledged, allowing individuals to accompany and assist Litigants in Person (LIP) in court.

In 2005 the Court of Appeal, in the matter of the children of Mr O’Connell, Mr Whelan and Mr Watson, further clarified the role of McKenzie friends.

Article 6 of the ECHR is engaged in any application by a litigant in person for the assistance of a McKenzie friend. Furthermore, in our judgment, two clear propositions stand out from the authorities as they apply to family proceedings.

These are:

(1) that the presumption in favour of the litigant being allowed the assistance of a McKenzie friend is a strong one; and

(2) that such a request should not be refused without good reason, even where the proceedings relate to a child and are being heard in private.

[2005] EWCA Civ 759 – LORD JUSTICE THORPE and LORD JUSTICE WALL

Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with a person’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Role and Responsibilities of McKenzie Friends

McKenzie Friends are volunteers, friends, family members, or sometimes paid advisors, who assist litigants in various ways. They are not lawyers, but their involvement can be valuable.

A McKenzie Friend can help litigants by providing emotional support, taking notes during proceedings, offering practical advice, and helping with case preparation.

However, it is essential to note that McKenzie Friends cannot address the court directly or act as legal representatives.

Practice Guidance: McKenzie Friends (Civil and Family Courts)

In July 2010, the role of McKenzie Friends was formalised through the issuance of Practice Guidance by the then Master of the Rolls and the President of the Family Division.

mckenzie-friends-practice-guidance-july-2010Download

The guidance aims to ensure a consistent and fair approach across the civil and family courts when dealing with McKenzie Friends. This Practice Guidance is essential in establishing the parameters and responsibilities of McKenzie Friends in court proceedings.

Guidance from the President’s Office- McKenzie Friends

A guidance document was published by the then President of the Family Division in 2005.

pfd-guidance-mckenzie-friendsDownload

The Courts and Tribunal Judiciary list both guidance documents on their McKenzie Friend webpage.

Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends

A consultation paper entitled Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends was published by the Lord Chief Justice in February 2016.

mf-consultation-paper-feb2016-1Download

A Consultation Response Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends was published by the Lord Chief Justice in February 2019

MF-Consultation-LCJ-Response-Final-Feb-2019Download

Notice of McKenzie Friend

Here is a an example Notice of McKenzie friend which should be completed and handed to the usher before the hearing starts. If you are attending a remote hearing, then you should email the court before the start of the hearing.

notice_of_mckenzie_friendDownload

There is no legal requirement to share this form with the other party (Family or Civil Proceedings).

(2) Paragraph (1) applies to any communication in which any representation is made to the court on a matter of substance or procedure but does not apply to communications that are purely routine, uncontentious and administrative.

FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE 5.7 – PART 5: FORMS, START OF PROCEEDINGS AND COMMUNICATION WITH THE COURT

This practice direction supplements Part 5 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010

1. Rule 5.7(1) FPR 2010 makes provision in relation to the requirement to disclose and, if in writing, to copy any communication with the court to the other parties or their representatives. Exceptions to the requirement are specified in rule 5.7(2), (3) and (7) FPR 2010. This practice direction supplements rule 5.7(7) FPR 2010.

FAMILY PRACTICE DIRECTION 5C – COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COURT

Court Refusal of the Request for Assistance from a McKenzie Friend

The purpose of allowing a litigant in person the assistance of a McKenzie friend is to further the interests of justice by achieving a level playing field and ensuring a fair hearing.

We endorse the proposition that the presumption in favour of allowing a litigant in person the assistance of a McKenzie friend is very strong, and that such a request should only be refused for compelling reasons.

Furthermore, should a judge identify such reasons, (s)he must explain them carefully and fully to both the litigant in person and the would-be McKenzie friend.

[2005] EWCA Civ 759 – LORD JUSTICE THORPE and LORD JUSTICE WALL

Check out our related articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friends Rights of Audience, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

ULEZ Bag Crime ?

Ulez Ultra Low Emission Zone Crime

ULEZ is London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s much-hated and deeply unpopular road charge, which has seen protests, violence and vandalism (criminal damage) throughout Greater London.

The ULEZ scheme was expanded to cover all of Greater London on Tuesday 29th August 2023. Ulez charges (fines) older, more polluting vehicles £12.50 a day and is currently the largest clean air zone in the world.

The Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, every day of the year, except Christmas Day (25th December). The zone operates across all London boroughs, and does not include the M25.

At least a quarter of the cameras in London’s newly expanded Ultra Low Emission Zone have been damaged by vandals, new data reveals.

Campaigners this week have stepped up efforts to deface the cameras installed in wake of mayor Sadiq Khan’s controversial extension of the scheme, which is now clobbering thousands more drivers with £12.50 a day charges.

ULEZ vandals damage ‘a quarter of all new cameras in expansion zone’ amid backlash over Sadiq Khan’s ultra-low emissions scheme – Daily Mail 1st September 2023

Is putting a bag over a ULEZ camera criminal damage or harmless civil disobedience ?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) publish legal guidance on Criminal Damage.

What is Criminal Damage ?

The Criminal Damage Act 1971 (CDA 1971) is the primary source of offences involving damage to property.

Section 1(1) CDA 1971 – A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage any such property, or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged, shall be guilty of an offence.

This offence is triable either way – para. 29, Schedule 1 Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 (MCA 1980).The maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment – Section 4 CDA 1971.

What is the Meaning of Property ?

Property” in the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (CDA 1971) means property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal. – Section 10.

The CDA 1971 requires proof that tangible property has been damaged, not necessarily that the damage itself should be tangible. Property does not however include intangibles or things in action.

What is Damage ?

Damage is not defined by the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (CDA 1971).

It should be widely interpreted to include not only permanent or temporary physical harm, but also permanent or temporary impairment of value or usefulness – Morphitis v. Salmon [1990] Crim.L.R. 48.

Any alteration to the physical nature of the property concerned may amount to damage within the meaning of the section.

The courts have construed the term liberally and included damage that is not permanent such as smearing mud on the walls of a police cell.

Where the interference amounts to an impairment of the value or usefulness of the property to the owner, then the necessary damage is established – R v Whiteley [1991] 93 Crim. App. R. 25.

Mens Rea

Mens Rea refers to criminal intent. The literal translation from Latin is “guilty mind.” The plural of mens rea is mentes reae. Mens rea​ is the state of mind statutorily required in order to convict a particular defendant of a particular crime. Establishing the mens rea of an offender, in addition to the actus reus (physical elements of the crime) is usually necessary to prove guilt in a criminal trial.

Cornell Law School

Without Lawful Excuse

Section 5 of the CDA 1971 sets out a defence to criminal damage charges, though not to aggravated criminal damage under s.1(2) – see s.5(1) CDA 1971. A person has a lawful excuse if

  • they believed at the time that those whom they believed to be entitled to consent to the destruction of or damage to the property in question had so consented, or would have so consented to it if they had known of the destruction or damage and its circumstances; or
  • at the time of the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence they believed:
    • that the property, right or interest was in immediate need of protection; and
    • that the means of protection adopted or proposed to be adopted were or would be reasonable having regard to all the circumstances.

Tried Summarily

The provisions of s. 22 and Schedule 2 Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 (MCA) deal with the determination of mode of trial for those offences, referred to as “scheduled offences” that are mentioned in the first column of Schedule 2 MCA 1980.

Where a person is charged with an offence contrary to s.1(1) CDA 1971 or with aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring such an offence, or with attempting to commit, or inciting such an offence, and the value involved is less than £5,000, they must be tried summarily.

Tried summarily is an offence that can be tried only in a magistrates’ court.

It is important to note that there are two exceptions set out in Schedule 2 where the offence will be triable either way even if the value of the destroyed property or damage amounts to less than £5000. These are:

  • if the damage was caused by fire (the offence will be arson – see below); and
  • if the damage was done to a memorial on or after 28 June 2022.

Civil Disobedience on Conscientious Grounds

The common law has always been sensitive to the position of protesters when it comes to both prosecution and sentencing.

“My Lords, civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country.

People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometimes vindicated by history.

The suffragettes are an example which comes immediately to mind. It is the mark of a civilised community that it can accommodate protests and demonstrations of this kind.

But there are conventions which are generally accepted by the law-breakers on one side and the law-enforcers on the other.

The protesters behave with a sense of proportion and do not cause excessive damage or inconvenience. And they vouch the sincerity of their beliefs by accepting the penalties imposed by the law.

The police and prosecutors, on the other hand, behave with restraint and the magistrates impose sentences which take the conscientious motives of the protesters into account.

The conditional discharges ordered by the magistrates in the cases which came before them exemplifies their sensitivity to these conventions.”

Lord Hoffmann – R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 161 at [89]:

Is putting a bag over a ULEZ camera criminal damage ?

I am not a lawyer and this is purely my opinion of the Criminal Damage Act 1971. This is not legal advice ! I am not condoning or encouraging any form of criminal behaviour or civil disobedience.

  • Putting a bag over a ULEZ camera would be a temporary impairment of usefulness – Morphitis v. Salmon [1990] Crim.L.R. 48 and would therefore be classed as damage. This would be the Actus Reus (physical elements of the crime)
  • The Mens Rea would be to render the camera unable to carry out it’s function.
  • The damage would be less than £5000 so if prosecuted, it would be tried summarily in a magistrates’ court.
  • Civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. The police and prosecutors should behave with restraint and the magistrates impose sentences which take the conscientious motives of the protesters into account.

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, R v Sussex Justices, Policing by Consent and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary Legal Professionals

His Honour Judge Michael Slater

Circuit Judge HHJ

His Honour Judge Michael Slater, fell asleep during a trial and was subsequently investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office who issued a disciplinary statement on the 29th August 2023.

HHJ Michael Slater, a barrister, was appointed to be a circuit judge in November 2016 and deployed to the north eastern circuit, based at Sheffield Combined Court.

STATEMENT FROM THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT
INVESTIGATIONS OFFICE

His Honour Judge Michael Slater

A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said:

The Lord Chief Justice, with the Lord Chancellor’s agreement, has issued His Honour Judge Michael Slater with formal advice for misconduct after he was found to have fallen asleep in court during a hearing.

The Guide to Judicial Conduct reminds judges that they are expected to display diligence and care in the discharge of their duties. Judges are expected to ensure that their conduct maintains and enhances public confidence in the judiciary.

Following an investigation carried out under the Judicial Conduct (Judicial and other office holders) Rules 2014, a nominated judge found that HHJ Slater’s behaviour amounted to misconduct and recommended that he should be issued with formal advice.

In making their recommendation, the nominated judge took into account that HHJ Slater had accepted the allegation and apologised, that he was under a great deal of pressure dealing with an unremitting workload, and that his actions had not derailed the trial. They also took into account that HHJ Slater addressed the matter with parties in court and offered them a retrial, though neither party chose to take this up.

Having considered the facts of the case, the Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor agreed with the nominated judge that HHJ Slater’s actions amounted to judicial misconduct and that the appropriate disciplinary sanction is formal advice.

STATEMENT FROM THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS OFFICE  His Honour Judge Michael Slater
His Honour Judge SlaterNorth East15-11-2016
His Honour Judge Slater Appointment date

According to a Law Gazette article Judge with ‘unremitting workload’ fell asleep during trial published on the 30th August 2023, HHJ Slater fell asleep during a trial. No details were given by the JCIO of what the case was about, when it was heard or for how long the judge fell asleep.

A list of all Circuit Judges is published on the Courts and Tribunal Judiciary website.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Check out our articles on Dodgy Judges, His Honour Now His Dishonour, His Honour Judge Martin Davis, HHJ Farquhar, HHJ Bedford, DDJ Nicholes, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law

Libel and Slander

libel and slander

Libel and slander are both forms of defamation, which involve making a false statement about someone that damages their reputation.

Libel is a defamatory statement that is written. Slander is a defamatory statement that is oral.

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.

Defamation Act 2013

The Defamation Act 2013 defines defamation as a statement that “causes or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant”. It also sets out the criteria for what constitutes a defamatory statement, including whether the statement would lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society or whether it would cause the claimant to be shunned or avoided.

Under the Defamation Act 2013, a claimant has to show that the statement was published to a third party and that it referred to them directly or indirectly. The statement must also be shown to be false, unless it is a statement of opinion, in which case the defence of honest opinion may be used.

One of the key changes introduced by the Defamation Act 2013 was the introduction of a new defence of “truth”. If a defendant can prove that the statement is true, they will not be liable for defamation. The Act also introduced a defence of “honest opinion”, which can be used if the statement was a genuine expression of opinion, based on true facts, and was not malicious.

Another important change introduced by the Defamation Act 2013 was the requirement for claimants to show that they had suffered “serious harm” as a result of the defamatory statement. This was intended to prevent trivial claims from clogging up the courts and to ensure that claimants only pursued cases where there was a genuine loss.

Defamation

The role of solicitors and barristers in defamation cases is crucial. A solicitor will typically be the first point of contact for a potential claimant, and will assess the strength of their case and advise on whether it is worth pursuing. They will also be responsible for drafting the claim form and other legal documents, and for liaising with the defendant’s legal team.

The law says that the victim of libel or slander has just 12 months from the date of publication of the libellous or slanderous statement to start Court proceedings. The 12 month time limit can be varied in some circumstances.

Once the claim has been filed, the case will usually be heard in the High Court, although smaller cases may be heard in the County Court. In some cases, the parties may be able to reach a settlement before the case goes to court, but if the case proceeds to trial, a barrister will typically be instructed to represent the claimant.

Barristers are specialist advocates who are trained in the law and court procedure. They will provide advice on the strength of the case, draft legal arguments and represent the claimant in court. Barristers will also cross-examine witnesses and make closing submissions to the judge or jury.

Defendants in defamation cases will also typically be represented by a solicitor and barrister. Their role will be to defend the claim and argue that the statement was not defamatory, or that a defence applies. The defendant may also bring a counter-claim if they believe that the claimant has defamed them.

One important aspect of defamation law in the UK is the ability to apply for an injunction to prevent the publication of defamatory material. This is known as a “gagging order” and can be used to prevent a defendant from publishing further defamatory material, or to prevent the publication of material that has already been produced.

The role of the court in defamation cases is to balance the right to freedom of expression against the right to protect one’s reputation. The court will consider a range of factors, including the seriousness of the defamatory statement, the context in which it was made, the audience it was intended for, and whether the statement was made in the public interest.

Human Rights Act

The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) is an important piece of legislation in the UK that incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law. The HRA has had a significant impact on defamation law in the UK, particularly in relation to the right to freedom of expression.

Under the HRA, individuals have the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas. However, this right is not absolute, and can be subject to restrictions that are necessary in a democratic society.

In defamation cases, the HRA has been used to strike a balance between the right to freedom of expression and the right to protect one’s reputation. The courts have recognised that freedom of expression is a fundamental right, but have also recognised that defamatory statements can have a serious impact on an individual’s reputation and can restrict their right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the ECHR.

In some cases, the HRA has been used to strengthen the defences available to defendants in defamation cases. For example, in the case of Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [1999], the House of Lords (now the Supreme Court) developed a new defence of “responsible journalism” based on the right to freedom of expression under the HRA. The defence applies where a publication is on a matter of public interest, the publisher has taken reasonable steps to verify the information, and the publication is in the public interest.

Similarly, in the case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe SPRL [2006], the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) held that the right to freedom of expression under the HRA required a high threshold for proving “serious harm” in defamation cases, and that a claimant must show that the publication had caused or was likely to cause “serious harm” to their reputation.

The HRA has also had an impact on the remedies available in defamation cases. Under Article 10 of the ECHR, individuals have the right to seek a remedy for a violation of their right to freedom of expression. This means that claimants in defamation cases can seek a range of remedies, including damages, injunctions, and apologies.

The Human Rights Act has had a significant impact on defamation law in the UK, particularly in relation to the right to freedom of expression.

The Act has been used to strike a balance between the right to freedom of expression and the right to protect one’s reputation, and has led to the development of new defences and a high threshold for proving “serious harm”.

The Act has also had an impact on the remedies available in defamation cases, and has reinforced the importance of the right to seek a remedy for a violation of the right to freedom of expression.

The law around libel and slander in the UK is complex, but is governed by the Defamation Act 2013. The Act introduced important changes, including a requirement for claimants to show “serious harm”, new defences of “truth” and “honest opinion”, and the ability to apply for an injunction to prevent the publication of defamatory material.

It is worth noting that the internet and social media have had a significant impact on defamation law in recent years.

Online platforms have made it easier for defamatory material to be published and shared, and have made it more difficult for individuals to protect their reputation.

However, the same principles of defamation law apply online as they do offline, and individuals can still take legal action to protect their reputation.

In addition, the Defamation Act 2013 introduced new provisions to address the issue of online defamation.

These include a new defence of publication on a matter of public interest, which can be used if the statement was published in the public interest and the defendant reasonably believed it to be true.

Overall, libel and slander remain important areas of law in the UK, and individuals and organisations need to be aware of their rights and responsibilities when it comes to protecting their reputation or defending against defamatory statements.

The gov.uk website has various help and guidance on Crime, justice and the law.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law Legal Analysis Police

National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT)

counter disinformation unit (cdu)

The National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT) at the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology was allegedly established to bring together cross-government monitoring and analysis capabilities. The National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT) was previously known as the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU).

Check out the article on the Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP).

It is often said that when a government decides what information is to be disseminated to the people, the institution of government is no longer for the people but for its own self-preservation. The 1949 George Orwell novel Nineteen Eighty Four (1984) had a fictional Ministry of Truth.

On the 3rd June 2023 The Telegraph published an article Elon Musk joins backlash over secret unit curbing lockdown dissent and states “The billionaire Twitter owner condemned the ‘terrible’ tactics used by the Government during the pandemic, as revealed by the Telegraph”

On the 9th June 2023 The Telegraph published an article Covid disinformation unit made ‘hourly contact’ with tech firms, its leader reveals

In response to this article, Dr John Campbell published his own analysis on his YouTube channel which has 2.8 million followers.

Government Counter Disinformation Unit – Dr John Campbell

According to The Telegraph on the 10th June 2023 Twitter refused majority of removal requests from Covid spying unit “Figures show that social media firm refused nearly six out of 10 appeals from UK government CDU”

Molly Kingsley published the following Tweet on the 3rd June 2023 containing evidence of government censorship following a Subject Access Request (SAR) to the CDU at the DCMS.

Molly Kingsley Twitter

The Daily Sceptic published on the 12th June 2023 an article Secretive Government Unit Broke Own Rules by Flagging Opinions as ‘Disinformation’

Originally Published 12th June 2023 – Last Updated Updated 22th July 2023

Big Brother Watch have launched a campaign against the CDU :-

  • Take the first ever legal action in Europe against a government’s ‘counter disinformation’ activity
  • Grow pressure in Parliament for an immediate suspension of the CDU and an investigation into its work
  • Continue our investigation into extra-judicial government censorship and surveillance activities.

Big Brother Watch have published their report Ministry of Truth: the secretive government units spying on your speech which details their findings.

Misinformation from the Counter Disinformation Unit or an MP ?

There is a discrepancy about when the CDU was actually established. The Cabinet Office and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology published a Fact Sheet on the CDU and RRU on the 9th June 2023.

Is the following evidence of Disinformation by the Counter Disinformation Unit or an MP ? 2019 v 2020 ?

The Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) was first set up within the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport in 2019 and it has since responded to periods of acute disinformation risk including Covid-19.

Fact Sheet on the CDU and RRU

Lucy Powell who is the Labour MP for Manchester South tabled (UIN 98962) the following parliamentary question on the 6th January 2022

To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, whether the cross-Whitehall unit to counter disinformation on covid-19 is operating as of 6 January 2022; how many staff working as part of that unit there are in the (a) Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, (b) Home Office (c) Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, (d) Cabinet Office and (e) Ministry of Defence; and whether the number of staff in each team has increased or decreased since that unit was established in March 2020.

Coronavirus: Disinformation Question for Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

Chris Philp who is the Conservative MP for Croydon South replied on the 11th January 2022.

The Cross-Whitehall Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) was established on 5 March 2020, bringing together cross-government monitoring and analysis capabilities. As of 7 January 2022 the CDU is still fully operational.

Addressing the challenges of disinformation and misinformation is a whole of the government effort. The CDU is resourced full time and works in close partnership with cross-government teams. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the size of the team in DCMS has increased. Requirements are continually reviewed to ensure appropriate levels of resourcing, including surge capacity as needed.

When false narratives are identified, the CDU coordinates departments across Whitehall to deploy the appropriate response. This can include a direct rebuttal on social media, flagging content to platforms and ensuring public health campaigns are promoted through reliable sources.

Coronavirus: Disinformation Question for Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

It is no surprise that Chris Philp MP chose to ignore most of the questions that were asked.

Fact Sheet on the CDU and RRU

The Cabinet Office and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology published a Fact Sheet on the CDU and RRU on the 9th June 2023.

Counter-Disinformation Unit Fact Sheet

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology published the Counter-Disinformation Unit – open source information collection and analysis: privacy notice on the 16th Match 2023.

RESIST 2 Counter Disinformation Toolkit

The Government Communication Service published the RESIST 2 Counter Disinformation Toolkit sometime in 2021 and updated it on the 11th January 2022.

It is unknown if the National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT) use this toolkit.

It is however interesting that this was updated on the same day that Chris Philp MP replied to the question tabled by Lucy Powell MP.

Check out our articles on Office for Communications Data Authorisations, Thought Police, Policing, Police News, Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Two Tiered Policing, Wasting Police Time, Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP), Police Professional Standards and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent