header-logo header-logo

22 February 2007
Issue: 7261 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-detail

CARLILE WARNING

In brief

Control orders are “necessary and justifiable”, according to the findings of an independent review conducted by Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, the government’s terror watchdog. Carlile found the orders were necessary because of the risk of terrorist attacks, and that they were being used cautiously. “The process is rigorous and structured in an appropriate way, so that the decisions are definitely those of the Home Secretary himself, not his officials,” he writes. However, he warns: “The greatest care must be taken to ensure that the orders are used only in those cases where there is a clear intention to put the stated desire into effect, as opposed to extravagant expressions of support or wishes.”

Issue: 7261 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll