header-logo header-logo

15 February 2013 / Roger Smith
Issue: 7548 / Categories: Opinion , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Courting controversy

Roger Smith considers courts & constitutions

Someone in the UK Supreme Court has a talent for communication. To the court’s existing Twitter feed and live streaming of hearings, we now have the promise of a regular presence on YouTube. The court has committed itself to five minute summaries of its court judgments. These are written and delivered by one of the justices and have been given, but not regularly broadcast, since the court was established in 2009. The summaries are designed to pick out the key facts and findings without the legal analysis present either in the judgment itself or the written press summaries.

The YouTube performances are hardly dramatic but they are rather good in providing accessible versions of the judgments. They underline how the court has gone beyond its predecessor, the appellate committee of the House of Lords. In a recent speech, Lord Carnwath reflected: “I believe there has been a profound change…over time [the Supreme Court] has brought a new sense of collective identity.” He quoted earlier words of Lord Hope: “The most

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll