header-logo header-logo

24 January 2008
Issue: 7305 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Crime Bill threatens justice

Crime Bill

Sections of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill are “unnec­essary and undesirable” and would “undermine the operation of the courts”, the Bar Council and the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) claim.

The Bill seeks to amend the test applied by the Court of Appeal when considering an appeal against conviction, including cases where there has been an abuse of the investigative or pros­ecution process. It also proposes extending the powers of non-legally qualified case workers to conduct trials for serious offences in magistrates’ courts. 

Sally O’Neill QC, chairman of the CBA, says: “Cases involving contested facts, issues of law, and serious allegations with imprison­ment as a possibility, should be conducted by properly qualified advocates who are subject to independent regulation otherwise there will be an increased risk of miscarriages of justice.”

Bar chairman, Tim Dutton QC, says cl 42 of the Bill attempts to amend the test applied by the Court of Appeal when considering an appeal against conviction.

“It is in part unnecessary and undesirable because it will alter the role of the Court of Appeal from a court of review to a tribu­nal of fact. It does not recognise the way in which the rules of crim­inal appeals currently operate. It will increase cost and delay,” he says.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll