header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 November 2009 / William Redgrave
Issue: 7290 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Cut-price justice?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

William Redgrave investigates the concept of shopping centre justice

Press reporting of the Home Office’s review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) has centred on one distinctive proposal, dubbed “Tesco jails” by The Times (15 March 2007). The name is misleading, as has been much of the reporting.

It is not clear exactly what the government has in mind for short-term holding facilities (STHFs). The proposals at present are vague, and the responses from police forces and other interested parties have been mixed.
The Home Office published its consultation paper, Modernising Police Powers—Review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, in March 2007 (see www.police.homeoffice.gov.uk). The paper covers a wide variety of topics relating to police powers and procedures, including reforms to stop and search and the taking of biometric samples. It invites views on whether PACE 1984, encrusted by over two decades of amendments and codes, needs to be replaced or rewritten.

EYE-CATCHING INITIATIVES

While claiming to be mindful of the need to safeguard basic rights, the paper contemplates

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll