header-logo header-logo

20 January 2017 / David Hewitt
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Joseph, 1917: a lesson for us all

nlj_7730_hewitt

David Hewitt looks at a sad & maddening case from a hundred years ago

The Central Tribunal sat many times during the Great War. It had to decide whether men who were not soldiers should now be required to fight and its decisions certainly affected a great many lives. But the tribunal didn’t always do justice.

At the beginning of 1917, “Joseph” was told that he could remain at home, at least for the time being. He was given an exemption from military service by a committee of councillors in Thornton, the small town near Blackpool where he lived. But although the committee was satisfied that Joseph was a market gardener and therefore essential to the war effort, its decision soon came under fierce attack.

The Central Tribunal was the final arbiter in matters of this kind. It sat in far away Westminster and was led by the fourth Marquess of Salisbury, whose father had been Prime Minister three times and the last man to lead his government from the House of

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll