header-logo header-logo

16 August 2007
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

R (Kelly) v Warley Magistrates’ Court [2007] EWHC 1836 (Admin), [2007] All ER (D) 506 (Jul)

The defence was ordered—under Pt 3.10 of the Criminal Procedure Rules—to supply the full names, dates of birth and addresses of all defence witnesses to be called at trial.

The defendant applied to have the direction quashed. It was held that the subject matter of the direction was covered by both litigation privilege and legal professional privilege, and the court did not have power to override them.

Such a requirement would require statutory authority, and the relevant provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 have not yet been brought into force.

Issue: 7286 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
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