header-logo header-logo

London to get new ‘state-of-the-art’ court

06 July 2018
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , In Court
printer mail-detail

Lawyers give a mixed reaction to a £300m court for fraud, cybercrime and economic crime cases that is to be built in London.

The flagship 18-courtroom legal centre will also deal with business and property work as well as civil cases, boosting lawyers’ hopes that the Capital will retain its status as a legal hub post-Brexit. It will replace the Mayor’s and City of London County Court, and City of London Magistrates’ Court, and will include a new City of London police station.

The new court will be built on the site of Fleetbank House, behind Fleet Street, currently home to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The existing building will be torn down and the EAT will relocate to the Rolls Building on Fetter Lane.

Lord Chancellor David Gauke said: ‘This state-of-the-art court is a further message to the world that Britain both prizes business and stands ready to deal with the changing nature of 21st century crime.’

The Ministry of Justice expects the court to be finished by 2025.

Peter Binning, partner at Corker Binning, said: ‘It is the first announcement of serious investment in the fabric of the criminal justice system for decades.

‘It suggests that the City of London Corporation at least is keen to send a message to the City that commercial crime and in particular cybercrime will be dealt with seriously in the future.’

However, he added: ‘It says far less about the government’s true commitment in this area and begs serious questions as to how this new court will be used if inadequate resources are devoted to the investigation and prosecution of serious and complex fraud.’

Law Society president Joe Egan said: ‘A new state-of-the-art court to increase the country’s capacity to tackle cybercrime and fraud will undoubtedly reassure business and help maintain England and Wales as the global centre for legal services post-Brexit.

‘Fees charged by this and London’s pre-eminent international dispute resolution courts will, however, need to become more competitive if our jurisdiction is to continue to attract commercial parties from across the globe. With an annual net worth of £26bn—1.5% of GDP—and exports of £4bn, UK legal services make a huge contribution to UK plc in a highly competitive global market.’

Issue: 7801 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll