header-logo header-logo

22 April 2010 / Roger Smith
Issue: 7414 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Looking to the future

The Daily Mail was keen on Lord Judge’s Judicial Studies Board lecture. It linked his caution on the use of judgments of the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights to David Cameron’s policies to strengthen British sovereignty. Lord Judge himself, though he uttered the usual judicial disclaimers (“political debate is not for a holder of judicial office”), can hardly have been surprised. He dealt with politically touchy matters—the role of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and that of the European Court of Justice. On the former, he entered the murky waters of the authority to be accorded by the domestic courts to judgments of the Strasbourg court.

The Daily Mail was keen on Lord Judge’s Judicial Studies Board lecture. It linked his caution on the use of judgments of the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights to David Cameron’s policies to strengthen British sovereignty. Lord Judge himself, though he uttered the usual judicial disclaimers (“political debate is not for a holder of judicial office”), can hardly have been surprised. He dealt with politically

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll