header-logo header-logo

26 May 2021
Issue: 7934 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

More measures needed for protecting witnesses

Intimidated as well as vulnerable witnesses should be allowed to pre-record their evidence in chief and cross examination, a review by Victims’ Commissioner Dame Vera Baird QC has recommended.

This frees the witnesses from having to testify at trial and allows them to have therapy, if they wish, without fearing their notes might be accessed in the trial, according to the review, ‘Next steps for special measures’.

Currently, this option is available under section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to victims and witnesses deemed vulnerable, and there has been increased take-up of s 28 during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is also being piloted for intimidated witnesses at Leeds, Liverpool and Kingston upon Thames Crown Courts.

Dame Vera recommended it be more widely used for both intimidated and vulnerable witnesses and introduced across all Crown Courts as soon as practically possible, especially where trial dates are a long time in the future.

In all, she makes 21 recommendations, including promoting the closure of the public gallery as a special measure to avoid intimidation during evidence, the development of a national protocol for data collection on special measures, and provision of a separate court entrance for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses.

Dame Vera found special measures were widely praised but there was an over-complicated system for assessing witnesses’ needs and providing support. Magistrates’ courts tended to lag behind in the use of special measures and she said it was ‘urgent to upgrade facilities and boost the Witness Care Unit resources to ensure parity of witness care with the Crown Court’.

Welcoming the review, Ellie Reeves MP, Shadow Solicitor General, said: ‘With record numbers of rape victims withdrawing from prosecutions, and the court backlog now at over 58,000 cases, many survivors feel the system is working against them, not for them. Giving witness testimony can be extremely upsetting and traumatising.’

Issue: 7934 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll