header-logo header-logo

16 September 2011 / Charles Brasted
Issue: 7481 / Categories: Opinion , Public
printer mail-detail

Searching for answers

nlj_7481_p1233_4

Charles Brasted explains how public inquiries have become the universal panacea for controversy

Despite the introduction of the Inquiries Act 2005 (IA 2005), which sought to put public inquiries on a consistent statutory footing, questions remain as to how they should operate and how they interact with other on-going legal proceedings. With the frequency and scope of inquiries growing, these questions are becoming increasingly important.

Recently, amid much public, political, and press noise about the use of phone hacking by newspapers, David Cameron announced a total of three inquiries, although a number of criminal and civil proceedings were already afoot, as well as internal inquiries, Parliamentary Select Committee hearings, parliamentary debates, and even an FBI investigation.

While IA 2005 was intended to consolidate provisions and ensure greater consistency and clarity on the legal function of public inquiries, uncertainties remain. Not all inquiries are governed by IA 2005, of note being the current Chilcot inquiry and the Archer inquiry into the supply of contaminated blood products. Even where IA 2005 is applicable, it does

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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