header-logo header-logo

Searching for answers

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll