header-logo header-logo

03 December 2021 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7959 / Categories: Features , Criminal
printer mail-detail

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill in committee

66010
Michael Zander on the government’s response to Extinction Rebellion
  • Wilful obstruction and locking on.
  • Serious Disruption Prevention Orders.

The committee stage of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill in the House of Lords came to an unexpected end last week at 1.20am the night of November 24/25. By then, their lordships had been at it for some 70 hours over 11 days. They had considered more than 450 amendments. Labour, Liberal Democrat, Green Party and Crossbencher peers moved amendments which were debated, often at great length, rebutted by the government and then withdrawn. Not a single one had been put to a vote.

The previous week the government had tabled almost 20 pages of amendments proposing significant public order changes aimed at the problems caused by Extinction Rebellion and similar radical protest. The government hoped to get the amendments accepted by the committee. The Liberal Democrats signalled that they would call for a vote. But, quite apart from their controversial content, the late tabling

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll