header-logo header-logo

20 May 2020
Issue: 7887 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

This week in NLJ: Government accountability on COVID-19 decisions

Former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption’s ‘obviously wrong’ views on the lockdown, published in The Sunday Timeson last month, demonstrate why proper decision making and accountability are ‘all the more important’ during the COVID-19 pandemic, John Gould, senior partner at Russell-Cooke, writes in this week’s NLJ.

Lord Sumption’s view, two weeks into lockdown, that politicians were overreacting to the coronavirus illustrates, Gould writes, ‘some of the difficulties of making urgent decisions without solid evidence and substituting instead the imperatives of a belief system in which individual freedom is the only preferred child in a precious family.

‘Contrary to the plausible, but incorrect, hypothesis expressed in the article, it may well turn out to be the case that government decision makers acted too slowly, with insufficient vigour and failed to get to grips with the necessary detail.’

As well as critiquing Lord Sumption’s controversial column, Gould highlights the importance of decision making and government accountability during the crisis. He calls for the government to be held to account, and explains why ‘the mantra that nominal decision makers are only following scientific advice should be disturbing to anyone familiar with the requirements of public law’.

Read John Gould’s article here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

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