header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

What future for justice?

In brief

NLJ’s unflinching commentary on the state of the legal system is attracting attention from legal commentators (see NLJ, 27 July 2007). Writing in The Times Online last Friday, Michael Herman refers to “legal giants” pouring scorn on Labour’s record, adding that “leading legal figures including Michael Mansfield QC, attack the Government over a series of issues including the independence of the judiciary, intervention in the legal system and failure to uphold the rule of law”. In today’s issue Professor Michael Zander QC reports on the government’s mismanagement of the Ministry of Justice (see this issue
pp 1100–01).

Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll