Browse By

Tag Archives: criminal

HM Attorney General v Crosland [2021] UKSC 58

marcuscleaver · HM Attorney General v Crosland [2021] UKSC 58 Can the Supreme Court hear an appeal against a judgment it has itself made? In theory this sounds like a contradiction but this case explores the practical possibility. uklawweekly.substack.com/subscribe Music from bensound.com

UK Law Weekly

DPP v Ziegler [2021] UKSC 23

marcuscleaver · DPP v Ziegler [2021] UKSC 23 After a protest blocked the road the campaigners were arrested under the Highways Act. This case examines the right to protest in the context of human rights and the defence of lawful excuse. Music from bensound.com uklawweekly.substack.com/subscribe

Upside Down Legislative Priorities

In last week’s special newsletter for subscribers I wrote about how the new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill would severely curtail the right to protest in the UK. Unfortunately the proposed legislation would only represent the formalisation of what has been government policy for a long

Handing Down A “Judicial Kicking”

The family of PC Andrew Harper should have been supported in their time of need. Instead they were offered false hope and embarrassed on the public stage. As a quick reminder Harper was tragically killed in August of last year as he was trying to

UK Law Weekly

Stoffel & Co. v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42

marcuscleaver · Stoffel & Co. v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42 When Maria Grondona committed mortgage fraud she didn’t think that her plans would inadvertently fall apart because of the negligence of her solicitors. She pursued a claim for professional negligence but the key question in

Our Legal System Isn’t Coping

Despite the positive news about a potential vaccine for COVID-19 it remains likely that we will continue to live with the virus for some time to come. Some sectors have done well to cope with the ‘new normal’ but it is time to face up

UK Law Weekly

R v Hilton [2020] UKSC 29

marcuscleaver · R v Hilton [2020] UKSC 29 After a confiscation order was made against a benefits fraudster questions were raised about its validity. The court had not given other persons with an interest in the relevant property a chance to make their own representations.