Oxford Law News
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Action on Access WP and Access Eupdate Issue 139: 18 June 2021
1 Action on Access WP and Access eUpdate Issue 139: 18 June 2021 This eBulletin is created and produced by Andrew Rawson, Director, Action on Access, and currently emailed to 1,530 colleagues in the wider access widening participation and student success community. Don’t forget you can follow Action on Access on twitter: @actiononaccess Our eUpdates provide a monthly round-up of the latest news, events, resources and information requests on higher education, and include occasional features on Widening Participation, access, student success and social justice. I hope you find it useful and informative. Please continue to send me your feedback as well as your contributions. This edition will continue to be available until the next monthly edition at http://www.wptestsites.co.uk/actiononaccess/resources/e-update If you have any suggestions for how the newsletter could be improved, have any items of news, an event or an article you would like to contribute, please contact the editor at [email protected]. We disseminate information every day through our [email protected] list and current WP, access, student success and related vacancies are also regularly posted at http://www.wptestsites.co.uk/actiononaccess/resources Contents Welcome to the June 2021 Action on Access eBulletin. ...................................................................3 What’s New .............................................................................................................................................4 Skills and Post-16 Education -
Press Freedom Under Attack
LEVESON’S ILLIBERAL LEGACY AUTHORS HELEN ANTHONY MIKE HARRIS BREAKING SASHY NATHAN PADRAIG REIDY NEWS FOREWORD BY PROFESSOR TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM UNDER ATTACK , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. WHY IS THE FREE PRESS IMPORTANT? 2. THE LEVESON INQUIRY, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 A background to Leveson: previous inquiries and press complaints bodies 2.2 The Leveson Inquiry’s Limits • Skewed analysis • Participatory blind spots 2.3 Arbitration 2.4 Exemplary Damages 2.5 Police whistleblowers and press contact 2.6 Data Protection 2.7 Online Press 2.8 Public Interest 3. THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK – A LEGAL ANALYSIS 3.1 A rushed and unconstitutional regime 3.2 The use of statute to regulate the press 3.3 The Royal Charter and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 • The use of a Royal Charter • Reporting to Parliament • Arbitration • Apologies • Fines 3.4 The Crime and Courts Act 2013 • Freedom of expression • ‘Provided for by law’ • ‘Outrageous’ • ‘Relevant publisher’ • Exemplary damages and proportionality • Punitive costs and the chilling effect • Right to a fair trial • Right to not be discriminated against 3.5 The Press Recognition Panel 4. THE WIDER IMPACT 4.1 Self-regulation: the international norm 4.2 International response 4.3 The international impact on press freedom 5. RECOMMENDATIONS 6. CONCLUSION 3 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY 4 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD BY TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM: RESTORING BRITAIN’S REPUTATION n January 2014 I felt honour bound to participate in a meeting, the very ‘Our liberty cannot existence of which left me saddened be guarded but by the and ashamed. -
Traineeship Brochure 2020
TRAINEESHIP BROCHURE 2020 Matrix is ‘the future of the Bar.’ Chambers and Partners TRAINEESHIP BROCHURE CONTENTS • Introduction to Matrix- page 2 • Why choose Matrix?- page 2 • Glossary - plain words- page 2 • Becoming a barrister - page 3 • Areas of work - page 3 • Training schedule - page 3 • Life as a trainee - page 4 • Application procedure- page 6 • Deferred applications- page 6 • Third six- page 6 • Training awards- page 6 • Visa requirements- page 6 • Information for applicants who have a disability- page 6 • Traineeship supervisors- page 7 • Matrix selection procedure - page 10 • Stage 1- page 9 • Stage 2- page 110 • Stage 3- page 11 • Notes regarding the application form- page 11 • Equal opportunities- page 11 • Useful contacts- page 11 • Matrix core values- page 12 • Members- page 13 1 INTRODUCTION TO MATRIX Matrix is a barristers’ chambers located in hierarchies and attitudes demonstrated by our London, Geneva and Brussels. We are a members – all these elements make Matrix a collection of lawyers specialising in a wide really great place to train and to work. range of practice areas throughout the UK and Matrix is committed to providing a stimulating, internationally. Described as “professional and balanced and comprehensive training forward thinking”, we are an approachable schedule. As a junior member of Matrix, the set that are proud of our record of innovation. expectation is that you will be in court regularly Our core values govern the way we work and on a wide range of cases and practice areas outline our commitment to operating within an as this is a very important part of continuing environment where diversity, accessibility and training to be a fully-rounded barrister. -
The Toohey Legacy: Rights and Freedoms, Compassion and Honour
The Toohey Legacy: rights and freedoms, compassion and honour Introduction This year is the 25th anniversary of the Mabo decision, in which the late John Toohey played a significant role. It is fitting, therefore, that I commence with a reference to Malo’s Law which was oft repeated during the evidence in that case: Malo tag mauki mauki, Teter mauki mauki. Malo tag aorir aorir, Teter aorir aorir. Malo tag tupamait tupamait, Teter tupamait tupamait Malo keeps his hands to himself; he does not touch what is not his. He does not permit his feet to carry him Towards another man’s property. His hands are not grasping He holds them back. He does not wander from his path. He walks on tiptoe, silent, careful, Leaving no sign to tell that This is the way he took. Malo is the God, in the form of an octopus, who gave the Meriam people the laws they live by. He laid his tentacles down on the Island of Mer, creating the 1 8 tribes of Mer and he gave them the rule that they should not trespass on one another’s lands. Consistently with Malo’s law, I acknowledge that this event is occurring on the traditional land of the Whadjuk People of the Nyungar Nation. I acknowledge their elders and thank them for welcoming us onto this site alongside the Derbal Yerrigan1. Eleanor Roosevelt said that “great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people”. The focus of this address is upon the ideas discussed by the Honourable John Leslie Toohey AC QC, expressed in his judgments and occasional lectures. -
Socialist Lawyer 45
LawyerI G SocialistMagazine of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers Number 45 December 2006 £2.50 Prison crisis Michael Mansfield, Piers Mostyn & Laura Janes on ‘Gulag Britain’ TONY BENN THE YASMIN SADAT SAYEED BILL BOWRING LAW, SOCIETY KHAN JEAN GUANTANAMO: DO ‘TERROR’ AND A NEW CHARLES DE WORK BEHIND SUSPECTS’ WORLD ORDER MENEZES THE SCENES HAVE RIGHTS? HaldaneSocietyof SocialistLawyers PO Box 57055, London EC1P 1AF Contents Website: www.haldane.org Number 45 December2006 ISBN 09 54 3635 The Haldane Society was founded in 1930. It provides a forum for the discussion and News & comment ................................................................................ 4 analysis of law and the legal system, both From the Philippines to Turkey, Shrewsbury to Lebanon, AGM to Jack Straw nationally and internationally, from a socialist perspective. It holds frequent public Keeping it in the family ...................................................... 11 meetings and conducts educational Young Legal Aid Lawyers’ regular column from Laura Janes programmes. The Haldane Society is independent of any Reiding between the lines .......................................... 12 political party. Membership comprises Michael Mansfield QC on the prisons crisis lawyers, academics, students and legal workers as well as trade union and labour Are we heading for ‘Gulag Britain’?...... 14 movement affiliates. Piers Mostyn catalogues the parlous state of our penal policy President: Michael Mansfield QC Vice Presidents: Kader Asmal; Children in need ................................................................................... -
The Supreme Court of Victoria
ANNUAL REPORT ANNUAL Annual Report Supreme Court a SUPREME COURTSUPREME OF VICTORIA 2016-17 of Victoria SUPREME COURTSUPREME OF VICTORIA ANNUAL REPORT 2016-17ANNUAL Supreme Court Annual Report of Victoria 2016-17 Letter to the Governor September 2017 To Her Excellency Linda Dessau AC, Governor of the state of Victoria and its Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia. Dear Governor, We, the judges of the Supreme Court of Victoria, have the honour of presenting our Annual Report pursuant to the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986 with respect to the financial year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017. Yours sincerely, Marilyn L Warren AC The Honourable Chief Justice Supreme Court of Victoria Published by the Supreme Court of Victoria Melbourne, Victoria, Australia September 2017 © Supreme Court of Victoria ISSN 1839-6062 Authorised by the Supreme Court of Victoria. This report is also published on the Court’s website: www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au Enquiries Supreme Court of Victoria 210 William Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Tel: 03 9603 6111 Email: [email protected] Annual Report Supreme Court 1 2016-17 of Victoria Contents Chief Justice foreword 2 Court Administration 49 Discrete administrative functions 55 Chief Executive Officer foreword 4 Appendices 61 Financial report 62 At a glance 5 Judicial officers of the Supreme Court of Victoria 63 About the Supreme Court of Victoria 6 2016-17 The work of the Court 7 Judicial activity 65 Contacts and locations 83 The year in review 13 Significant events 14 Work of the Supreme Court 18 The Court of Appeal 19 Trial Division – Commercial Court 23 Trial Division – Common Law 30 Trial Division – Criminal 40 Trial Division – Judicial Mediation 45 Trial Division – Costs Court 45 2 Supreme Court Annual Report of Victoria 2016-17 Chief Justice foreword It is a pleasure to present the Annual Report of the Supreme Court of Victoria for 2016-17. -
The University of Western Australia Law Review: the First Seventy Years
1 THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA LAW REVIEW: THE FIRST SEVENTY YEARS MICHAEL BLAKENEY* I FOUNDATION The two oldest Australian university law journals are the UWA Law Review and the Queensland University Law Review, both founded in 1948. In his foreword to the first issue of the UWA Law Review the Hon. Sir John Dwyer, Chief Justice of Western Australia, noting the coming of age of the School of Law in the University of Western Australia, which had been established in 1927 and explained that “now in the enthusiasm of early maturity it has planned the publication of an Annual Law Review of a type and on a scale not hitherto attempted in any Australian University.” The Chief Justice in his foreword identified the desirable objectives of the Law Review. He wrote: It is too much to-day to expect statutory recognition, prompt and adequate, by legislatures almost exclusively preoccupied with economic questions. It is necessary to have a considerable body of informed opinion to show the needs and point the way; and the creation of such a body depends in turn on an explanation and understanding of our institutions, an exposition of the underlying principles of our laws and customs, an examination of their moral sources, a comparison with other legal systems, a criticism_ of applications and interpretations that may appear to be dubious. There is no better mode of achieving such ends than a Review devoted to such purposes, and this first number is a satisfactory step in the right direction. The example set in 1948 by the Universities of Western Australia and Queensland in establishing their law reviews was followed by the University of Sydney in 1953, when it established the Sydney Law Review and in 1957 with the establishment of the Melbourne University Law Review; the University of Tasmania Law Review in 1958; the Adelaide Law Review in 1960 and the Australian National University’s Federal Law Review in 1964. -
Counter-Terrorism Bill Committee Stage Report
RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 Counter-Terrorism Bill 5 JUNE 2008 Committee Stage Report Bill 100 of 2007-8 This is a report on the Committee Stage of the Counter-Terrorism Bill, Bill 63 of 2007-08. The Bill as amended in Committee and published for the Report Stage is Bill 100 of 2007-08. This report has been produced in response to a recommendation of the Modernisation Committee in its report on The Legislative Process (HC 1097, 2005-06). The Counter-Terrorism Bill covers a wide range of topics; however, the most contentious have proved to be proposals in relation to pre-charge detention, post charge questioning and inquests and inquiries. The Bill Committee took evidence from a number of witnesses prior to debate, primarily on these issues. It held 14 sittings between 22 April and 15 May 2008. Remaining Stages are to be on 10-11 June 2008. Alexander Horne HOME AFFAIRS SECTION Catherine Fairbairn HOME AFFAIRS SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 Recent Library Research Papers include: 08/36 Transport in London 21.04.08 08/37 Social Indicators 23.04.08 08/38 2001 Census of Population: Statistics for New Parliamentary 23.04.08 Constituencies 08/39 Parliamentary Involvement in Public Appointments 23.04.08 08/40 Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 23.04.08 08/41 Planning and Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 30.04.08 08/42 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL] [Bill 70 of 2007-08] 02.05.08 08/43 Economic Indicators, May 2008 06.05.08 08/44 Children and Young Persons Bill [HL] [Bill No 8 of 2007-08] 08.05.08 08/45 Unemployment by Constituency, April 2008 14.05.08 08/46 Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL] 2007-08 16.05.08 [Bill 103 of 2007-08] 08/47 London Elections 2008. -
Newsletter-Vol09-Issue01-April 2018.Pub
MURDOCH LAW NEWSLETTER Vol. 9, Issue 1, May 2018 www.murdoch.edu.au/School-of-Law/ Inside this issue: Dean’s Award Ceremony 2 Community Engagement 11 Distinguished Alumni 6 Indigenous incarceration 14 Law Café Series 16 Retirement of Professor Neil Mcleod 7 New Colombo Program - Travel to India 19 Planning Symposium 8 made possible A Word from the Dean Habemus EBA! The Enterprise Bargaining process has finally come to a conclusion and it would seem that the finalizaon of the actual agreement is only a formality. This brings and end to a long process with considerable challenges on all sides. Let us not forget that a lot of people put in a lot of work to bring this to what looks to be a good end and thanks to all of them. The “good end” is the perfect segue to talk about the rerement of Professor Neil McLeod. Neil was a fixture at this Law School almost since its incepon and in the best possible sense an academic of the “old school”. Now, of course, some will say the world in general and the academic world in parcular are changing and “old school” is out and change is in. Really? Depends on what one wants to look at. Yes, there is the internet and the various new generaons of students, x, y, z, millennials and what not. But at the end of the day all knowledge and understanding enters the brain through ears and eyes and at the end of the day it is intensive engagement, reading, thinking and discourse that makes a good graduate, a good professional and a good academic and that kind of intensive engagement creates the ability to think crically and analycally. -
Today Oxford
www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk Michaelmas Term 2010 Volume 23 No 1 OX FOR D TODAY THE UNIVERSITY MAGAZINE 20 | WILFRED THESIGER AFRICA SEEN THROUGH HIS LENS 30 | SCIENCE WHEN TO SHARE GENE DATA? 45 | GEOFFREY HILL SEAMUS PERRY ON OUR GREATEST LIVING POET PRIME MINISTERS Why has Oxford produced so many? OXF01.cover 1 8/10/10 3:37:5 pm FROM HOME Since 1821 the Oxfordand Cambridge Club has provided alumni of both universities with an exclusive home from home in the heartofthe Capital. Todaymembers can relax, dine and meetfriends in supremely elegant surroundings thatalso featurewell stocked libraries,sports facilities and first-class bedroom accommodation. Reciprocal clubs welcome members of the Oxfordand Cambridge Club in 35 countriesaround the world. Formoreinformation, please contact: [email protected] or call +44 (0)20 7321 5110 Oxfordand Cambridge Club,71Pall Mall,LondonSW1Y 5HD www.oxfordandcambridgeclub.co.uk OX FOR D TODAY EDITOR: Dr Richard Lofthouse DEPUTY ART EDITOR: Steven Goldring DESIGNER: Victoria Ford HEAD OF PUBLICATIONS AND WEB OFFICE: Anne Brunner-Ellis PRODUCTION EDITOR: Kate Lloyd SUB EDITOR: Elizabeth Tatham PICTURE EDITOR: Joanna Kay DESIGN DIRECTOR: Dylan Channon Thanks to Simon Kirrane, Esther Woodman, Helen Cox, Emma Swift EDITORIAL ENQUIRIES: Janet Avison Public Affairs Directorate Tel: 01865 280545 Fax: 01865 270178 [email protected] www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk ALUMNI ENQUIRIES, INCLUDING CHANGE OF ADDRESS: Claire Larkin Alumni Offi ce Tel: 01865 611610 Michaelmas [email protected] COVER IMAGE: HARRY BORDEN/CORBIS OUTLINE, ROB JUDGES www.alumni.ox.ac.uk Term 2010 University of Oxford, University Offi ces, Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JD ADVERTISING ENQUIRIES: Marie Longstaff Future Plus, Beaufort Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath BA1 2BW Tel: 01225 822849 [email protected] www.futureplc.com Oxford Today is published in February, June and October. -
Overview Report: Selected Writings of Dr. Natalie Skead
Overview Report: Selected Writings of Dr. Natalie Skead I. Scope of Overview Report 1. This overview report attaches selected writings by Dr. Natalie Skead. II. Journal Articles a. Appendix A: Natalie Skead, “Drug-trafficker property confiscation schemes in Western Australia and the Northern Territory: A study in legislation going too far” (2013) 37 Criminal Law Journal 296. b. Appendix B: Natalie Skead and Sarah Murray, “The Politics of Proceeds of Crime Legislation” (2015) 38:2 UNSW Law Journal 455. c. Appendix C: Natalie Skead, “Crime-Used Property Confiscation in Western Australia and the Northern Territory: Laws Befitting Draco’s Axones?” (2016) 41:1 The University of Western Australia Law Review 67. d. Appendix D: Natalie Skead, Tamara Tulich, Sarah Murray and Hilde Tubex, “Reforming Proceeds of Crime Legislation: Political Reality or Pipedream?” (2019) 44:3 Alternative Law Journal 176. III. Submission to the Review of the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (WA) e. Appendix E: Sarah Murray, Natalie Skead, Hilde Tubex and Tamara Tulich, Submission: Review of the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (WA). 1 Appendix A Natalie Skead, “Drug-trafficker property confiscation schemes in Western Australia and the Northern Territory: A study in legislation going too far” (2013) 37 Criminal Law Journal 296. Appendix A Drug-trafficker property confiscation schemes in Western Australia and the Northern Territory: A study in legislation going too far Dr Natalie Skead* Combating drug-related crime is a key focus of proceeds of crime legislation in Australia. Despite this clear focus only three Australian jurisdictions have introduced confiscation provisions levelled specifically at those involved in drug-related crimes: New South Wales, Western Australia, and the Northern Territory. -
Chicheley Hall, UK 29-30 January 2018
Chicheley Hall, UK 29-30 January 2018 Chaired by Sir Andrew Witty Please note: The event is held under the Chatham House rule Monday 29 January 16.00-16.30 Arrival and check-in 16.30-18.00 Introductions and scene setting Sir Venki Ramakrishnan, President of the Royal Society, and Ed Whiting, Director of Policy and Chief of Staff at the Wellcome Trust, will give an overview of the Future Partnership Project. 18.30-19.00 Pre-dinner drinks and networking 19.00-21.30 Dinner Tour de table and initial views on a future vision for European research. Tuesday 30 January 07.30-08.30 Breakfast and check-out 08.30-10.00 Session 1: What is our long-term vision for European research? In this session, we’ll explore a vision for European research in 2050. 10.00-10.30 Coffee break 10.30-13.00 Session 2: What would a Brexit science and innovation agreement need to include to achieve our vision in the short-term? The discussion will address: o People (mobility and career development) o Funding o Infrastructure o Regulation and research policy o Governance and oversight o Financial contributions o Transition 13.00-14.30 Lunch and agreement of the Future Partnership Project statement 14.30-16.30 Session 3: Consolidating and communicating our short- and long-term vision 16.30-16.45 Wrap-up and overview of next steps 16.45 Guests depart Chicheley Hall Attendees Sir Andrew Witty FMedSci (Chair) Chancellor, University of Nottingham Professor Enric Banda Senior Advisor, Barcelona Supercomputing Center Dr Jet Bussemaker Former Minister for Research, The Netherlands