DOCSLIB.ORG

Acts with Case Annotations Live on Lexislibrary Agency • Factors Act 1889 • Powers of Attorney Act 1971

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Acts with Case Annotations Live on Lexislibrary Agency • Factors Act 1889 • Powers of Attorney Act 1971 Acts with case annotations live on LexisLibrary Agency • Factors Act 1889 • Powers of Attorney Act 1971 Agriculture • Agricultural Credits Act 1928 • Agricultural Marketing Act 1958 • Agricultural Wages Act 1948 • Agriculture Act 1947 • Agriculture Act 1967 • Agriculture Act 1970 • Agriculture and Horticulture Act 1964 • Allotments Act 1922 • Allotments Act 1925 • Allotments Act 1950 • Food Safety Act 1990 • Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 • Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967 • Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967 • Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908 Animals • Animal Health Act 1981 • Animal Welfare Act 2006 • Animals Act 1971 • Animals (Scientific Procedure) Act 1986 • Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 • Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 • Dogs Act 1871 • Dogs Act 1906 • Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953 • Game Act 1831 • Ground Game Act 1880 • Guard Dogs Act 1975 • Hunting Act 2004 • Night Poaching Act 1828 • Night Poaching Act 1844 • Pet Animals Act 1951 • Poaching Prevention Act 1862 • Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Armed Forces, War and Emergency • Armed Forces Act 2006 • Court Martial Appeals Act 1968 • Distribution of German Enemy Property Act 1949 • Emergency Laws (Re-enactments and Repeals) Act 1964 • Military Lands Act 1892 • Pensions (Navy, Army Air Force and Mercantile Marine) Act 1939 • Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 • Reserve and Auxiliary Forces (Protection of Civil Interests) Act 1951 • Reserve Forces (Safeguard of Employment) Act 1985 • Visiting Forces Act 1952 Aviation • Carriage by Air Act 1961 • Civil Aviation Act 1982 • Aviation Security Act 1982 Bankruptcy and Insolvency • Debtors Act 1869 • Deeds of Arrangement Act 1914 • Insolvency Act 1986 • Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 • Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 Burial and Cremation • Burial Act 1853 • Burial Act 1855 • Burial Act 1857 • Burial Laws Amendment Act 1880 • Cemeteries Clauses Act 1847 • Cremation Act 1902 • Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 • Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 Carriers • Carriers Act 1830 Charities • Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954 • Charities Act 1993 • Charities Act 2006 • Charities Act 2011 • House to House Collections Act 1939 • Recreational Charities Act 1958 Children • Adoption Act 1976 • Adoption and Children Act 2002 • Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 • Children Act 1989 • Children and Young Persons Act 1933 • Children and Young Persons Act 1963 • Children and Young Persons Act 1969 • Criminal Justice Act 1961, s 39 • Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000, ss 11-16, 18-21, 23-38, 42, 76-82, Schs 2-4 • Child Support Act 1991 • Family Law Act 1986, ss 3, 5, 55A • Family Law Reform Act 1969 • Family Law Reform Act 1987, s 27 • Legitimacy Act 1976 • Protection of Children Act 1999 • Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 Civil Liberties and Human Rights • Administration of Justice Act 1960 • Data Protection Act 1998 • Equality Act 2010 • Freedom of Information Act 2000 • Habeas Corpus Act 1679 • Habeas Corpus Act 1803 • Habeas Corpus Act 1804 • Habeas Corpus Act 1816 • Habeas Corpus Act 1862 • Human Rights Act 1998 • Welsh Language Act 1993 Commerce and Competition • Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Act 1977 • Competition Act 1998 • Enterprise Act 2002 • Private Security Industry Act 2001 • Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980 • Restrictive Practices Court Act 1976 • Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 • Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002 Communications • Broadcasting Act 1990 • Broadcasting Act 1996 • Communications Act 2003 • Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 • Telecommunications Act 1984 • Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006 Companies and Partnerships • Companies Act 1985 • Companies Act 2006 • Companies Clauses Act 1863 • Companies Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 • Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 • Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000 • Limited Partnerships Act 1907 • Partnership Act 1890 Constitutional Law • Coinage Act 1971 • Decimal Currency Act 1969 • Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 • Foreign Compensation Act 1969 • National Savings Bank Act 1971 • Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 • State Immunity Act 1978 • Wild Creatures and Forest Laws Act 1971 Contract • Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990 • Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 • Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 • Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 • Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 • Mercantile Law Amendment Act 1856 • Statute of Frauds (1677) • Statute of Frauds Amendment Act 1828 • Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 Courts, Judgments and Legal Services • Access to Justice Act 1999 • Administration of Justice Act 1920 • Administration of Justice Act 1960 • Administration of Justice Act 1969 • Arbitration Act 1950 • Arbitration Act 1996 • Attachment of Earnings Act 1971 • Charging Orders Act 1979 • Cinque Ports Act 1821 • Cinque Ports Act 1855 • Civil Procedure Act 1997 • Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890 • Contempt of Court Act 1981 • Coroners Act 1988 • Coroners and Justice Act 2009 • County Courts Act 1984 • Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 • Crime and Disorder Act 1998, ss 51, 51A, Sch 3 • Criminal Justice Act 1925 • Crown Proceedings Act 1947 • Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 • Judgments Act 1838 • Judicial Committee Act 1844 • Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 • Juries Act 1974 • Justices of the Peace Act 1361 • Justices of the Peace Act 1968 • Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 • Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 • Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 • Magistrates’ Courts (Appeals from Binding Over Orders) Act 1956 • Metropolitan Police Courts Act 1840 • Naval Prize Act 1864 • Senior Courts Act 1981 • Solicitors Act 1974 • Stannaries Act 1855 • Summary Jurisdiction (Process) Act 1881 Criminal • Abortion Act 1967 • Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 • Administration of Justice Act 1960 • Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933 • Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 • Bail Act 1976 • Bail (Amendment) Act 1993 • Child Abduction Act 1984 • Computer Misuse Act 1990 • Coroners and Justice Act 2009 • Crime and Disorder Act 1998 • Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 • Criminal Appeal Act 1968 • Criminal Appeal Act 1995 • Criminal Attempts Act 1981 • Criminal Damage Act 1971 • Criminal Evidence Act 1898 • Criminal Justice Act 1961 • Criminal Justice Act 1967 • Criminal Justice Act 1987 • Criminal Justice Act 1988 • Criminal Justice Act 1991 • Criminal Justice Act 2003 • Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 • Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 • Criminal Law Act 1826 • Criminal Law Act 1967 • Criminal Law Act 1977 • Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 • Criminal Procedure (Attendance of Witnesses) Act 1965 • Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 • Criminal Procedure (Right of Reply) Act 1964 • Drug Trafficking Act 1994 • Explosive Substances Act 1883 • Extradition Act 2003 • Firearms Act 1968 • Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 • Forfeiture Act 1982 • Forgery Act 1861 • Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 • Fraud Act 2006 • Homicide Act 1957 • Incitement to Disaffection Act 1934 • Indictments Act 1915 • Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 • Infanticide Act 1938 • Judicial Proceedings (Regulation of Reports) Act 1926 • Licensing Act 1872 • Malicious Communications Act 1988 • Malicious Damage Act 1861 • Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 • Obscene Publications Act 1959 • Obscene Publications Act 1964 • Offences Against the Person Act 1861 • Official Secrets Act 1911 • Official Secrets Act 1920 • Official Secrets Act 1989 • Perjury Act 1911 • Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 • Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 • Prevention of Crime Act 1871 • Prevention of Crime Act 1953 • Prison Act 1952 • Prison Security Act 1992 • Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 • Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 • Protection from Harassment Act 1997 • Protection of Children Act 1978 • Public Meeting Act 1908 • Public Order Act 1936 • Public Order Act 1986 • Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 • Remission of Penalties Act 1859 • Sale of Offices Act 1809 • Sexual Offences Act 1956 • Sexual Offences Act 2003 • Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 • Street Offences Act 1959 • Suicide Act 1961 • Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act 1878 • Terrorism Act 2000 • Theft Act 1968 • Theft Act 1978 • Treason Act 1351 • Treason Act 1842 • Treason Felony Act 1848, s 3 • Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 • Universities Act 1825 • Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, s 4 • Vagrancy Act 1824 • Witnesses (Public Inquiries) Protection Act 1892 • Writ of Subpoena Act 1805 • Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 Culture, Licensing, Entertainment and Sport • Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 • British Museum Act 1963 • Cinemas Act 1985 • Football Offences Act 1991 • Football Spectators Act 1989 • Horserace Betting Levy Act 1969 • Hotel Proprietors Act 1956 • Innkeepers Act 1878 • Licensing Act 2003 • Literary and Scientific Institutions Act 1854 • Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 • National Lottery etc Act 1993 • Public Lending Right Act 1979 • Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 • Theatres Act 1968 • Video Recordings Act 1984 Damages • Administration of Justice Act 1982, s 1 • Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 • Damages Act 1996 Distress • Distress for Rent Act 1689 • Distress for Rent Act 1737 • Law of Distress Amendment Act 1888 • Law of Distress Amendment Act 1908 • Sale of Farming Stock Act 1816 • Statute of Marlborough
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Burial Act 1852
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted). Burial Act 1852 1852 CHAPTER 85 An Act to amend the Laws concerning the Burial of the Dead in the Metropolis. [1st July 1852] WHEREAS it is expedient to repeal " The Metropolitan Interments Act, 1850, " and to make such other Provision as herein-after mentioned in relation to Interments in and near the Metropolis: Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same, as follows : I 13 & 14 Vict. c.52 repealed, and Her Majesty may continue additional Member of Board therein authorized. The said Act shall be repealed: Provided always, that it shall be lawful for Her Majesty to continue during the Continuance of the General Board of Health the Appointment of the additional Member of such Board authorized by the said Act, and the Salary of such Member, fixed as in the said Act mentioned, shall be paid as by Section Seven of the Public Health Act, 1848, is directed concerning the Salaries therein mentioned. II On Representation of Secretary of State, Her Majesty in Council may order Discontinuance of Burials in any Part of the Metropolis. In case it appear to Her Majesty in Council, upon the Representation of One of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, that for the Protection of the Public Health Burials in any Part or Parts of the Metropolis, or in any Burial Grounds or Places of Burial in the Metropolis, should be wholly discontinued, or should be discontinued subject to any Exception or Qualification, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by and with the Advice of Her Privy Council, to order that after a Time mentioned in the Order Burials in such Part or Parts of the Metropolis or in such Burial Grounds or Places of Burial shall be discontinued wholly, or subject to any Exceptions or Qualifications 2 Burial Act 1852 (c.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Ref: RFI 7304 27 March 2015 Dear REQUEST for INFORMATION: the DANGEROUS DOGS (EXEMPTION SCHEMES) (ENGLAND and WALES) ORDER 2
    T: 03459 33 55 77 or 08459 33 55 77 [email protected] www.gov.uk/defra Our ref: RFI 7304 27 March 2015 Dear REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: THE DANGEROUS DOGS (EXEMPTION SCHEMES) (ENGLAND AND WALES) ORDER 2015 - SI 2015 No 138 Thank you for your request for information, which we received on 20 February 2015, about the above Order. We have handled your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). I apologize for the delay in replying to you. The response to each part of your request is below (I have repeated text from each part of your request for ease of reference): Q1) What checks were made on the instrument to ensure it was made in accordance with the powers granted to the Minister making it? A1) The instrument was checked by four lawyers, all employed by the Treasury Solicitor’s Department; the drafting lawyer and three other lawyers performing a checking function. The instrument was sent to the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments which scrutinises secondary legislation and will draw legislation to the attention of the House if (among other reasons) it considers the instrument is not in accordance with the power being exercised. In the case of SI 2015/138 the instrument passed scrutiny without being drawn to the attention of the House, and the report of the Committee showing this is publicly available at the following link: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201415/jtselect/jtstatin/138/138.pdf. You will find reference to SI 2015/138 at page 9 under the title “Instruments Not Reported”.
    [Show full text]
  • The British Museum Report and Accounts for the Year
    The British Museum REPOrt AND ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 MARCH 2012 HC 400 £14.75 The British Museum REPOrt AND ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 MARCH 2012 Presented to Parliament pursuant to Museums and Galleries Act 1992 (c.44) S.9(8) Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 12 July 2012 HC 400 London: The Stationery Office £14.75 The British Museum Account 2011-2012 © The British Museum (2012) The text of this document (this excludes, where present, the Royal Arms and all departmental and agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context The material must be acknowledged as The British Museum copyright and the document title specified. Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. This publication is also for download at www.official-documents.gov.uk ISBN: 9780102976199 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID 2481871 07/12 21557 19585 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum The British Museum Account 2011-2012 Contents Page Trustees’ and Accounting Officer’s Annual Report 3 Chairman’s Foreword 3 Structure, governance and management 5 Constitution and operating environment 5 Governance statement 5 Subsidiaries 10 Friends’ organisations 10 Strategic direction and performance against objectives 10 To manage and research the collection more effectively 10 Collection 10 Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • Call the (Fashion) Police
    Papers from the British Criminology Conference © 2008 the author and the British Society of Criminology www.britsoccrim.org ISSN 1759‐0043; Vol. 8: 205‐225 Panel Paper On Treating the Symptoms and not the Cause Reflections on the Dangerous Dogs Act Maria Kaspersson, University of Greenwich Abstract The experience of saving a dog that later turned out to be a Pit Bull and therefore banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, made me investigate the Act and its implications. The Act is not built on evidence and by compiling results from different studies on dog bites and breed‐ specific legislation in different countries the conclusion is that there is not much empirical support for breed bans either. ‘Dangerous breeds’ do not bite more frequently than German Shepherds and directing legislation towards certain breeds deemed as ‘dangerous’ cannot therefore be seen as justified. The strength of the label ‘dangerous dog’ seems to rule out policies that follow the facts and there is more treating of symptoms than causes. Key Words: dangerous dogs, breed‐specific legislation Introduction Sometimes your research interests move in unexpected directions. In my case, the pivotal point was rescuing a dog that later turned out to be a Pit Bull Terrier, and consequently banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 s.1 (hereafter DDA or ‘the Act’). The experience of getting an Exemption Order and registering the dog on the Dangerous Dogs Register highlighted some problematic areas of the Act in particular, and breed‐specific legislation in general. Firstly, on what facts and evidence was the Act based? Secondly, is the singling out of certain breeds justified, or is it merely stigmatising those breeds, thereby treating the symptoms ‐ 205 Papers from the British Criminology Conference, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconciling Ireland's Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values
    Reconciling Ireland's Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values Kate Doran Thesis Offered for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Law Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences University of Limerick Supervisor: Prof. Paul McCutcheon Submitted to the University of Limerick, November 2014 Abstract Title: Reconciling Ireland’s Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values Author: Kate Doran Bail is a device which provides for the pre-trial release of a criminal defendant after security has been taken for the defendant’s future appearance at trial. Ireland has traditionally adopted a liberal approach to bail. For example, in The People (Attorney General) v O’Callaghan (1966), the Supreme Court declared that the sole purpose of bail was to secure the attendance of the accused at trial and that the refusal of bail on preventative detention grounds amounted to a denial of the presumption of innocence. Accordingly, it would be unconstitutional to deny bail to an accused person as a means of preventing him from committing further offences while awaiting trial. This purist approach to the right to bail came under severe pressure in the mid-1990s from police, prosecutorial and political forces which, in turn, was a response to a media generated panic over the perceived increase over the threat posed by organised crime and an associated growth in ‘bail banditry’. A constitutional amendment effectively neutralising the effects of the O'Callaghan jurisprudence was adopted in 1996. This was swiftly followed by the Bail Act 1997 which introduced the concept of preventative detention (in the bail context) into Irish law.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom Report by Sara Selwood University of Westminster with Maurice Davies, Museums Association
    A Guide to European Museum Statistics United Kingdom Report by Sara Selwood University of Westminster with Maurice Davies, Museums Association Introduction - Key Issues It is increasingly the case that hard data is required for a multiplicity of reasons: to support advocacy, not least to present the case for support to government; to assess museums´ efficiency in relation to funding; to inform decision making; to establish, develop and evaluate policies; to identify trends; to measure the progress that the sector is making, not least in terms of delivering government objectives. A current preoccupation is with measuring the impact of museums. Responsibility for national museum statistics falls to Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), the government's advisory body, which succeeded the Museums & Galleries Commission in April 2000. Following the devolution of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, MLA´s remit is primarily confined to England. At the time of writing (October 2003) there is no dedicated statistical time series on museums, which covers the whole of the UK. The Museums & Galleries Commission's DOMUS database (see below) was abandoned after the 1999 survey, and the only other UK-wide, year-on-year time series are, Sightseeing in the UK and Visits to Visitor Attractions. These present the findings of annual surveys conducted by the National Tourist Boards of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, which monitor trends in the visitor attraction market including museums. There are, however, an increasing number of regular reports, which cover local and regional trends (in particular, financial statistics) and the activities of different types of museums. Pulling together a national picture depends on the collation of existing data sets.
    [Show full text]
  • St Albans City Archive Catalogues - Transcription
    St Albans City Archive Catalogues - Transcription Introduction The St Albans City Archive is one of the main sources of primary material for anyone researching the history of the city. However, understanding what is in the archive is daunting as the key finding aid, the catalogue produced by William Le Hardy in the 1940s, does not match the standard of modern catalogues. Improvements are underway. The City Archive has been held at Hertfordshire Archives & Local Studies (HALS) in Hertford since the 1990s. HALS are currently engaged in an extensive project to improve access to its catalogues via the internet. The City Archive is part of this project but it is likely to be several years before the fully revised catalogue is available on-line. In light of this and with HALS’ agreement, the St Albans & Hertfordshire Architectural & Archaeological Society (SAHAAS) has opted to publish the following transcription of Le Hardy’s catalogue together with relevant material from the ‘Interim’ catalogue. (The latter represents a further deposit by St Albans City Council in the 1990s). For the benefit of SAHAAS members, most of whom live closer to St Albans than to Hertford, we have noted on the transcript the following additional information: 1. Microfilm numbers: much of the pre-1830 archive has been microfilmed. Copies of these films are held in the Local Studies filing cabinets at St Albans Central Library. (See column marked Microfilm/Book) 2. A transcription of the St Albans Borough Quarter Sessions Rolls, 1784-1820, was published by the Hertfordshire Record Society (HRS) in 1991. (See column marked Microfilm/Book) Finally, some of the items catalogued by Le Hardy were not subsequently deposited by the City Council.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parthenon Sculptures Sarah Pepin
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 02075, 9 June 2017 By John Woodhouse and Sarah Pepin The Parthenon Sculptures Contents: 1. What are the Parthenon Sculptures? 2. How did the British Museum acquire them? 3. Ongoing controversy 4. Further reading www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 The Parthenon Sculptures Contents Summary 3 1. What are the Parthenon Sculptures? 5 1.1 Early history 5 2. How did the British Museum acquire them? 6 3. Ongoing controversy 7 3.1 Campaign groups in the UK 9 3.2 UK Government position 10 3.3 British Museum position 11 3.4 Greek Government action 14 3.5 UNESCO mediation 14 3.6 Parliamentary interest 15 4. Further reading 20 Contributing Authors: Diana Perks Attribution: Parthenon Sculptures, British Museum by Carole Radatto. Licenced under CC BY-SA 2.0 / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 9 June 2017 Summary This paper gives an outline of the more recent history of the Parthenon sculptures, their acquisition by the British Museum and the long-running debate about suggestions they be removed from the British Museum and returned to Athens. The Parthenon sculptures consist of marble, architecture and architectural sculpture from the Parthenon in Athens, acquired by Lord Elgin between 1799 and 1810. Often referred to as both the Elgin Marbles and the Parthenon marbles, “Parthenon sculptures” is the British Museum’s preferred term.1 Lord Elgin’s authority to obtain the sculptures was the subject of a Select Committee inquiry in 1816. It found they were legitimately acquired, and Parliament then voted the funds needed for the British Museum to acquire them later that year.
    [Show full text]
  • A Supreme Court's Place in the Constitutional Order: Contrasting Recent Experiences in Canada and the United Kingdom
    A Supreme Court's Place in the Constitutional Order: Contrasting Recent Experiences in Canada and the United Kingdom Paul Daly" In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss 5 and 6 that its position at the apex of the judicialsystem was constitutionally entrenched. It did so by interpreting its own history and developing a narrative that emphasized both the critical importance of section 6 in protecting Quebec's distinct interests and legal tradition, and the Court's position as domestic rights protector. The author analyzes this narrativeand argues that the Court'sentrenchment within the Constitution Act, 1982 was not as inevitable 2015 CanLIIDocs 5258 as its reasoning suggests. The article then turns its attention to the newly established United Kingdom Supreme Court and its role pre-and post-adoption of the Human Rights Act 1998. The authorpulls out themes in the Court's recent judgments-which suggest a move awayfrom the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Strasbourg Court and a desire to return to British common law traditions-andan emerging narrativethat resembles that of its Canadiancounterpart. The author then compares the narrativesdeveloped by the two courts to predicthow the United Kingdom Supreme Court might in the future interpret its own role as the guardian of its legal tradition. * Associate Dean and Faculty Secretary, Faculty of Law, University of Montreal. Special thanks to Marie-France Fortin and Matthew Harrington for discussion. I am indebted to the two anonymous reviewers and fear only that my revisions do not do justice to the excellent and thoughtful comments they produced.
    [Show full text]
  • Television and Media Concentration
    •• IRIS Special Edited by the European Audiovisual Observatory TelevisionTelevision andand MediaMedia ConcentrationConcentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level TELEVISION AND MEDIA CONCENTRATION IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2001 ISBN 92-871-4595-4 Director of the Publication: Wolfgang Closs, Executive Director of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Editor and Coordinator: Dr. Susanne Nikoltchev (LL.M. EUI and U of M) Legal Expert of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Partner Organisations that contributed to IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration IViR – Institute of European Media Law EMR – Institute of European Media Law Rokin 84, NL-1012 KX Amsterdam Nell-Breuning-Allee 6, D-66115 Saarbrücken Tel.: +31 (0) 20 525 34 06 Tel.: +49 (0) 681 99275 11 Fax: +31 (0) 20 525 30 33 Fax: +49 (0) 681 99275 12 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] CMC – Communications Media Center MMLPC – Moscow Media Law and Policy Center New York Law School Mokhovaya 9, 103914 Moscow 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10013 Russian Federation USA Tel./Fax: +7 (0) 503 737 3371 Tel.: +1 212 431 2160 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax: +1 212 966 2053 [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] Proofreaders: Florence Pastori, Géraldine Pilard-Murray, Candelaria van Strien-Reney Translators: Brigitte Auel, France Courrèges, Christopher
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the United Kingdom's
    A REVIEW OF THE UNITED KINGDOM’S EXTRADITION ARRANGEMENTS (Following Written Ministerial Statement by the Secretary of State for the Home Department of 8 September 2010) Presented to the Home Secretary on 30 September 2011 This report is also available online at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ ~ 2 ~ The Rt Hon Sir Scott Baker was called to the Bar in 1961, and practised in a range of legal areas, including criminal law and professional negligence. He became a Recorder in 1976 and was appointed as a High Court judge in 1988. In 1999, he presided over the trial of Great Western Trains following the Southall rail crash in 1997 and in the same year was the judge who tried Jonathan Aitken. He was the lead judge of the Administrative Court between 2000 and 2002 when he was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal, presiding over the inquests into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed. He also sat regularly in the Divisional Court hearing appeals and judicial reviews in extradition cases. He retired in 2010 and is currently a Surveillance Commissioner, a member of the Bermuda Court of Appeal and a member of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. David Perry QC is a barrister and joint head of chambers at 6 King’s Bench Walk, Temple. From 1991 to 1997, Mr Perry was one of the Standing Counsel to the Department of Trade and Industry. From 1997 to 2001, he was Junior Treasury Counsel to the Crown at the Central Criminal Court and Senior Treasury Counsel from 2001 until 2006, when he took silk.
    [Show full text]
  • Abolishing the Crime of Public Nuisance and Modernising That of Public Indecency
    International Law Research; Vol. 6, No. 1; 2017 ISSN 1927-5234 E-ISSN 1927-5242 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Abolishing the Crime of Public Nuisance and Modernising That of Public Indecency Graham McBain1,2 1 Peterhouse, Cambridge, UK 2 Harvard Law School, USA Correspondence: Graham McBain, 21 Millmead Terrace, Guildford, Surrey GU2 4AT, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Received: November 20, 2016 Accepted: February 19, 2017 Online Published: March 7, 2017 doi:10.5539/ilr.v6n1p1 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ilr.v6n1p1 1. INTRODUCTION Prior articles have asserted that English criminal law is very fragmented and that a considerable amount of the older law - especially the common law - is badly out of date.1 The purpose of this article is to consider the crime of public nuisance (also called common nuisance), a common law crime. The word 'nuisance' derives from the old french 'nuisance' or 'nusance' 2 and the latin, nocumentum.3 The basic meaning of the word is that of 'annoyance';4 In medieval English, the word 'common' comes from the word 'commune' which, itself, derives from the latin 'communa' - being a commonality, a group of people, a corporation.5 In 1191, the City of London (the 'City') became a commune. Thereafter, it is usual to find references with that term - such as common carrier, common highway, common council, common scold, common prostitute etc;6 The reference to 'common' designated things available to the general public as opposed to the individual. For example, the common carrier, common farrier and common innkeeper exercised a public employment and not just a private one.
    [Show full text]