Judicial College Equal Treatment Bench Book 2013

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Judicial College Equal Treatment Bench Book 2013 Equal Treatment Bench Book ………………………………….. 2013 Amendments to the 2013 edition, introduced September 2015 The following sections have been updated: Hinduism Secularism Foreword Dear Colleagues, I am pleased to tell you that the Judicial College’s Equal Treatment Bench Book, a guide for judges, magistrates and all other judicial office holders, has been revised and updated. The Equality Act 2010, which strengthened and harmonised all our anti‐discrimination laws and created important new duties and rights, has been in force for about three years. Moreover, 2012 saw the introduction of an Equality and Diversity policy for all judicial office holders in England and Wales1. The Equal Treatment Bench Book has been revised to reflect these and other recent developments. Although aspects of the guidance may seem familiar, and some of its general principles are well‐known, the messages it contains are worth reiterating. Fair treatment is a fundamental principle embedded in the judicial oath, and it is therefore a vital judicial responsibility. Treating people fairly requires awareness and understanding of their different circumstances, so that there can be effective communication and so that steps can be taken, where appropriate, to redress any inequality arising from difference or disadvantage. This work covers some of the important aspects of fair treatment about which we should all be aware. It also makes some suggestions as to steps that judges may wish to take, in different situations, to ensure that there is fairness for all those involved in the justice process. We hope that you find it both helpful and informative. I should like to express my gratitude to the following, who have contributed to the revision: Michael Anson Mark Hinchliffe Tim Paviour Gordon Ashton Hugh Howard John Phillips Mathu Asokan Melanie Jameson Joyce Plotnikoff Jeremy Cooper Samantha Livsey Jane Rayner Mandy de Waal Jan Luba Ingrid Simler Marc Dight Juliet May Mary Stacey Paul Farmer Karon Monaghan Sue Tapping Paula Gray Camilla Palmer Joanna Wade Rowan Williams Yours sincerely Lady Justice Hallett Chairman of the Judicial College November 2013 1 And reserved tribunals’ judiciary operating in Scotland and Northern Ireland Contents Contents 1. Equality Act 2010......................................................................................................1‐1 Protected characteristics .................................................................................................1‐2 Types of discrimination and other prohibited conduct as defined in the Act.................1‐4 Disability discrimination ..................................................................................................1‐6 Contexts falling with the jurisdiction of the Equality Act 2010 .......................................1‐8 Transport and building regulations .............................................................................. 1‐10 Remedies....................................................................................................................... 1‐10 rPublic Secto Equality Duty........................................................................................... 1‐10 2. Judgecraft.................................................................................................................2‐1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................2‐1 Good communication ......................................................................................................2‐1 Demonstrating fairness....................................................................................................2‐2 Complaints .......................................................................................................................2‐4 3. Social exclusion and poverty.....................................................................................3‐1 Key points.........................................................................................................................3‐1 Social exclusion................................................................................................................3‐1 The concept of social exclusion .......................................................................................3‐1 Some facts........................................................................................................................3‐2 Characteristics of social exclusion ...................................................................................3‐3 Social exclusion and the justice system...........................................................................3‐6 Decisions of the court or tribunal....................................................................................3‐8 4. Litigants in Person ....................................................................................................4‐1 Key points.........................................................................................................................4‐1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................4‐1 Particular areas of difficulty.............................................................................................4‐4 Before the court or tribunal appearance.........................................................................4‐5 The hearing ......................................................................................................................4‐8 Assistance, representation and ‘McKenzie friends’ ..................................................... 4‐11 5. Children and vulnerable adults .................................................................................5‐1 Key points.........................................................................................................................5‐1 Equal Treatment Bench Book • November 2013 i Contents 1 Overarching principles ..................................................................................................5‐1 2e Active cas management from first appearance..........................................................5‐6 3 Effective use of special measures.................................................................................5‐9 4 Ground rules hearings: planning to question someone with communication needs5‐14 5 Reporting restrictions ................................................................................................ 5‐19 6 At trial ........................................................................................................................ 5‐20 7 The importance of routine feedback......................................................................... 5‐21 6. Physical Disability Overview .....................................................................................6‐1 Key points.........................................................................................................................6‐1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................6‐1 Empowering disabled people ..........................................................................................6‐2 Terminology .....................................................................................................................6‐4 Trial management and disability .....................................................................................6‐6 The statutory environment........................................................................................... 6‐10 Physical disability .......................................................................................................... 6‐13 Key points...................................................................................................................... 6‐13 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 6‐13 Practical measures........................................................................................................ 6‐14 Representation ............................................................................................................. 6‐17 Glossary: Disability ........................................................................................................ 6‐19 Acquired brain injury .................................................................................................... 6‐19 Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) ......................................................... 6‐19 Alzheimer’s Disease ...................................................................................................... 6‐19 Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD)................................................................................. 6‐20 Cerebral palsy ............................................................................................................... 6‐21 Cerebral vascular accident (CVA) – commonly called a ’stroke’ .................................. 6‐21 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)........................................................... 6‐21 Diabetes ........................................................................................................................ 6‐22 Down’s syndrome ........................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Divulgação Bibliográfica
    Divulgação bibliográfica Julho/Agosto 2019 Biblioteca da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Coimbra Sumário BASES DE DADOS NA FDUC ........................................................................................ 4 E-BOOKS .................................................................................................................. 6 MONOGRAFIAS ........................................................................................................ 52 Ciências Jurídico-Empresariais................................................................................................................. 53 Ciências Jurídico-Civilísticas ..................................................................................................................... 70 Ciências Jurídico-Criminais ...................................................................................................................... 79 Ciências Jurídico-Económicas .................................................................................................................. 82 Ciências Jurídico-Filosóficas ..................................................................................................................... 83 Ciências Jurídico-Históricas ..................................................................................................................... 88 Ciências Jurídico-Políticas ........................................................................................................................ 94 Vária ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CCBE Charter of Core Principles of the European Legal Profession
    Council of Bars & Law Societies of Europe The voice of the European legal profession Rue Joseph II, 40/8 - 1000 Brussels T +32 (0)2 234 65 10 - [email protected] - www.ccbe.eu Charter of core principles of the European legal profession & Code of conduct for European lawyers Edition 2019 The 2019 edition includes the amendments to the commentary on Principle (g) of the Charter approved by the Plenary Session on 17 May 2019. Responsible editor: Philip Buisseret Cover illustration: ©gunnar3000 - Fotolia.com The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) has as its principal object to represent its member Bars and Law Societies, whether they are full members (i.e. those of the European Union, the European Economic Area and the Swiss Confederation), or associated or observer members, on all matters of mutual interest relating to the exercise of the profession of lawyer, the development of the law and practice pertaining to the rule of law and the administration of justice and substantive developments in the law itself, both at a European and international level (Article III 1.a. of the CCBE Statutes). In this respect, it is the official representative of Bars and Law Societies which between them comprise more than 1 million European lawyers. The CCBE has adopted two foundation texts, which are included in this brochure, that are both complementary and very different in nature. The more recent one is the Charter of Core Principles of the European Legal Profession which was adopted at the plenary session in Brussels on 24 November 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • South Australia Law Reform Institute
    Issues Paper 3 October 2013 South Australian Law Reform Institute Nothing but the truth Witness oaths and affirmations The South Australian Law Reform Institute was established in December 2010 by agreement between the Attorney-General of South Australia, the University of Adelaide and the Law Society of South Australia. It is based at the Adelaide University Law School. Postal address: SA Law Reform Institute Adelaide Law School University of Adelaide North Terrace Adelaide SA 5005 Contact details: (08) 8313 5582 [email protected] www.law.adelaide.edu.au/reform/ Publications All SALRI publications, including this one, are available to download free of charge from www.law.adelaide.edu.au/reform/publications/ If you are sending a submission to SALRI on this Issues Paper, please note: the closing date for submissions is Friday 17 January 2014; there is a questionnaire in downloadable form at www.law.adelaide.edu.au/reform/publications/ we would prefer you to send your submission by email; we may publish responses to this paper on our webpage with the Final Report. If you do not wish your submission to be published in this way, or if you wish it to be published anonymously, please let us know in writing with your submission. The cover illustration is from The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Magic Pudding by Norman Lindsay. The eBook may be read or downloaded from <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/23625/23625- h/23625-h.htm> Contents ABBREVIATIONS 2 PARTICIPANTS 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 TERMS OF REFERENCE 4 OVERVIEW 4 1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Ethics
    THE GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF LEGAL ETHICS VOL. VII, NO. 1 SUMMER 1993 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY'S LEGAL ETHICS CODE PART I: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT Laurel S. Terry ARTICLES An Introduction to the European Community's Legal Ethics Code Part I: An Analysis of the CCBE Code of Conduct LAUREL S. TERRY* I. WHO PROMULGATED THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT AND WHY?........................................... 5 II. To WHOM DOES THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT APPLY? . 10 III. WHAT Is THE BINDING FORCE OF THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT........................................ 11 IV. WHAT TYPE OF CODE Is THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT? . 15 V. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS OF THE CCBE CODE OF CONDUCT. 17 A. A Description of the Contents of the CCBE Code of Conduct...................................... 18 B. A Discussion of the Substance of the CCBE Code. 18 1. The "Preamble" of the CCBE Code . 19 2. The "General Principles" in the CCBE Code . 23 * Professor of Law, The Dickinson School of Law. B.A. 1973, University of California, San Diego; J.D. 1980, University of California, Los Angeles. I would like to thank the Fulbright Commission for a research grant to work on this article and the innumerable individuals who provided assistance or information, including Dorothy Margaret Donald-Little, Drs. Nicholas and Julie Simon, Dr. Peter Fischer, and the officials of the CCBE, especially including John Toulmin, Q.C., Msr. Denis de Ricci, Dr. Karl Hempel, Dr. Georg Frieders, and Mmse. Janice Webster. In addition, I would like to thank Professor Roger Goebel, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Court of Justice at Work: Comparative Law on Stage and Behind the Scenes
    Journal of Civil Law Studies Volume 13 Number 1 2020 Article 2 9-28-2020 The European Court of Justice at Work: Comparative Law on Stage and Behind the Scenes Michele Graziadei Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls Part of the Civil Law Commons Repository Citation Michele Graziadei, The European Court of Justice at Work: Comparative Law on Stage and Behind the Scenes, 13 J. Civ. L. Stud. (2020) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol13/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Law Studies by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT WORK: COMPARATIVE LAW ON STAGE AND BEHIND THE SCENES Michele Graziadei∗ I. Introduction ................................................................................. 2 II. Multilingualism, Translation, and Interpretation at the ECJ ...... 6 III. Comparative Law and the Search for Shared Meaning in European Law ............................................................................ 8 IV. The Keywords, the Concepts, the General Principles ............ 11 V. The Extraterritorial Reach of EU Law and the Comparison of Different Laws ......................................................................... 16 VI. The Transatlantic Dimensions of the Comparative Exercise . 19 VII. EU Law and the Extracontractual Liability of the European Institutions ................................................................................ 26 VIII. The “Constitutional Traditions Common to the Member States” as an Invitation to Comparative Law ........................... 28 ABSTRACT The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has often been hailed as an engine of European integration. Entrusted with the task of secur- ing the uniform interpretation of the law of the European Union— among other functions—the ECJ makes use of comparative law for a variety of purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Equal Treatment Bench Book 2013 Contents
    Equal Treatment Bench Book 2013 Equal Treatment Bench Book 2013 Contents In this document In this document you will find the separate pieces of guidance on equality and diversity brought together for ease of reading. However, it is not a single document in reality and will be updated regularly. The Legal Framework – including the Equality Act 2010 General judgecraft principles Social exclusion and poverty Litigants in Person Age, including children and vulnerable adults Physical disability Mental disability, including mental illness Gender reassignment Race, including interpreters and travellers Religion or belief Gender Sexual orientation 2 Equality Act 2010 1. Equality Act 2010 Key points The statutory torts prohibiting discrimination and related conduct are now codified in the Equality Act 2010 which is now in force. The Equality Act 2010 sets out a clear framework for all forms of discrimination – both direct and indirect discrimination and victimisation and harassment. In addition there are obligations to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people and disabled people have the right not to be treated unfavourably because of something arising in consequence of their disability, unless it can be justified. The Equality Act 2010 encompasses the range of intrinsic aspects of human dignity, known as protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The contexts in which discrimination and other conduct is prohibited by reference to a protected characteristic is also set out comprehensively in the Equality Act 2010 – from housing, to education, employment and services and public functions. Consideration of equality issues are also brought into the heart of public sector decision making processes by the Public Sector Equality Duty which seeks to tackle institutionalised discrimination that can be hard to challenge through individual rights based litigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Oaths Act 1978, Part II
    Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Oaths Act 1978, Part II. (See end of Document for details) Oaths Act 1978 1978 CHAPTER 19 PART II UNITED KINGDOM Oaths 3 Swearing with uplifted hand. If any person to whom an oath is administered desires to swear with uplifted hand, in the form and manner in which an oath is usually administered in Scotland, he shall be permitted so to do, and the oath shall be administered to him in such form and manner without further question. Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Court Martial Appeal Court Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/2657), rule 15, Sch. 1 C2 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/2041), rule 21 C3 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Summary Hearing and Activation of Suspended Sentences of Service Detention) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1216), rule 14 C4 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Summary Appeal Court) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1211), rule 28 C5 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Service Civilian Court) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1209), rule 20 C6 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Warrants of Arrest for Service Offences) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1110), rule 16 C7 S. 3-6 applied (with modifications) (31.10.2009) by The Armed Forces (Custody Proceedings) Rules 2009 (S.I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Establishment of a Cross-Border Legal Practice in the European Union Florence R
    Boston College International and Comparative Law Review Volume 20 | Issue 2 Article 7 8-1-1997 The Establishment of a Cross-Border Legal Practice in the European Union Florence R. Liu Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr Part of the European Law Commons Recommended Citation Florence R. Liu, The Establishment of a Cross-Border Legal Practice in the European Union, 20 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 369 (1997), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol20/iss2/7 This Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Establishment of a Cross-Border Legal Practice in the European Union INTRODUCTION Traditionally, lawyers practice law in the country where they com­ pleted their legal studies. This practice, though still present, is slowly changing in the European Union (EU),! as greater economic integra­ tion leads to the greater mobility of lawyers.2 EU lawyers benefit from this increased mobility, as they may practice law in a country that is a member of the EU (Member State) in addition to the one where they obtained their legal education and license.3 In practice, this mobility is difficult to achieve because it requires a harmonization of legal standards among countries with different legal systems. 4 The EU's attempts
    [Show full text]
  • Employment & Labour
    Employment & Labour Law Jurisdictional comparisons Fourth edition 2012 General Editor: Siân Keall, Travers Smith LLP General Editor Siân Keall, Travers Smith LLP Commercial Director Katie Burrington Commissioning Editor Emily Kyriacou Publishing Editor Dawn McGovern Senior Editor Caroline Pearce Sub Editor Callie Leamy Published in 2012 by Sweet & Maxwell, 100 Avenue Road, London NW3 3PF part of Thomson Reuters (Professional) UK Limited (Registered in England & Wales, Company No 1679046. Registered Office and address for service: Aldgate House, 33 Aldgate High Street, London EC3N 1DL) Printed and bound in the UK by CPI William Clowes, Beccles NR34 7TL A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: 978-1-908239-15-0 Thomson Reuters and the Thomson Reuters logo are trademarks of Thomson Reuters. Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland. While all reasonable care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of the publication, the publishers cannot accept responsibility for any errors or omissions. This publication is protected by international copyright law. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature without prior written permission, except for permitted fair dealing under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or in accordance with the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in respect of photocopying and/or reprographic reproduction. Application for permission for other use of copyright material including permission to reproduce extracts in other published works shall be made to the publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • Eu:C:2006:587
    WILSON JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 19 September 2006* In Case C-506/04, REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC by the Cour administrative (Luxembourg), made by decision of 7 December 2004, received at the Court on 9 December 2004, in the proceedings Graham J. Wilson v Ordre des avocats du barreau de Luxembourg, THE COURT (Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans and A. Rosas, Presidents of Chambers, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), E. Juhász, E. Levits, A. Ó Caoimh and L. Bay Larsen, Judges, * Language of the case: French. I - 8643 JUDGMENT OF 19. 9. 2006 — CASE C-506/04 Advocate General: C. Stix-Hackl, Registrar: K. Sztranc-Sławiczek, Administrator, having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 14 March 2006, after considering the observations submitted on behalf of: — Mr Wilson, by L. Lorang, avocat, C. Vajda QC, and V. Sloane, Barrister, — the Ordre des avocats du barreau de Luxembourg, by C. Ossola and C. Kaufhold, avocats, — the Luxembourg Government, by S. Schreiner, acting as Agent, and L. Dupong, avocat, — the French Government, by C. Bergeot-Nunes and G. de Bergues, acting as Agents, — the Italian Government, by I.M. Braguglia, acting as Agent, and A. Cingolo, avvocato dello Stato, I - 8644 WILSON — the United Kingdom Government, by R. Caudwell, acting as Agent, and M. Demetriou, Barrister, — the Commission of the European Communities, by A. Bordes and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 11 May 2006, gives the following Judgment 1 This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Directive 98/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained (OJ 1998 L 77, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Movement of Legal Professionals Within the European Union
    Una Særún Jóhannsdóttir Free Movement of Legal Professionals within the European Union -Master´s Thesis in Law - Supervisor: Dr. M. Elvira Méndez-Pinedo University of Iceland – Faculty of Law September 2009 Una Særún Jóhannsdóttir Free Movement of Legal Professionals within the European Union -Master’s Thesis in Law - Supervisor: Dr. M. Elvira Méndez-Pinedo University of Iceland – Faculty of Law September 2009 Prologue Being, myself, a law student living and studying in another country than where I pursued my law studies I have often wondered how I can transform my purely Icelandic legal diploma into a more international legal diploma. This is a difficult situation and problems arise. My knowledge is mainly based on Icelandic law, with a basic course in European law and Public International law. Furthermore, the legal profession is a highly regulated one and it has different requirements for entrance between States. In my year as an exchange student at Stockholm University I became accidently fascinated with European Union law. A basic course in EC Procedural Law took me all the way to competing in the European Law Moot Court Competition on behalf of the University. After that there was no turning back for me. With little background knowledge in the field I found it necessary to read and independently get to know EC Law. I found myself repeatedly coming across case law from the European Court of Justice concerning lawyers that were met with hindrances to their right to free movement. Hindrances to practice their legal skills in other Member States, even though the EC Treaty guarantees for all the possibility to move around and work within the Community.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Responsibilities and the International Lawyer: Mind the Gaps
    FRANK.DOC 11/30/00 3:45 PM ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE INTERNATIONAL LAWYER: MIND THE GAPS LAUREN R. FRANK* As more American lawyers are practicing abroad, the result of a growing global market, additional ethical questions are presented. More specifically, attorneys’ responsibilities have changed: in addi- tion to knowing the law, transnational attorneys must also understand the cultures, traditions, and languages of the foreign societies in which they practice. Also crucial is an understanding of foreign codes of professional conduct, which can differ markedly from the American Bar Association’s Model Rules used in the United States. In this student note, the author details relevant provisions of the Model Code, then compares them both to the codes of selected Euro- pean countries and, more broadly, to a multinational code the Euro- pean Community has fashioned. Important differences in areas such as conflicts of interest and attorney-client privilege are illustrated. Finally, the author proposes that American attorneys working abroad undergo a formal certification process to ensure their profi- ciency and understanding of these ethical issues. Suggestions for both law students and practicing attorneys are offered. I. INTRODUCTION With the proliferation of a global market and many American busi- nesses taking advantage of economic opportunities abroad, the Ameri- can legal profession similarly has expanded. American lawyers are fol- lowing their clients abroad, broadening their legal services to provide counsel to clients uncertain how to proceed in a foreign environment. In 1995, for example, U.S. international trade amounted to $753 billion in exports and $641 billion in imports.1 Correspondingly, U.S.
    [Show full text]