C&D Legal Docudramas

05/12/2021

Here, the esteemed Geoffrey Robertson - interestingly, if not 100% convincingly - argues for some statutory backing for Article 10 (free speech) effectively being considered 'higher law' than Article 8 (right to privacy). He would prefer this to a continuation of our current situation, which relies on judges balancing these competing interests in each case.

The irony though, is that there are powerful forces within our current government who would like to scrap the Human Rights Act entirely, to be replaced by we-know-not-yet. So this entire area of law may soon be reframed.

GEOFFREY ROBERTSON: The Appeal Court judges ruled that this newspaper's decision to publish half of a letter from Meghan to her father had indeed been a breach of her privacy.

20/10/2021

A lot of Facebook experts saying the law should leave this woman alone... but there's no statute of limitations for murder, and nor should there be.

A 96-year-old German woman who was caught shortly after going on the run ahead of a court hearing last month on charges of committing war crimes during World War Two appeared before a judge on Tuesday in the northern town of Itzehoe.

30/09/2021

Here's Joshua Rozenberg's clear summary of the likelihood of Sarah Everard's killer receiving a whole life term. Verdict: definitely possible, but by no means certain.

Judge to decide whether Wayne Couzens will receive whole life order

09/08/2021

London's status as the global centre for dispute resolution could be in jeopardy after pulling out of the Lugano Convention... and, as CNN reports, hardly anyone in the UK is talking about it.

Boris Johnson has spent decades agitating against the European Union and the last five years battling to free the United Kingdom from the shackles of regulation from Brussels. Now he's in the awkward position of finding himself at the mercy of EU leaders for permission to rejoin an international tre...

06/07/2021

This is a recent advertisement on the Nextdoor site, from a landlord who's letting her flat.

Apart from being somewhat behind the times (the DHSS hasn't existed since 1988 - she means 'DSS'), it's actually illegal to discriminate against people who receive Universal Credit or Housing Benefit.

Here's a story about the case that found 'No DSS' to be a violation of the Equality Act, as it constitutes indirect discrimination against women and the disabled:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53391516.amp

Everyone knows that the infamous sign of years gone by ('No blacks, no dogs, no Irish') is now abhorrent and illegal, but more subtle discrimination still exists; you should have no doubt about that.

Here is the charity Shelter's advice, to anyone facing housing discrimination:
https://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/legal/housing_options/discrimination_in_housing/direct_and_indirect_discrimination_in_housing

It still exists in the US too, both in states that have made it formally illegal and, obviously, in states that haven't.
https://www.vox.com/22547660/section-8-housing-vouchers-landlords-realtors-lawsuit-century-21-keller-williams-realty?fbclid=IwAR1oLGHonQgm6Z-qDHcdYVGScdXu9_VzDFeYm0lypIcjHHVUnlbmgvLnWps

09/03/2021

A special episode of Hard Cases, focusing on the legal case against the UK government for its fatal ineptitude during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This presentation contains images that were used under a Creative Commons License. Click here to see the full list of images and attributions:
https://fb.watch/47iLwB6S5o/

04/03/2021

C&D Legal Docudramas are looking for partners (directors, producers, financial backers) to help bring this exciting concept to the screen.

Episode One: Negligence
Episode Two: Murder
Episode Three: Defamation
Episode Four: Consideration
Episode Five: Defences
Episode Six: Medical Law

We have also written a controversial and topical special episode on the government's response to the coronavirus pandemic. What are the legal ramifications of their failure to protect us?

04/01/2021

Very strong prima facie evidence that Trump has broken Georgian state law (prohibiting “solicitation of election fraud” and “conspiracy to commit election fraud”) and federal law (prohibiting “the procurement, casting, or tabulation or ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent”) during this phone call. It will be interesting to see if anything comes of it. If the United States wants to retain its reputation as a nation governed by the rule of law, then you would think charges must follow.

President Donald Trump pushed Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" votes to overturn the election results after his loss to President-elect Joe Biden, according to an audio recording of a phone call obtained by CNN and first reported by the Washington Post.

24/12/2020

Here is an insight into Trump's Blackwater pardons.

Everything about this ability of a President - to pardon whomsoever he or she wishes and for whatever reason - seems antithetical to the rule of law and normal principles of justice.

It's more like the privilege you'd expect to be exercised by a king or a theocrat.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1056788834826156&id=144268129411569&sfnsn=scwspmo

22/12/2020

More on name suppression: I believe it's still an important principle of law, even though, in the age of the internet, its practical effect is often diminished.

There's a example in the news today, with the lifting on court orders in New Zealand protecting the identity of Grace Millane's murderer, Jesse Kempson. Obviously, these orders had effect in NZ only, therefore many media sources in other parts of the world had no compunction in immediately naming him. The one below is from Ireland, back in November 2019. Meanwhile, certain other outlets in this part of the world, including the Guardian, chose not to name the accused.

The thing to remember about suppressing the name of the accused is that it's frequently used - as it was, eventually, in this case - to preserve the chances of a fair trial in subsequent litigation. We don't want mistrials or, worse, the state eventually dropping the case, simply because a fair trial cannot be guaranteed. Anyone tempted to disregard a name suppression order should bear this in mind.

Jesse Kempson, the killer of 22-year-old backpacker Grace Millane has been described as 'creepy' and a 'serial fantasist'.

14/12/2020

Name suppression is highly problematic area of our law. As the author says here, any principled reason why Salmond, for example, was immediately named, and Francois wasn't, is hard to locate.

Mark Francois R**e Investigation Dropped Paving Way for His Return

11/12/2020

In case you're wondering who'll pay the price if someone suffers damage caused by the new vaccine, it'll be the government's own Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme (maximum payout = £120,000) rather than Pfizer, who we've indemnified from any such liability.

It's important to note here that damage caused by vaccines is a rare occurrence, and also that the indemnity is thought to have facilitated some of the paperwork for this deal, allowing us to have acquired the vaccine so quickly. Still, it's good to know.

The UK government announced Thursday that it had granted Pfizer legal indemnity protecting the American pharmaceutical company from civil lawsuits due to any unforeseen complications arising from prob...