Can kids be criminals?

There's a really good discussion on Radio 4's Law in Action programme here, or download the free podcast of it here.

Can younger children know right from wrong?

Can they anticipate the true consequences of their actions?

Can they understand complicated court proceedings?

So, what do you think the age of criminal responsibility should be? 10? 12? 14? 18? Thousands of crimes are committed by the under 10s, but are we demonising our kids?

Complete the poll on the right - but read the article or listen to the discussion first!

Trips to Employment Tribunals

We are off to the Employment Tribunals next week!

Mr Howells' Thurs morning class - meet outside the Tribunals at 9.20am

Mr Howells' Thursday afternoon class - meet outside the Tribunals at 1.40pm

See map below! Travel directions are here.

View Larger Map

MMU Law Talk/LNAT talk

Manchester Metropolitan University are coming into College to talk to AS students about studying Law at degree level.

This is taking place on Wednesday 10th June at 1.00pm in the Theatre. Tickets are available from Mr Howells, Miss Standing or Jarra in the Study Centre.

If you are even vaguely considering studying law at any University, this event will be well worth attending!

LNAT Talk - 18th June

Miss Standing will be giving a talk on the National Admissions Test for Law (LNAT) and personal statements for law students at 1.00 in the Theatre on Thursday 18th June. Again, if you are considering studying law at University, this will be very useful for you, as many Universities require applicants to take this test. Miss Standing will also cover UCAS personal statements for law students.

See you all there...

Court trips

Mr Howells and Miss Standing's shared group - Wednesday 10th June, morning - meet at Court at 9.45.

Mr Howells' Mon/Thurs group - Thursday 11th June, afternoon - meet at Court at 1.30pm.

Mr Howells' Tues/Thursday group - Thursday 11th June, morning - meet at Court at 9.45 am.

Minshull Street Crown Court is near Piccadilly Station:


View Larger Map

For more details, watch this space!

A Time Comes

Have a look at this documentary about the "Kingsnorth Six", the environmental activists who were put on trial and acquitted of criminal damage in relation to their protest against pollution at Kingsnorth coal-fired power station in 2007. A good example of pressure groups, and of jury equity! You can also read an article by the barrister who defended the Kingsnorth Six here.

What exactly does the Privy Council do?

Interesting article on this strange body here. Crying out for reform?

Law reform body Justice say that “the lack of accessibility and transparency of the Privy Council means that almost no one understands its processes”.

The Privy Council for AS Law Students has two functions - as a Court, (the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) and as a body that meets to issue Orders in Council. Orders in Council often concern matters of national security, or the implementation of European Directives.

The judges who sit in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council are the same people that make up the Law Lords. As it is outside the hierarchy of the Courts, Privy Council decisions are persuasive only but the case of R v James and Karimi (2006) shows us that the Court of Appeal will sometimes follow a Privy Council decision over one of the House of Lords - in this case, the Privy Council's decision in Jersey v Holley (2005) was preferred to the House of Lords' decision in R v Smith (Morgan James) (2001)


The picture above (by artist Ptolemy Dean) shows the chamber where meetings of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council take place - although they will move to the new Supreme Court building next year.

New Poll now up

AS law students - which topic are you most confident about for the Sources exam? Poll on the right.

Also don't forget to sign up for the LoretoLaw mailing list! Put your email address in the box on the left, then respond to the email you get sent. Easy.

Justice on Trial

The Guardian has just begun a campaign called Justice on Trial, aiming to highlight cases where there is a major concern that a miscarriage of justice has taken place. (Pictured here is Sally Clark, who was wrongly convicted of shaking her two baby sons to death on the basis of now discredited medical evidence).

Miscarriages of justice do not appear to have gone away, as the recent case of the Cardiff Three shows.

There's a good short film to watch (but be warned - it contains some strong language from the start) and a fantastic slideshow of some of the higher-profile miscarriages of justice that have taken place over the years.

The exam doctor is here...

..and here's his advice on how to revise effectively, from the School Gate blog:

Ten minutes is all that it takes with the ‘10-minute rule’ whenever you get stuck.

o Ditch those four-hour sessions you planned, where only 10 minutes actual work is done.

o Start with the 10 minutes you know you will do. Then have a 10-minute break and start again.

o Anyone can do that. So can you.

o When working work and when relaxing relax. The two don’t mix. Remember that.

o No texting friends, looking out of the window or playing with the cat. And your room can wait for another few years to be tidied.

o So now you have started, doubled the time you normally work in an evening and had a 10-minute break, all within the first half hour.

o Increase the working periods to 30 or 40 minutes and keep the breaks at 10 or less.

o Sorted? Well ‘ish’ at least. Don’t think about it, just do it – now!

o Congratulate yourself for having done it. You’ve made a start.

o Staring into space won’t help but the ‘10-minute rule’ will whenever you have difficulty in starting something you don’t want to do.

Have a watch of the below:

EU Commissioners

There are 27 Commissioners at the European Commission - one from each Member State.

Our current representative there is Baroness Catherine Ashton, who replaced Peter Mandelson on the 6th October 2008 - although usually Commissioners serve a full 5-year term. She is pictured here meeting with the Chinese Minister for Commerce.

Baroness Ashton is the EU Trade Commissioner - so her duty is to serve the EU as a whole and represent the interests of the EU with our global trading partners. Quite a responsibility!

This is an important role these days as the credit crunch means other countries are taking steps to protect their indistries, sometimes by taxing EU imports. China has even banned some EU goods! You can watch an interview with Baroness Ashton about this here (although it may not work on the College computers - try at home!)

As a reminder, the Commission's main jobs are to:

• propose policies and draft proposals for changes in EU law;
• take any Members State that do not obey EU rules to court at the ECJ;
• administer the EU and implement the budget.

Finally, the following video is an interview with Baroness Ashton at this year's European Business Summit:

Leila Deen - custard queen!

Loretolaw's poll on whether Leila Deen should have faced charges after sliming Lord Mandelson sees a 55% to 45% win for those voting "no". Perhaps the police were listening as she has escaped with just a caution for disorderly behaviour under Section 5 of the Public Order Act.

Play Leila Deen the Custard Queen here - no, on second thoughts you are all supposed to be revising!

Job opportunity

Brown Dunne and Gray Solicitors have several positions available for Paralegals/Litigation Executives in their busy Altrincham office.

They specialise in personal injury accident claims and need more staff as they are expanding.

Legal qualifications are not essential. Applicants must have the ability to listen and learn together with good organisational skills.

Start date - June/July 2009.

If you are interested in this you can email your CV to recruitment@bdglaw.co.uk or send it by post - see Mr Howells for the address or email me ahowells@loreto.ac.uk .

This position might suit any A2 students who are interested in law but not going straight on to university in September.

Easter Revision dates

Here are the revision dates for AS and A2 law over Easter. If you need to resit an exam, and/or got a U, or just want to achieve your potential, you really must attend! Lessons start at 9am.

Tuesday 14th April - AS English Legal System – Police, Bail, Sentencing, Criminal Courts – all day, W111, Miss Standing

Wednesday 15th April - A2 Special Study – all day, W111 - Miss Standing

Thursday 16th April - A2 Law of Contract Paper - all day, W111 - Miss Standing

Thursday 16th April - AS English Legal System – Juries, Magistrates, Legal Prof, Civil Courts, ADR - all day, W110 - Mr Howells

Friday 17th April - AS Sources of Law - all day, W110 - Mr Howells

Be there!

Judges reject robes that make them look like "Star Trek characters"

...even though they were designed by former designer of the year Betty Jackson, pictured below with the Lord Chief Justice. Story here.

Another miscarriage of justice

Sean Hodgson has been released from prison after 27 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. He's one of the longest serving prisoners in the penal system, is mentally ill and DNA evidence was used to clear his name.

The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) ruled that his conviction was unsafe and should be quashed after the case had been urgently referred to court by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Hodgson was suposed to have had DNA tests many years ago. Unbelievably, when he asked for DNA tests in 1988 he was told no DNA material had been kept!

Recently he saw this advert (right) and thought he'd give it one last try. Bet he's glad he did!

Read about the background to this here.

The Times archive shows how they originally reported the case here.

Cyclists without helmets partly to blame for injuries?

The case of Smith v Finch (2009) in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court appears to indicate that the idea of contributory negligence - which sees compensation reduced for those partly at fault for their own injuries - is extended to helmetless cyclists, although the defendant must show that not wearing a helmet contributed to the injury sustained. You can read the judgment here.

This is even though there is no legal compulsion to wear a helmet. The judge took the view that this did not matter.

This is an example of a judge reasoning by analogy to create an original precedent. In this case, the judge referred to Lord Denning's decision in Froom v Butcher (1976) which established the idea that occupants of a car are partially reposnsible for their own injuries if such injuries are caused by not wearing a seatbelt.

In Smith, the claimant could not prove that if the cyclist was wearing a helmet injury would have been prevented - so in fact no deduction will be made from the substantial damages likely to be awarded to the defendant in respect of his serious injuries. As a result, the judge's comments about contributory negligence and cycle helmets are arguably obiter dicta, meaning that they are persuasive in effect rather than binding.

Many cylists are really upset at the implications of this decision - they feel that this ruling potentially blames victims. What do you think?

PS: this article comments that the judge in Smith seems to have departed from the obiter comments of the judge in A (a child) v Shorrock (2001) where the judge attached no fault for the failure to wear a helmet.

Time for parliament to step in and clear things up? Or will we have to wait for a case to get to the Court of Appeal?

English Legal System Podcast

Although it's from August 2007 this is a really useful listen for AS students. Dr Penny Derbyshire is a legal academic and writer based at Kingston University and an expert on the English Legal System and juries in particular.

Includes relatively new cases on EU Law, the Law Commission, Civil Courts, Judicial review and much more. Listen to it with a pen and paper and note down some extra cases to help you on your way to higher grades!

In other news, the College of Law is opening a new branch in Manchester - so you can study there to be a solicitor or barrister, as you can already with BPP, Man Met and so on. Charon QC interviews Tricia Chatterton about this here.

Mandelson slime attacker arrested

Legitimate political protest against the third runway at Heathrow, or criminal act? Technically it's assault, so should the police have arrested Leila Deen of Plane Stupid ?

Views please!

An overview of contract law

Professor Robert Upex on the basics. Not an exciting video, but an accurate one and a good starting point for revision for A2 Law of Contract students.

A modern miscarriage of justice...

When we teach police powers we often explain the need for PACE, etc by reference to various miscarriages of justice in the 1970s such as the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six. The implication is that, post-PACE, miscarriages of justice are a thing of the past. The following story gives the lie to this idea:

Three men were jailed in Cardiff in 1990 for the murder of a 20-year old girl (pictured).

All three were subsequently released, with the real perpetrator admitting to the murder and getting life imprisonment in 2003.

Subsequently, three witnesses from the original trial were convicted of perjury (lying in court) at the original trial.

Now 13 police officers are to be charged with perverting the course of justice. it is alleged that they "moulded, manipulated and fabricated" evidence.

Full story here.

Riz Ahmed on liberty

Is he right?

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

In 1991 there was a disaster at Hillsborough football ground during the F.A. cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest.

96 people died as a result. The Taylor Report found that the deaths were caused by a failure of police control when they opened a gate to allow thousands of fans into an already-full terrace. Fans were crushed against the fences at the front of the terrace, which had been put there to prevent hooliganism.

One of the victims of this tragedy was Anthony Bland, who sustained severe crush injuries including crushed ribs and two punctured lungs, leaving him in a persistent vegetative state. He was 18 at the time. Although he could not see, hear or feel anything, his brain was still functioning. The doctors were of the opinion that Anthony would not recover.

The doctors , together with Anthony's parents, applied to court for a ruling that the doctors would not be guilty of murder if they stopped feeding him.

This was a new situation, which required the judges to create an original precedent. The judges reasoned by analogy. They decided that the feeding tube was effectively medical treatment which was no longer working. They confirmed that they would not find the doctors guilty if they stopped this "treatment".

You can read the full judgment in this case here.

Have a look at the Hillsborough Justice Campaign site too.

Labour peer jailed for dangerous driving

What IS going on with the House of Lords at the moment?

At least this case confirms the rule of law - even life peers like Lord Ahmed are not above the law.

On the other hand, he only got 12 weeks and his conviction was not related to being involved in a fatal crash, but to sending long text messages to a journalist earlier on the same journey. The last text was sent only two minutes before the crash - I wonder whether he was still looking at his phone? How the mighty are fallen...

It's not been a great few weeks for the reputation of the upper House. Should we keep it or bin it? What do you think?

Debbie Purdy loses euthanasia appeal

Although Debbie Purdy lost her appeal to try to force the Director of Public Prosecutions to issue clear guidelines on when someone assisting another to commit suicide will be prosecuted, the Lord Chief Justice did indicate that the courts are likely to throw any such prosecution out.

He also stated that it was not for judges to issue guidance on this, but up to parliament. AS students - this is an example of judges being wary of setting precedents on important issues that they consider best left to our elected representatives.

Gordon Brown has said that he will not change the law - so at present, any person in such an incredibly difficult situation will have to rely on hints made by a judge rather than clear guidance from the DPP or a change in the law.

Precedent in Action!

We will shortly be studying Judicial Precedent as a Source of Law.

Some areas of our law originate entirely from judicial precedent (law made by judges). One example of this is the law of negligence, much of which can be traced back to the landmark decision in Donoghue v Stevenson made by the House of Lords in 1932. In this case, Mrs Donoghue found a snail in her bottle of ginger beer. It made her ill, so she sued the manufacturer, claiming they owed her a duty of care - previously a concept limited to only a few areas such as road accidents.

The ratio decidendi in a case refers to the reason for the decision; that part of the judgment that creates a binding precendent that all other judges from equal or lower courts must follow.

In Donoghue, the ratio can be found in Lord Atkin's judgment, and in particular in the following passage:

"You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.

Who, then, in law is my neighbour?

The answer seems to be - persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question."

This principle has been followed in hundreds of subsequent cases. The concept of a duty of care now extends to lawyers and their clients, doctors and their patients, and so on.

For example, this week the accountancy firm Moore Stephens is being sued for damages of £117 million for negligence, as it is alleged they did not audit a company properly which then went bankrupt.

Also. the NHS is expected to pay out £700 million in negligence payments to claimants in 2009 -all because of a snail in a bottle of ginger beer in 1928!