January had crept up on me so surreptitiously. The first week of the year ended uneventfully before a sudden realisation brought me back to the sanctity of the keyboard next to a roaring radiator. That realisation was a promised column on last week's legal news roundup. So, welcome to the ‘Sunday Law Review’ from TheLawMap!
This week had started ominously still in bank holiday mood but the law never stands still. The Stephen Lawrence trial and the sentencing of Gary Dobson and David Norris had kept the broadsheets and redtops busy for most of the week. The 14 and 15 year sentences handed out to Dobson and Norris had been criticised as lenient in some quarters. It is understood that the attorney general would have the matter referred to him. Public opinion seems to be demanding retribution so I would expect a statement from Dominic Grieve QC in the weeks to come.
Noise of legislative changes came in the shape of the Prime Minister David Cameron’s proposal to cap personal injury lawyer’s fees to £400 for cases less than £25000. This created much stir in the legal community. I must add that the £400 would be awarded where the defendant had admitted liability.
ABS or alternative business structure has finally reared its head. Whether that head is ugly or pretty is yet to be decided. For the non-legal reader I should perhaps explain that ABS is a new regulated business structure for law firms that would allow for non-legal partnerships or management structure to exist within the law firm. The Law Society Gazette’s leading article ‘Titanic battle’ predicted as ABS processing begins heralded the start of ABS but I would like to draw the reader’s attention to the comments section of that article as an example of how opinion is divided on ABS. It is true that one of my TheLawMap associates had started the discussion rolling with the first comment, however, there were a number of pertinent points made by other readers! The comments alone highlight the strength of feelings on this matter.
A major report to the parliament on assisted suicide is sure to add more fuel to the euthanasia debate. Lord Falconer, the former Lord Chancellor has deemed the current framework to be incoherent and inadequate at best, and has proposed several changes. The summary of his proposals would incorporate the following: at least two independent doctors must be involved in the decision making process, the patient must be made aware of all medical and social help available, and perhaps most importantly, they must not have taken the decision under duress or others making the patient feel like a burden. Mental illness and the incapability of taking the medication by the individual himself or herself had also been cited as a prerequisite for any decision on assisted suicide.
Drug driving could become a new offence. An expert panel is being set up by the government to consider the possibility to identify, for average members of the adult population, the levels of drugs that may have an impairing effect broadly equivalent to the current blood-alcohol level. Panel members would consider the effect for a number of drugs including cocaine, MDMA (more commonly known as ecstasy), cannabis, and opiates. Based on the findings, a new law could be drafted in the near future 'on driving under the influence of drugs'. One can't help wondering who would be the willing or unwilling test tube participants in the resulting trials!
While attracting little media coverage I found a very interesting story on The New Law Journal on divorce mediation, and duly turned it into one of TheLawMap’s focus of the day tweets. Sir Paul Coleridge, a former family law barrister of 30 years before becoming a judge is seeking to raise £150,000 for a marriage foundation. His proposal is to highlight the negative effects of divorce upon children. Coming in at a time when the Conservative led coalition government had increasingly been propounding on the importance of marriage as a socially cohesive institution and the critique of that stance from the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg questioning the need for married couples tax breaks, it would be interesting to see any resultant legislative change on this front before the end of the present parliament.
The Michael Peacock obscenity trial that had been gathering momentum for a while finally ended rather dramatically with a not guilty verdict. Peacock, a male escort had been charged under the Obscenity Publications Act for distributing DVDs containing lewd sexual acts. The jury’s decision on the material being intended to cater for gay men specifically desiring to be exposed such graphic sexual imagery might have long repercussions on the nature obscenity itself. We can certainly expect a major debate on what constitutes obscenity.
On Friday, the last day of the working week as I was just about to get away from the keyboard and more reluctantly, the radiator, news filtered through on the subject of conveyancing. One must admit that other than the odd tweets from mortgage lending websites, I come across precious few developments on conveyancing in general. However, all that is sure to change as HSBC have established a conveyancing panel of solicitors and licensed conveyancers with the specific aim of providing legal services to its residential mortgage customers. Of the 43 chosen associates 39 are solicitor’s firms and the remaining 4 being licensed conveyancing companies. Customers would continue to be free to use their existing legal representative or chosen conveyancer, however, HSBC would use a panel of firms for its own legal requirements. Where a customer chooses a non-panel firm, the new process would separate the two pieces of legal work, and the customer would be charged for both.
While the Law Society has welcomed the need for the associate solicitor’s firms to carry the CQS (Conveyancing Quality Scheme) accreditation, such a small pool of firms to cater for the entirety of England and Wales jurisdiction is of some concern. The list of associate firms is by no means closed and I would hope that for the sake of the general public, there would be more law firms applying to join the HSBC scheme in the near future.
International human rights news have been dominated this week by events in Syria, Yemen and Nigeria. Calls for the former President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak to be awarded the death penalty in the charge of murdering 800 protesters had been gaining credence. All week, I have felt fascinated by events evolving in Pakistan with regards to the memogate scandal. Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari had said that his government would accept a parliamentary panel’s decision on the authenticity of an alleged memo that had sought US help to stave off a feared military coup in Pakistan, setting the stage for a fresh confrontation with the Supreme Court that is also investigating the scandal. In India the 2G Scam trial continues with new revelations each week. While it would be unfair to admit that I have lost interest in the Jerry Sandusky trial in the US, this week there had been less column inches dedicated to this trial compared to December. The Alabama immigration law, challenges to the requirement of photo ID for voting purposes and the Obama healthcare bill had been the other major US law news to have interested me.
And that was my fascinating first legal week of the year here at TheLawMap! Comments, additions, corrections or even critical omissions related to any of the reported legal news stories would be most welcome from my readers.
I would like to thank all involved within the legal profession, journalists, web editors and the linked publications cited above for allowing me to draft this review and comment on last weeks legal happenings.
© TTR
