For some years now I have kept to the principle that I do not work on the anniversary of my arrival on Earth. As blogging, for me, is not work… I am able to blog.
The UK Supreme Court proceedings are now being broadcast on Sky. Although the first transmission involved a complex matter of Revenue law, I watched for about an hour yesterday morning and thoroughly enjoyed it. This, apart from being a wonderful tool for teaching, is a very welcome development and I have no doubt that some of the more important cases on human rights, the constitution, civil liberties, and other matters of wide and general public interest will attract a wide viewership. Worth a look
In an excellent piece of blogging @lawandgarbage considers the issue of superinjunctions…
In recent weeks a former reality television contestant, Imogen Thomas, has done the rounds of television studios and newspapers bemoaning the fact that she had been gagged by the courts from selling her story.
One of her tear-filled television appearances can be viewed here……
David Allen Green puts the boot into Wikileaks with an excellent analysis of what Wikileaks should have done to gag their employees: WikiLeaks £12m Legal Gag: a legal analysis
And.. if you need more on this… The Big Brother star, the footballer, privacy law and the judiciary from Legal Week
Many law bloggers have commented on the privacy and superinjunction issue. I did so with a number of propositions the other day. The Guardian reports: Privacy law could help judges decide over gagging orders, says Ken Clarke noting…“Justice secretary says he will consider legislation, but admits there may be quicker, less controversial ways of tackling issue.”
Proposals for a reformed House of Lords published
For my part, I tend to agree with much in The Times editorial today that reform of the House of Lords – an ongoing saga since 1911 – should not be a high priority of government time at a time when the economy and cuts are far more deserving of the focus of our MPs and government. The recent AV fiasco should be a pointer to the lack of public interest in constitutional reform at this time – and even, generally? However, I share Carl Gardner’s astonishment, declared on twitter earlier today, that the reform proposals published today in readiness, hopefully, of being kicked into the long grass, contain a provision for 12 of 26 ‘unelected’ bishops to remain in the Lords. Why? Religion is a matter of personal choice – and there are many gods out there for people to believe in. But should any religion, in the 21st century, be part of the governance of our country? Obviously, I think not.
I remember enjoying the biting satire The Ruling Class with Peter O’Toole many years ago. Plus ca change?
Breaking the myth of the barristers’ dinner
A few days ago Alex Aldridge wrote an article on the dining ritual: Barristers’ dinners – a bit of fun or one upper-class indulgence too many?
I read the article in The Guardian with some amusement – wondering how long it would be before the backlash came… and come it did.
Fiona Fulton is the head of education and training at the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple. She had much to say…rightly. I’ll quote from her summation:
“Instead of perpetuating a simplistic stereotype, we want to break down myths and make sure that prospective barristers receive accurate information about the inns and the profession.
We wish the same could have been said for the earlier article.
The Inns of court are many things but “Disneyland” for the privileged they are not.”
Ouch. Worth reading.
Legal Walk raises £500,000 for advice centres
The Law Society Gazette reports: Legal workers came out in force across the country yesterday for this year’s Legal Walk. More than 5,000 people joined in the event on Monday evening to raise £500,000 for free legal advice centres in London. The Gazette acted as media partner.
Right.. back to my Rioja….