Blog — Law Answered

Legal Commentary

Remote Hearings

Remote Hearings

As the Covid 19 pandemic became increasingly disruptive and deadly in the UK the Courts produced a Protocol Regarding Remote Hearings (dated 26th March 2020). This effectively set a default position that court cases should move to remote hearings; it’s very flexible in permitting any practicable platform to be used (who would have dreamed in advance that the judiciary, bar and solicitors would so quickly have got to grips with the range of technologies available?).

Share

Is land law your thing? What about adverse possession?

Is land law your thing? What about adverse possession?

Land Law is really rather a marmite subject. Students tend to love it or loathe it but one of the areas of the subject with more general appeal is probably adverse possession.

There is something rather fascinating about the idea that if you can get into possession of some land and use it as you please for long enough, (without the true owner asserting any rights over it) then eventually it’s yours! Perhaps we all hope we’re going to be lucky enough to get some land this way?

Share

Coronavirus and the English Legal System

Coronavirus and the English Legal System

The last fortnight has seen a rapid escalation of the COVID-19 outbreak in the UK. With this escalation, people in the UK have come to realise the very real effect it will have on everyone in this country. On 23 March 2020, Boris Johnson outlined strict new measures: people should leave home only to exercise once a day, to travel to and from work where "absolutely necessary", to shop for essential items and to fulfil any medical or care needs. Along with pubs, cinemas, theaters and leisure centres shops selling non-essential goods are now closed.

How might COVID-19 impact your client’s contractual obligations?

How might COVID-19 impact your client’s contractual obligations?

Force Majeure? What does it mean? When does it apply?

Force Majeure clauses are utterly standard in substantial contracts and bring an end to parties’ liabilities in the event of a range of apocalyptic events normally including acts of war, terrorism, nuclear catastrophes and acts of God.

Covenant for quiet enjoyment

Covenant for quiet enjoyment

Don’t make a sound – I’ve got a covenant for quiet enjoyment

Covenants by landlords to allow tenants quiet enjoyment of premises let to them are pretty standard and there are lots of cases around what is meant by that particular covenant. (For those of you yet to embark on the joys of Land law a quick translation of the first part of this – let’s go with “Promises by landlords to give tenants a bit of peace in the premises for which the tenants are paying rent”).

Share

Judicial support for Traveller communities

Judicial support for Traveller communities

There has been much press comment on the outcome of the recent attempt by Bromley London Borough Council to secure what was effectively a borough wide ban to prevent the Gypsy and Traveller community from setting up camps. (Bromley v Persons Unknown 2020). The Local Authority’s application failed in the High Court and its appeal was unsuccessful.

Share

Supreme Court’s at it again! Must read on false imprisonment!

Supreme Court’s at it again! Must read on false imprisonment!

The Supreme Court has once again made a finding against the government. This time it’s in connection with a really interesting case of false imprisonment. R (on the application of Jalloh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019]. The unfortunate Mr Jalloh, a Liberian national was released from immigration detention and allowed to live at home under strict rules which imposed a curfew from 11.00pm to 7.00am daily.

Share

Contract races & The new SRA conduct rules

  Contract races & The new SRA conduct rules

Many of you who are studying the LPC this year are expecting to be examined on the new SRA Code of Conduct; this finally came into force on 25th November 2019. We have updated our LPC guide accordingly. But don’t worry – if you are being taught at an institution which is examining this year under the old rules - we can still let you have a copy of the previous version of our guide. (Do make sure you look at the new rules before you actually start work though!!)

Share

What does Brexit mean for UK law?

What does Brexit mean for UK law?

If you’re in the process of studying EU, Public or Constitutional law now, then you need to read this post! It’s very likely that you’ll need to understand and refer to the concept in your exams, and to have a grasp what is now happening with Brexit. (If you have bought the relevant individual subject LLB guides, or the GDL guide, do read this as an update on your Brexit chapters).

Veganism

Veganism

Ethical veganism is a protected belief!

Well, who knew that? We’ve all got good (and about time too) at recognising groups protected under the Equality Act 2010. Most law students can probably recall at least the majority of the categories – age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnerships, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief and sex. But how many of us would have thought that “belief” covered veganism?

Share

Miller2? What’s that about?

Lots of people have been talking about the case R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister but do you know what it was about? It’s a huge constitutional law case so it would be good for all aspiring lawyers to have an idea what it’s about.

It’s a common adage that constitutional law is meant to be dull and boring – you might or might not agree but it’s hard to argue that recent developments have not shaken up the image.

If you’ve bought our LLB guides on Public or EU law or our GDL guide you’ll have seen our Brexit chapters where we’ve worked through and explained the constitutional law challenges of Brexit. Brexit has provided a number of examples of the working of Separation of Powers. The executive (or government) has taken actions and then found itself challenged by Parliament and the courts. Brexit divides public opinion in every way. On the one hand it’s arguable that the shenanigans have demonstrated that the checks and balances in our constitution work, on the other hand, some argue that we must now proceed towards a written constitution. Maybe spend a bit of time thinking about where you are on this part of the debate?

But what was Miller 2 about? It isn’t in our guides as the circumstances that gave rise to it and the judgment occurred after we went to print. When Boris Johnson was elected Prime Minister by the membership of the Tory party he committed to leaving the EU on 31st October “Do or die”, with or without a deal. He promised to die in a ditch rather than ask the EU for a further extension to our membership period. He made these commitments knowing that he faced a Parliamentary majority on one aspect of Brexit – that was that the UK should not leave the EU without a deal. Mr Johnson knew that Parliament might try to thwart his plans. He decided to ask the Queen to prorogue Parliament (bring proceedings in both houses to an end) for a protracted period covering the party conferences (when business is usually suspended) allegedly to allow him to prepare for a Queen’s speech.

Many cried foul, arguing that the purpose of the prorogation was to prevent Parliament from taking action to avoid the possibility of a no-deal Brexit. At very high speed Parliament managed to pass an Act (the Benn Act) to achieve precisely that end. The legislation required Mr Johnson to write to the EU to request an extension if Parliament had not ratified a withdrawal agreement by 19th October.

Meanwhile Gina Miller, Joanna Cherry and others went off to court to get a declaration that the prorogation was illegal, and that’s exactly the decision that was made by the High Court. The advice given to the Queen to prorogue Parliament was unlawful and therefore the prorogation was “unlawful, null and of no effect.” Pretty seismic stuff in constitutional law terms. Lady Hale backed the judgment up with a powerful bit of imagery. Prorogation happens when commissioner go to Parliament with the appropriate papers, the judgment proclaimed that “it was as if the Commissioners had walked into Parliament with a blank piece of paper.”

If you want to read more about Brexit and the law or have an idea for an article yourself, check out our friends at The Student Lawyer, the number one source of free news and information created by law students for law students.

Unfairness in Contract law?

Who remembers Interfoto Picture Library v Stilletto Visual Programmes? It’s a contract case about incorporation of terms, in this case very onerous ones. The defendant borrowed transparencies from a lending library, the delivery note contained conditions providing for very high charges if the transparencies were not returned in 4 weeks. The defendant failed to read the terms and incurred a charge of over £3,700. On appeal the claimants were not able to sustain their claim, particularly onerous contractual terms have to be brought to the attention of the other party. This was not done. A very recent case has, obiter, made this clearer. Higgins v Evans stated that Interfoto did not create a general doctrine of unfairness in contract law. Interfoto is very unlikely to apply to a signed contract where all the terms are set out. Knowing this and referring to it in the right place could add a mark to a contract law LLB essay!

Oh, and if you did want to know what Higgins v Evans is about it’s relevant to LPC studies. It concerns a CFA (Conditional Fee Agreement). Very briefly the court allowed a solicitor to recover basic charges under a CFA where the client died before any recovery had been made. There was no right under the CFA for the client’s estate to pursue the claim in the event of his death and his family claimed that this amounted to an unfair term. The agreement had been very clear and they were unsuccessful.

Share