Hands‐Off or Hands‐On?: Deconstructing the ‘Test‐Case’ of Re G within a Culture of Children's Rights

This note challenges the so‐called ‘test‐case’ status of Re G in so far as it attempts to overturn the principle established in Re T that courts should adopt a neutral position when it comes to weighing the merits of different upbringings and the education provided by parents of minority religions. In determining the future upbringing and education of children who had been brought up in a minority religious community, Re G applies a principle of maximising educational opportunity in order to uphold the mother's proposed educational choice and way of life. This note argues that Re G was wrong to do so, should not be regarded as establishing any new principle and that the only relevant principle, both in determining this case and future cases, ought to rest on the psychological well‐being of the child.     

Human Rights Watch v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Victim Status,Extraterritoriality and the Search for Principled Reasoning

In Human Rights Watch v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office the UK Investigatory Powers Tribunal found that the relevant standard of ‘victim status’ that applies in secret surveillance cases consists in a potential risk of being subjected to surveillance and that the European Convention on Human Rights does not apply to the surveillance of individuals who reside outside of the UK. This note argues that the Tribunal's finding regarding the victim status of the applicants was sound but that the underlying reasoning was not. It concludes that the Tribunal's finding on extraterritoriality is unsatisfactory and that its engagement with the European Court of Human Rights case law on the matter lacked depth. Finally, the note considers the defects of the Human Rights Watch case, and the case law on extraterritoriality more generally, against the backdrop of the place of principled reasoning in human rights adjudication.     

Section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 and the Primacy of Contract

The Court of Appeal's decision in Fulham Football Club (1987) Ltd v Richards & Anor is both of interest and significance. By embracing the idea of the parties’ ability to ‘contract out’ of their statutory right to petition the court for relief under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (the so‐called ‘unfair prejudice’ remedy), their Lordships have not only contrived to stunt the future development of unfair prejudice as a minority shareholder remedy but, and more importantly for the purposes of this case note, their decision has reasserted and extended the contractual analogy in modern UK company law.     

Liability for sexual harassment in criminal justice agencies

This article focuses on sexual harassment in criminal justice agencies from a legal perspective. The article briefly describes sexual harassment cases that address agency liability decided by the United States Supreme Court, discussing the standards of liability articulated in Burlington Industries Inc. v. Ellerth (1998), Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998), and Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986). A more precise understanding of when agencies are liable for the actions of their subordinates is developed through an examination of lower federal court decisions. Trends in the law are identified, as case law is categorized according to harassment by supervisors and co-workers. The article concludes by exploring the policy implications flowing from court decisions and by calling for further research on this troubling aspect of the criminal justice workplace.     

Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd: Reflective Loss and the Autonomy of Company Law

In Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd the Supreme Court considered the ambit of the prohibition on a shareholder recovering losses from third parties for the reduction in the value of their shares or loss of dividend income arising from a wrong suffered by the company. This prohibition on ‘reflective loss’ had been growing in scope in recent years, leading to a lack of clarity as to whether it is taxonomically situated in company law or in private law. The majority in this case situated the prohibition firmly within company law. This note argues that the majority judgment did not go far enough and explores the impact of this case on company law more broadly.     

Complicating Complicity: Aiding and Abetting Causing Death by Dangerous Driving in R v Martin

The law of complicity, particularly relating to joint enterprise liability, appears to becoming more and more complicated. Cases on secondary liability for murder in the Court of Appeal demonstrate that this area of law is difficult to interpret and to apply. Even more complex is the question of how to apply these cases to offences other than murder. This case note attempts to address the Court of Appeal's questions in the case of R v Martin as to how the jury ought to be directed in a case of aiding and abetting causing death by dangerous driving.     

Between Justice and Law in Aotearoa New Zealand: Two Case Studies

Through two case studies, this essay examines the relationship between the operation and practice of law in Aotearoa New Zealand and the naming of the ‘unlawful’, ‘uncivil’ or ‘disorderly’ within a colonial context. Against the background of the apparent complicity between law and colonial interest and desire in Aotearoa, I argue that, in both the ‘Haka Party’ case (1979) and Mair v Wanganui City Council (1996), the acts of the defendants draw attention to the relationship between the authority of the law and the repression or exclusion of difference. According to the judges in both cases, the dictates of Maori law and custom were in conflict with the principles of ‘law and order’. Read in terms of colonial relations, the perceived relationship between Maori law and custom and the threat to ‘civilization’, law and order reveals the way in which ‘the law’ has operated in a culturally biased manner and has reflected the interests of Pakeha (New Zealanders of European descent). Thus, the perceived threat of the challenge made to the law in either case can be seen as the threat to reveal it for what it is, to expose the violence that maintains it, and thus to open a space for critique. Perhaps more powerfully than any physical attack on the system itself, these acts which expose the law challenge it in the name of justice, making it possible for the law to be seen both as a reflection of a particular cultural interest and hence as co-opt-able, takeable and able to be made to serve another end, that of the other in the name of justice. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Falling Short of Constitutional Norms: Does “Normative (In)Congruence” Explain the Courts' Inability to Promote the Right to Water in South Africa?

In South Africa, municipal noncompliance with legislation promoting the constitutional right to sufficient water is both a failure of the rule of law and a betrayal of that right. Judicial intervention has prompted formalistic compliance with water law, but the underlying commitment to sufficient water remains unfulfilled. Does the inability of courts to achieve social justice despite enforcing social legislation confirm the thesis that commitments to the rule of law and to social justice are inconsistent, that upholding the rule of law may not advance social justice? This article offers an alternative to this “inconsistency thesis,” arguing that the rule of law can accommodate social justice if it demands normative congruence alongside congruence with formal rules. Empirical investigation reveals that structural challenges and the multifarious normative demands on officials create a condition of normative incongruence that impedes the pursuit of social justice, even as courts compel congruence with formal rules.     

Desperately Seeking ‘Justice’ in Classical Chinese: On the Meanings of Yi

This essay sets out to search for an equivalent Chinese word to the English word ‘justice’ in classical Chinese language, through ancient Chinese philosophical texts, imperial codes and idioms. The study found that there does not seem to be a linguistic sign for ‘justice’ in classical Chinese, and further, yi resembles ‘justice’ in some ways and has been used sometimes to translate  ‘justice’, but yi is a complex concept in traditional Chinese philosophy with multiple meanings and it is dissimilar to ‘justice’ in their semantic and pragmatic meanings in Chinese and English legal culture. While ‘justice’ is a keyword and fundamental to Western law, yi is not a legal word or concept in classical Chinese in traditional China. Given its complexity, yi does not have a one-to-one equivalent in English. It sometimes carries a sense of ‘righteousness’ and occasionally ‘justice’, but yi and ‘justice’ are not equivalent. In view of these, it becomes understandable that the translations of yi in contemporary Chinese usage vary ranging from ‘friendship and justice’ to ‘greater good’, among others. The meaning of yi is still uncertain and context sensitive as it was two thousand years ago.

     

Toxic Torts, Public Interest Law, and Environmental Justice: Evidence from Louisiana*

Poor and minority communities facing environmental hazards have increasingly turned to legal strategies to seek redress but a divide has emerged in these cases and their outcomes. Some aggrieved communities turn to private injury lawyers, while others secure representation by public interest groups, such as Earthjustice, the Southern Environmental Law Center, or university law clinics. Is justice being equally served in these cases? We analyze the impact of toxic tort versus legal aid approaches in determining the outcome of environmental justice struggles using four landmark cases from Louisiana in the context of other factors that appeared important in determining how these cases resolved.     

Citizen Led Policing in the Digital Realm: Paedophile Hunters and Article 8 in the case of Sutherland v Her Majesty's Advocate

In Sutherland v Her Majesty's Advocate, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed an appeal which argued that the use of communications obtained by a paedophile hunter group as evidence in criminal prosecution was a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case raises fundamental questions of the scope of the right to private life as regards to the content of communications and the role played by private actors in the criminal justice process. This note argues that by limiting the protection of Article 8 to private communications which satisfy a contents-based test, the Court has bypassed the Article 8(2) balancing test to the detriment of the due process rights of the accused. The note concludes that the decision opens up the prospect of the state circumventing the accused's Article 8 privacy rights by lending tacit approval to the proactive investigations of these private ‘paedophile hunter’ groups.     

Building a post-war justice system in Afghanistan

This paper examines key dimensions of justice in post–war Afghanistan. These areshari'a(Islamic law), traditional institutions of informal justice (jirga), the Afghan interim legal framework, and human rights principles. It is argued that despite their apparent incompatibility, these various dimensions of justice could be integrated within a coherent framework of a new justice system in post–war Afghanistan –– a framework that would promote interaction between local institutions of informal justice and a district level court of justice, on the one hand, and between these two and a proposed human rights unit, on the other. On the basis of this analysis, an experimental model of a system of justice is proposed, which integrates local jirga and human rights units into the existing formal justice (based on shari'a and positive law) and law–enforcement institutions. This experimental model provides a multi–dimensional framework that both reflects the cultural and religious values of Afghan society, and at the same time, has the capacity to draw on human rights principles. It is maintained that the model has the capacity to deliver justice expeditiously and in cost–effective ways; it also has a strong potential to act as a channel of communication between ordinary people and a modern participatory state in post–war Afghanistan. However, in order to test the applicability of this model in the real world, it needs first to be thoroughly discussed among Afghan and international legal experts as well as among ordinary Afghan people, and then piloted in selected districts in Afghanistan.     

Rorschach Tests,Pluralism, and Hopes for the Future: A Response to the Responses

In this essay, I address some of the concerns raised by contributors to the Symposium on Invitation to Law & Society: An Introduction to the Study of Real Law. I argue that law and society scholarship focusing on race increasingly offers some of our field's best empirical analyses of the interpenetration of law and society; I emphasize the importance of the methodological and theoretical diversity that characterizes our fragmented field, arguing that our pluralism is one of our greatest strengths; I clarify my intended meaning of the term “real law” as I use it in the book's subtitle, as a way to underscore the socially constituted quality of all law; I attempt to rescue the reputation of dialectics from charges of “relativism”; and I reiterate my appreciation for our field's engagement with questions of social justice that has characterized it since its inception. In the second half of the essay, I briefly describe my current prison research and offer some thoughts for the future of our field.     

Durie v Gardiner: Public Libel Law and Stare Non Decisis

This note examines the controversial case of Durie v Gardiner, a recent decision of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, which radically altered the nation's public libel jurisprudence. It argues that Durie is incorrect as a matter of public libel law for three reasons. First, both Durie judgments failed to engage in freedom of expression theorising. Second, this undertheorising has caused significant confusion in Durie, including misinterpretation of material facts, breakdown of the ‘theory-doctrine’ interface, and a precipitous and unwarranted dismissal of the Court of Appeal's settled public libel principles. Third, owing to these difficulties, the Durie courts were in no position to import a new ‘public interest’ defence from foreign jurisdictions. Above all, by hastening towards wholesale law reform and ignoring its earlier comparative law deliberations, Durie arguably scuppers public libel law's best hope for advancement.     

Mr Hobbes Goes to Australia: Law,Politics and Difference

Using current conservative discourses about the nation state in Australia as an example,the paper notices how the image of the (male-sexed) body is used to enhance theauthority of the same (white ``neutral' agents of largely foreign capital)against the claims of difference (non-white refugees, women, Aboriginal people).The paper notices that far from protecting minority and difference, as liberalismleads one to expect, the law uses the same body image of itself to repeat theoppression. Legal education inscribes the masculinity of the phallus in thebodies and minds of its students. Other masculinity, the female, the``native' are identified by the law rather than self-identifiedin the law after negotiation with the law.     

Defense Attorney Plea Recommendations and Client Race: Does Zealous Representation Apply Equally to All?

Research on racism in the criminal justice system generally focuses on the role of the jury; yet, the vast majority of convictions are obtained through plea bargains. This research addresses the role of the defense attorney and proposes that disparities in sentence length and incarceration rates between African Americans and Caucasian Americans are in part due to the plea bargains that defense attorneys recommend these clients accept. Using practicing defense attorneys from around the country, findings indicate that the pleas attorneys felt they could obtain with a minority client contained higher sentences (adjusted M = 2.88) than those they felt they could obtain with a Caucasian client (adjusted M = 2.22) and were significantly more likely to include some jail time. Reasons for the disparate recommendations were not due to increased perceptions of guilt with the minority client nor to perceptions that the minority client would fare worse at trial. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed as well as possible future directions.     

The Common Law Constitution at Work: R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor

This note considers the radical significance of Supreme Court's judgment in R (on the Application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor (UNISON) on the unlawfulness of tribunal fees. It argues that the decision marks the coming of age of the ‘common law constitution at work’. The radical potential of UNISON lies in its generation of horizontal legal effects in disputes between private parties. Recent litigation on employment status in the ‘gig economy’ is analysed through the lens of UNISON and common law fundamental rights. The note identifies the various ways in which the common law tests of employment status might be ‘constitutionalised’ in the light of UNISON.     

Trust,Distrust and Reassurance: Diversion and Preventive Orders Through the Prism of Feindstrafrecht

This article considers Günther Jakobs' controversial theory of ‘the criminal law of the enemy’ (Feindstrafrecht). Taking an interpretive perspective that is anchored in social theory, rather than normative principles, the article traces the implications of Jakobs' central claims concerning trust relations in society as mediated by the criminal law and endeavours to articulate their relevance for English law, particularly as regards the growing role of diversion and preventive orders in criminal justice. It identifies the various ways in which these current alternatives to the criminal sanctioning process link with neo‐liberal technologies of government by connecting Jakobs' thoughts on trust with key themes in the Foucauldian governmentality literature and recent research on the ascent of auditing as a meta‐regulatory mechanism.     

Kogan v Martin: A New Framework for Joint Authorship in Copyright Law

The Court of Appeal has set out a new framework for the application of copyright law's joint authorship test in a recent landmark case. Kogan v Martin brings some welcome clarity to the complex joint authorship landscape, embedding an inclusive pro-collaboration default standard. This case note contrasts the appeal court's nuanced framing of the dispute with the first instance court's narrower approach. The note then examines the new joint authorship framework and explains how it allows the test to be applied with an eye to the reality of collaborative creative endeavours. Finally, the significance of Kogan v Martin is highlighted, as are some questions which remain unanswered.     

Closing the Floodgates on Privacy Class Actions: Lloyd v Google LLC

In Lloyd v Google LLC [2021] UKSC 50, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal's decision, which had allowed a claim under the Data Protection Act 1998 to proceed as a representative action under CPR 19.6. This is significant because the Court of Appeal's decision arguably paved the way for further data protection/privacy claims to be brought as opt-out ‘class actions’ using this procedure. This case note summarises the Supreme Court decision and assesses its implications for both the procedural law of collective redress and the substantive law of privacy in England. It argues that the Supreme Court's reasoning in relation to both of these areas is sound as a matter of precedent and statutory construction. As a matter of public policy, the decision is likely to re-enliven debate about the availability of collective redress in English law and whether the existing collective proceedings regime should be broadened.