Lessons from European population genetic databases: comparing the law in Estonia, Iceland, Sweden and the United Kingdom

The advent of large-scale, population genetic databases (PGDs) in several countries around the world marks a significant development in human DNA banking and genetic research. The European countries that have led the way in the development of PGDs are Iceland, Sweden, Estonia and the U.K. In legal terms, the emergence of PGDs has been far from straightforward as such projects pose a range of difficult and complex issues for the law to address. This article canvasses the current law in Iceland, Estonia, Sweden and the U.K. on four fundamental issues of principle pertaining to PGDs, in order to illustrate the difficulties that have emerged around PGDs, highlight key areas of legal concern, and shed light on possible ways forward. It compares and contrasts the differing legal positions and lawmakers' responses to date in these four European countries that have established PGDs or are seeking to do so. The four fundamental issues examined are: (1) consent, especially for secondary research purposes; (2) ownership of biological samples, data and databases; (3) the rights of certain third parties to gain access to, and to use, PGD biological samples and data; and (4) benefit sharing, including the provision of feedback and genetic counselling to participants. This analysis may offer some guidance for policymakers in other jurisdictions where PGDs have been proposed or are being established.     

Accountability, New Public Management, and the Problems of the Child Support Agency

This paper seeks to evaluate the accountability of Next Steps Agencies through the medium of a case study of the Child Support Agency (CSA). The CSA was widely considered to offer a substandard service to its customers. It was the subject of multiple reports by the House of Commons Social Services Select Committee, the Select Committee on the Parliamentary Commissioner, and the Public Accounts Committee. In addition, these committees had at their disposal internal reports from an adjudicator and the Child Support commissioner. The interlock between internal and external machinery for accountability is also considered.     

Negotiating Proximity: Expert Testimony and Collective Memory in the Trials of Environmental Activists in France and the United Kingdom

This article analyzes the role of expert witness testimony in the trials of social movement actors, discussing the trial of the “Kingsnorth Six” in Britain and the trials of activists currently mobilising against airport construction at Notre Dame des Landes in western France. Though the study of expert testimony has so far overwhelmingly concentrated on fact‐finding and admissibility, the cases here reveal the importance of expert testimony not simply in terms of legal argument, but in “moral” or political terms, as it reflects and constitutes movement cognitive praxis. In the so‐called climate change defence presented by the Kingsnorth Six, I argue that expert testimony attained a “negotiation of proximity,” connecting different types of contributory expertise to link the scales and registers of climate science with those of everyday understanding and meaning. Expert testimony in the trials of activists in France, however, whilst ostensibly able to develop similar bridging narratives, has instead been used to construct resistance to the airport siting as already proximate, material, and embedded. To explain this, I argue that attention to the symbolic, as well as instrumental, functions of expert testimony reveals the crucial role that collective memory plays in the construction of both knowledge and grievance in these cases. Collective memory is both a constraint on and catalyst for mobilisation, defining the boundaries of the sayable. Testimony in trials both reflects and reproduces these elements and is a vital explanatory tool for understanding the narrativisation and communication of movement identities and objectives.     

Inching toward incrementalism: federalism, devolution, and health policy in the United States and the United Kingdom

In the United States, the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 envisions a significant increase in federal oversight over the nation's health care system. At the same time, however, the legislation requires the states to play key roles in every aspect of the reform agenda (such as expanding Medicaid programs, creating insurance exchanges, and working with providers on delivery system reforms). The complicated intergovernmental partnerships that govern the nation's fragmented and decentralized system are likely to continue, albeit with greater federal oversight and control. But what about intergovernmental relations in the United Kingdom? What impact did the formal devolution of power in 1999 to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have on health policy in those nations, and in the United Kingdom more generally? Has devolution begun a political process in which health policy in the United Kingdom will, over time, become increasingly decentralized and fragmented, or will this "state of unions" retain its long-standing reputation as perhaps the most centralized of the European nations? In this article, we explore the federalist and intergovernmental implications of recent reforms in the United States and the United Kingdom, and we put forward the argument that political fragmentation (long-standing in the United States and just emerging in the United Kingdom) produces new intergovernmental partnerships that, in turn, produce incremental growth in overall government involvement in the health care arena. This is the impact of what can be called catalytic federalism.     

Unconscionability of E-contracts: A Comparative Study of India,the United Kingdom,and the United States

Liverpool Law Review - Adhesion contracts have a strong likelihood of being unconscionable. The laws and principles are further complicated by the introduction of electronic contracts, specifically...     

The legal landscape for advanced therapies: material and institutional implementation of European Union rules in France and the United Kingdom

In 2007, the European Union adopted a lex specialis, Regulation (EC) No. 1394/2007 on advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), a new legal category of medical product in regenerative medicine. The regulation applies to ATMPs prepared industrially or manufactured by a method involving an industrial process. It also provides a hospital exemption, which means that medicinal products not regulated by EU law do not benefit from a harmonized regime across the European Union but have to respect national laws. This article describes the recent EU laws, and contrasts two national regimes, asking how France and the United Kingdom regulate ATMPs which do and do not fall under the scope of Regulation (EC) No. 1394/2007. What are the different legal categories and their enforceable regimes, and how does the evolution of these highly complex regimes interact with the material world of regenerative medicine and the regulatory bodies and socioeconomic actors participating in it?     

United Kingdom Military Law: Autonomy, Civilianisation, Juridification

This paper argues that military law has undergone a long-term process of change. Previously an autonomous legal system with little civilian input at the administrative, judicial and policy-making levels, military law became subject to a consensual policy of civilianisation from the early 1960s, reflected primarily in the adoption of civilian criminal law norms by the military justice system. More recently there has emerged the juridification of significant areas of military relations in respect to discipline and certain other terms of service which hitherto have not been subject to externally imposed legal regulation. Explanations for the shifts from autonomy, through civilianisation, and then to juridification, ranging from political and social developments to new human rights and equal opportunities discourses, are offered for such changes.     

Reforming the United Kingdom Constitution: Law,Convention, Soft Law

The Governance of Britain Green Paper continues the programme of constitutional reform begun in 1997, and appears to reinforce the juridification of the UK's constitution. Nevertheless, several key reforms will be implemented not by legislation, but by creating new conventions. This article argues that such ‘declared’ conventions are best understood as a form of constitutional ‘soft law’, which attempt to influence constitutional behaviour rather than generating binding norms. Applying a regulatory analysis, it then argues that the case for a soft, rather than hard law approach to constitutional reform is weaker than its widespread use in the UK suggests. Finally, the article challenges the thesis that the political constitution is being replaced by a legal constitution, arguing that the government's attitude to constitutional reform still exhibits basic characteristics of political constitutionalism. Moreover, there is more to contemporary constitutional developments than a bipolar contest between political and legal constitutionalism.     

United Kingdom: Sisters and inheritance tax

Joyce and Sybil Burden are two sisters who have lived togethersince birth and currently occupy a UK farmhouse. When one ofthem dies the other will face a large inheritance tax bill andwill have to sell the     

Coroners' autopsies: quality concerns in the United Kingdom

Safety in health care has increasingly become a key focus of health care providers. Data on "patient outcomes" and evidence-based clinical decision-making have led to real changes in health care policy and care provision. Specialist groups such as the National Patient Safety Agency which operates the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) in the United Kingdom are reliant on good information in order to identify factors that lead to poor patient care. In a recent study the NCEPOD reviewed the quality of coroners' autopsy reports on which they rely for much of their core data. The study found that just over half of the reports (52%) were considered satisfactory by the reviewers, 19% were good and 4% were excellent. However, over a quarter of autopsies were marked as poor or of an unacceptable standard. While analysing the factors associated with poor-quality autopsies, comments and recommendations were made with regard to the processes of death investigation and the degree to which the coroner's death investigation meets the needs of health care services.     

Priority-setting processes for medicines: the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand

The agencies involved in the assessment and prioritisation of medicines for public subsidy purposes in Australia, England and Wales, and New Zealand are compared in terms of their processes; ultimate decision-maker and political involvement in decisions; price-setting processes; decision criteria and inclusion of economic assessment of cost-effectiveness; provision for the rule of rescue and separate treatment of potentially life-saving medicines and cancer drugs; levels of access; extent of consumer participation in processes and decisions; and provision for appeal from decisions. All countries face the key challenge of expanding access to important new treatments, while maintaining cost-effectiveness as a key criterion for public funding and safeguarding the affordability and sustainability of their programs into the future. New Zealand's model may have led to a greater focus on cost-containment and overall affordability than those of the other two agencies. Despite controversial decisions that have led on occasion to disappointment and challenge, the Australian and New Zealand agencies have survived and appear to have managed to date to maintain public and political support. By contrast, the United Kingdom's National Institute for Healthcare and Clinical Excellence is facing major changes to its role that could see it become more of an advisory organisation.