Experts, Juries, and Witch-hunts: From Fitzjames Stephen to Angela Cannings

Angela Cannings's successful appeal against her convictions for murder has revived an old controversy about the competence of juries to evaluate expert evidence. In response to criticisms of the jury system in the wake of a series of controversial poisoning trials, the Victorian jurist J.F. Stephen argued that juries were well equipped to decide on behalf of the community which experts should be treated as authorities, whose opinions the lay public could accept for practical purposes as 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Such practical decisions did not, Stephen argued, require that juries fully understand the experts' reasons for their conclusions. This article draws on recent work in social epistemology to argue that Stephen's view of the jury remains tenable, and that his authoritarian arguments can be recast in more democratic terms. It also concurs in Stephen's blunt recognition that the courts' need to make decisions despite the uncertainties of science renders some convictions of the innocent inevitable.     

Going privately: partnership and outsourcing in UK public services

Public private partnerships provide an important illustration of the way the traditional role of government as employer and service provider is being transformed. While policy–makers argue that the growing role of the private sector is not driven by ideological thinking – that, in fact, both public and private sector organizations can benefit from working together in partnership relations – in practice it is the norms and rules of private sector management that underpin reforms. This paper assesses evidence from two detailed case studies of partnerships and demonstrates, first, that there is little evidence of mutual gains from partnership arrangements and, second, that because of an imbalance of power between public and private sector partners, any gains achieved are not distributed equitably. These results suggest that current reforms need to be refocused around building on the distinctive qualities of services provision in the public sector, rather than expanding the private sector world of markets and contracts.     

Licences in OHIM practice

Legal context: Despite the commercial importance of licences, the Regulation40/94 contains relatively few provisions on licences. As faras these refer to licences granted to CTMs or their recordalat OHIM, they are beyond the scope of the article, which dealswith the case law emanating from OHIM in inter partes proceedings,where licences have played a role. Key points: This article considers the legal requirements licensees mustmeet when filing opposition and cancellation proceedings beforeOHIM. It reviews when use under licence is regarded as genuineuse, or valid for the purpose of establishing acquired distinctivenessor reputation. It also deals with OHIM decisions regarding licenseesfiling the licensors' trade marks in their own names. Practical significance: With respect to the standing of licensees as opponents or applicantsfor invalidity, this article explains the procedural requirements,mentioning also points to be considered when drafting trademark licences. The article also explains to what extent a licenceneed be proven where the opponent or cancellation applicanthas not used the earlier mark himself but wishes to rely onuse made by someone else. On the issue of a licensee filingthe licensed mark in his own name, the article gives an introductionto the criteria applied by OHIM and deals with his fiduciaryposition, resulting in a greater likelihood of his having actedin bad faith.