Legal Updates

Unless you have been living in a bubble over the past few months, you have not missed the numerous news stories that have come to light relating to public sector employees whistleblowing on the inadequacies of their workplaces. This has usually been connected with NHS Trusts – where worrying problems have been identified which may have otherwise gone unnoticed but for the brave individual who realised that something had to be done.  

Few of us appreciate just how many laws are in play when it comes to an employee blowing the whistle on his or her employer. With this in mind, and because this legislation is currently being changed, I thought it might be a good idea to provide a guide to exactly how this concept works. 

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) currently permits the police to treat a 17-year-old as an adult while in police custody. This position is at odds with the treatment of under-18s according to other legislation such as the Children’s Act 1989, the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. And the High Court has recently found the PACE provisions relating to 17-year-olds to be inconsistent with the way in which these young people are treated under such other legislation. 

Perhaps the biggest lie on the Internet is saying, “Yes, I have read and agree to the above statement.” But if you want to obtain any service, you will have no choice but to agree with a company’s terms. This month we will be looking at the implications in contract law of clicking the ‘I agree’ box. 

Are these terms legally binding?

Recent news stories have been reporting on new fast track traffic offence courts that are to be set up soon. The courts will be set up in England and Wales. The aim of these traffic courts will be to hear minor traffic-related offences. The plans follow a pilot phase where such fast track motoring courts were set up in nine different areas across the country. So, why are these courts being set up? And will the new plans help to improve and expedite the justice system in general? 

We recently saw massive changes in the way legal aid works in England and Wales. In a bid to cut legal aid budgets by over £350 million pounds a year, the Government have made several changes to the system and cut the availability of legal aid to a variety of civil as well as criminal law cases. The changes came into force in April 2013 and are, as predicted, resulting in changes in the way people deal with legal matters and, more specifically, a rapid rise in the number of people having to represent themselves in court. 

This month we had one of the highlights of the parliamentary year, the Queen’s Speech. This is the official announcement of what new laws the government plans to introduce in the year ahead. One proposal that stood out was a change to the protection available when you purchase faulty digital content online. The change is intended to bring this area of law up to date, which might strike you as slightly ironic as the announcement was being made by the Queen from the grand throne in the House of Lords in an arcane ceremony. 

On the whole it is, although some peculiar situations come up sometimes, and I am going to recount three of them to you!

R v Collins [1972] 2 All ER 1105 

One summer’s evening, a Friday in 1972, a 19-year-old, blond, good-looking chap had been out on his own to a local pub in Colchester, Essex. Little did he know, as he downed several pints of beer, that before the night was out he would become the lead player in a case that subsequently went from the Essex Assizes, where he was convicted of burglary with intent to commit rape contrary to s.9 (1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968, to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division where his conviction was quashed (R v Collins [1972] 2 All ER 1105). The Assize Courts, by the way, were disbanded at the end of 1972 by The Courts Act 1971 and replaced by the Crown Court.

Legal aid is a way to offer legal advice and support to people who cannot afford to pay for it themselves. It has been one of the basic pillars of the welfare state since it came into being. But new changes that came into effect in early April in England and Wales have removed legal aid funding from various areas of civil law, including family disputes and social welfare benefits advice as well as housing and debt problems. The Government claims that resources are extremely tight and that spending on legal aid the way we have is no longer an option. According to official sources, the new cuts will save £350 million from a £2.1 billion budget.

In October 2012, David Cameron made a statement about the prison system and that prisons should be made to work for the offenders. He also said that punishment and rehabilitation should in fact take equal precedence in preventing crime. The Prime Minister said that the debate on punishment had become too ‘black or white’, and that the prison system should be one that has a positive and rehabilitative impact on an inmate’s life, rather than merely a punitive one. 

This month we will consider a recent Court of Appeal decision which should remind those practicing in Wills and Probate of the importance of following best practices when preparing wills for clients. 

The case, Hawes v Burgess [2013] EWCA Civ 74, involved a 2007 will which cut out the testatrix’s son, Peter, and left the estate equally to her two daughters, Libby and Julia. 

Consider the following background facts to the case:

1. The deceased, Daphne Burgess, died in 2009, aged 80, having suffered from failing health since 2006.

2. Under an earlier will, her estate (total less than £200,000) had been left equally to her son and two daughters.