Legal Updates

Recent case law highlights the importance of understanding how property can be held jointly

Whenever property is jointly owned, there is the possibility of disagreement. The ongoing case of Kernott v Jones [2010] provides, in the words of Lord Justice Wall, “a cautionary tale” to all unmarried couples and the solicitors who advise them.

If you have already completed the Diploma course, you will be aware that there are only two ways to hold property in England and Wales – as a joint tenant or as a tenant in common. With only two options, you would think that couples entering into the world of home ownership should always get suitable legal advice. Unfortunately, this is not the case and it can be a very costly mistake.

For those of you already familiar with constitutional and administrative law, the ‘West Lothian Question’ will no doubt bring forth a frustrated sigh of recognition as you remember covering it in your legal studies. For those of you unfamiliar with this important point that affects our country’s democracy, allow me to explain as succinctly as possible.

The West Lothian Question was first raised in the House of Commons as far back as 1977, when Parliament was already discussing the possibility of a devolved legislature for Scotland. It was actually a Scottish Member of Parliament that questioned the fairness of non-English MPs being entitled to have a say over legal matters that were only ever likely to affect English constituents. That person was Tom Dalyell and at the time he represented the constituency of West Lothian.

If you have been following this section over the past year or so, you will have noticed how there has been a concerted effort to report on the issues of employment law that are being affected by the economic difficulties being faced within the country. In fact, some previous articles have gone so far as to make predictions on what might be expected in this regard; alas, it would seem that many of these assertions are now coming to fruition.

At a time when most small and medium-sized businesses are really struggling to keep their heads above water, it cannot be helpful that changes in employment law see these hard-pushed employers having to dip even deeper into their pockets to cover escalating financial obligations: anything from paternity/maternity pay to an extra bank holiday this year - leading to a very unproductive three-day week.

We all pride ourselves in living in a country that enjoys one of the oldest and most advanced legal systems in the world today. In fact, we may even go so far as to purport the fact that we live in one of the most tolerant and accepting societies in the developed world. However, why does the English legal system still insist on dragging its heels where the definite right to privacy is concerned?

Compared with most other countries in the West, it is completely fair to assert that the right to privacy is lacking in England. Although the United Kingdom has a duty to respect Article 8.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), for decades now, nevertheless, it has been commonly accepted that there is a distinct lack of clear law in this area.

As part of an ongoing series of articles focusing on Civil Litigation, this month we are considering the growing importance of mediation. There has been a lot of effort over the last few years to reform the civil justice system. One of the key reasons for this has been the high cost of bringing claims to court.

A recent proposal aimed at reducing legal costs was made by the Conservative Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, Jonathan Djanogly. He has suggested that mediation should be compulsory in some civil cases. The aim of the proposal would be to keep more cases out of the court system.

In this article we are considering the Supreme Court formed just over a year ago. Having studied on the Diploma course, you will have already identified yourself to prospective employers as someone with a serious interest in the law. Being aware of current developments in the law and legal practice marks you as someone who has a continuing interest in developing his or her knowledge.

Ever since the United Kingdom ratified the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as far back as 1950, for the most part it has seemed that this international law has been working very well for us. Indeed, the Human Rights Act 1998 was seen as an overdue, final acceptance of the laws contained within the convention. The previous Labour Government were determined to leave some kind of legacy for their period of administration, and this Act of Parliament is probably the most remembered.

It has been interesting to see how a certain area of family law has been pushed to the forefront of our attention lately: namely, the recognition of prenuptial agreements between married couples and civil partners in our legal system. Or perhaps, in the case of English law, we should be saying that the agreements are not actually recognised, at least automatically.

The recognition of prenuptial agreements as a legally binding contract between a couple has been very uncertain over previous years. Basically, it seems that for the most part, there was no real point in conceiving such an agreement in the first instance, as there was definitely no guarantee that it would be recognised in the unfortunate event of having to be relied upon, when the said couple were forced to pursue a divorce.

Wills are not usually the subject of polite conversation, but they are rarely out of the news. Typically, wills become newsworthy only when things have gone terribly wrong. On this occasion, however, there is a positive reason why wills are being discussed across the nation, namely a new series on television, ‘Can’t Take It With You’. The programme aims to increase people’s awareness and highlight some of the emotional and financial pitfalls of wills and inheritance law.

Rights of equality for all members of our society is one of the most fundamental tenets of our legal system. The protection of minorities and the more vulnerable members of the community has been an issue that has been held dear by the previous Labour Government and now the coalition. With this in mind, the new Equality Act 2010 was enacted and the majority of the provisions under this statute came into effect from 1 October 2010.