Sir Keir Starmer has been warned by Lord Hermer that UK involvement in a US attack on Iran could be illegal.
Advice ascribed to the Attorney General is understood to have said that Britain must limit its involvement to protecting its allies from attack.
A one way ticket to Tehran even?
OK, so they’re going to have a national inquiry now. But the important thing is the terms of the inquiry. And, obviously, the vigour with which it is pursued. You could, if you actually went at it, have something done by Christmas. They won’t, of course.
But what is the initial question being asked? What powers of evidence? And, of course, how formidable the person running it?
Sir Brian is also expected to recommend that the public should be spared jury service if a case is going to last more than 12 months because of the “unfairness” of it taking a year out of their lives and livelihoods. Instead, such cases would be heard by a judge without a jury.
So anything complicated doesn’t get a jury then. Railroad time!
Of course, this is lawyers so they’re being lying, sneaky, duplicitous little bastards.
He suggested one type of case judge-only trials could be where there was significant “public opprobrium” over the case such as sexual or sadistic violence and could sway the jury
It’s all about having the rape trials heard by judges suitably prepared by feminist indoctriniation. None of that basic societal “But that’s not rape!” is to be allowed.
A church sacked an accountant after she was discriminated against for not being Catholic, a tribunal has found.
University of Cambridge-educated Janet Parker argued with her female boss after she asked for leave to care for her newly adopted daughter.
When the 55-year-old’s request for flexible working was refused, she complained, observing that “the Catholic Church does not have a blemish-free history when it comes to adopted children or children in care”.
Ms Parker was then subjected to a “witch hunt” investigation for alleged professional negligence, which led to her dismissal from her £60,000-a-year role.
She has now won claims against Clifton Diocese after a tribunal ruled it discriminated against her, harassed her and then unfairly sacked her because she was not religious.
Ms Parker, who later told a reporter that she was an atheist, claimed the diocese’s approach to her flexible working request was “tainted by negative views of adoption, emanating from the religious beliefs of its staff”.
And she’s won and getting compo. I assume because the court is packed with idiots.
The Catholic Church has a negative view of adoption, does it?
Sheesh.
The US supreme court made it easier on Thursday for people from majority backgrounds such as white or straight individuals to pursue claims alleging workplace “reverse discrimination”, reviving the case of an Ohio woman who claimed that she did not get a promotion at a state agency because she is heterosexual.
The justices, in a 9-0 ruling, threw out a lower court‘s decision rejecting a civil rights lawsuit by the plaintiff, Marlean Ames, against her employer, Ohio’s department of youth services.
Racial discrimination is racial discrimination, sexual is sexual etc. There is no get out about only punching down, punching up is just fine etc.
Discrimination is discrimination. With a .
Threats by politicians to “abandon” international law such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have been compared to 1930s Nazi Germany by the Attorney General.
That is interesting. So, the ISDS courts- you know, those secretive offshore things where companies can sue governments – should also be supported as being anti-Nazi. Cool. Anyone told Monbiot yet?
All the Trump tariffs are, apparently, illegal and rescinded.
The question in the two cases before the court is whether the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (“IEEPA”) delegates these powers to the
President in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country
in the world. The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside
the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder.
How long that’s going to stand is another thing….
Plans to force barristers to promote diversity initiatives have been scrapped after the proposed overhaul sparked a backlash from top legal figures.
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) said it will not be moving forward with plans to overhaul rules requiring barristers to actively advance diversity in their jobs.
“M’Lud, my client’s white, probably decended from a slaver. Send ‘im dahn”
Probably, yes.
Counter-terror police are leading an investigation into a suspected “firebomb” attack at Sir Keir Starmer’s north London home.
A suspicious blaze broke out at the property in Tufnell Park at just after 1.30am on Monday, with neighbours saying police had searched gardens for a “projectile”.
Bit four lions isn’t it? He lives a number of miles away as anyone sentient would know.
And now for something fun. So, it’s rented out. As and when Sir K stops being PM he’ll lose that home. So he’ll want his house back. But they’re just outlawing evictions without cause, right? So he’ll not be able to get it back?
New details allege that Mr Khan pressured the alleged victim, a Malaysian woman in her 30s, into what the Wall Street Journal described as “non-consensual sexual intercourse” on several occasions.
Oh.
The British prosecutor seeking the arrest of Benjamin Netanyahu tried to silence a woman accusing him of sexual assault by citing the plight of the Palestinians, it has been claimed.
Karim Khan KC, who as the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague is leading the war crimes case against Israel, allegedly told the complainant that a scandal would harm the success of the prosecutions.
According to the Wall Street Journal, a record of a telephone call, which forms part of a United Nations investigation into the claims, shows that Mr Khan told the woman: “The casualties [of her allegations] will unfortunately be three: You and your family, me and my family and the justice of the victims.”
On another occasion, he reportedly said: “Think about the Palestinian arrest warrants,” according to other testimony made to the UN.
My word so unlike the normal righteous lefty. No one at all ever says lie back and think of Palestine, do they? Leaders of groupuscules are all moral saints etc.
A former civil servant who played a key role in drafting the Equality Act has said the supreme court’s ruling about the legal definition of a woman contradicted the act’s original intentions.
Melanie Field, who oversaw its drafting and passage through Westminster in 2010, said the legislation was meant to give transgender people with gender recognition certificates (GRCs) the same legal status as biological men or women.
She said that treating trans women with GRCs as women in relation to sex discrimination protections was “the clear premise” of the policy and legal instructions to the officials who drafted the bill.
The aim, purpose and detail of an Act is what Parliament says it is, not what the civil service say.
Well, that’s assuming that we don’t make that rather Deep State assumption that the civil service really are the people who should say….
Ethnic minority criminal suspects are being given priority by judges considering bail under new two-tier justice guidelines drawn up by the Ministry of Justice.
Judges and magistrates have been told they should “prioritise” the cases of ethnic minorities, women and transgender suspects because they may be at “disproportionately higher risk” of being remanded into custody.
Strangers in our strange land, eh….
The guidance also advises judges to take account of trauma suffered by suspects whose relatives experienced racism or discrimination, and cites “important historical events which may have had a greater impact on those from specific groups and cultures”.
Campaigners have claimed that black British people can suffer from trauma originally inflicted on their ancestors by the slave trade.
Sigh.
There’s never any shift, is there?
Terror laws could be used to nationalise Britain’s last steel blast furnaces after their Chinese owner threatened to shut them down.
Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, has raised the idea of using the Civil Contingencies Act as a way of rapidly nationalising British Steel, The Telegraph understands.
Introduced in 2004, the act allows ministers to invoke extraordinary powers in the event of a national emergency such as war, an attack by a foreign power or an act of terrorism.
Bring in some vile law that will only be used in hte most terrible extremis. Then start using it over trivia.
No, no, never happens, does it?
HMRC could be forced to repay Uber £1.3bn after losing a key court battle over attempts to charge VAT on minicab fares.
The tax authority is at risk of steep payments after failing to overturn a legal ruling against Bolt, Uber’s Estonian rival.
This decision is likely to have implications for other ride-hailing apps, including Uber, which has been battling HMRC over the £1.3bn VAT bill it has been charged since 2022.
I’m sure I remember Jolly shouting that Uber must charge him VAT….
Greenpeace must pay at least $660m over Dakota pipeline protests, says jury
Non-profit, which will appeal decision, says lawsuits like this are aimed at ‘destroying the right to peaceful protest’
That’ll larn ’em.
Donald Trump’s attacks on lawyers risk undermining Britain’s legal system, the Law Society of England and Wales has warned.
Richard Atkinson, the head of the 200-year-old professional body, has criticised the US president’s recent crackdown on some of America’s biggest law firms over their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies.
He said the US government’s decision to investigate law firms on the basis of their DEI programmes represented “a flagrant disregard for the fundamental principle of the rule of law”, which serves as the “bedrock of freedom and justice worldwide”.
Mr Atkinson said: “The Law Society stands by our US colleagues being targeted by the US government in respect of their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
Middling performer kicked out to grass in the professional insitute sees opportunity for grandstanding.
Takes it.
We’ll have film at 11.
MPs have voted to remove the need for a High Court judge to approve assisted dying requests.
Greenpeace and other such buggery buggeries get to determine whether a company can borrow money or not?
Environmental campaigners will challenge the granting of a high-interest £3bn emergency loan to struggling Thames Water at an appeal on Tuesday, arguing the “eye-watering” costs for a short-term fix are not in the public interest.
Which mindless cunt allowed this to become law?
The most contentious area concerns the efforts to freeze out local debate over the siting of housing developments. The new Planning and Infrastructure Bill contains what ministers say are significant measures to speed up planning decisions and remove unnecessary blockers and challenges to the delivery of vital developments like roads, railway lines and wind farms.
The Government says these are the most radical reforms since 1947. We shall see – but they must not be at the expense of local democracy.
Nothing will ever get built if we don’t roger local democracy sideways with a pineapple. But rather more than that there’s a logical problem here. That local democracy allows those currently in situ to vote. But there’s no counterbalance, no voice, for those who would like to live there in the future if more building took place. It is, thus horrendously biased.
Mixing up the names of non-white colleagues counts as race discrimination as it makes them feel “lumped together as a group”, a tribunal has ruled.
Employment Judge Garry Smart said those from minority backgrounds were often “confused” with others from the same heritage, which can make them feel “hurt” and “offended”.
He said the “adverse inference” of confusing the names of non-white employees was because of race and could therefore be seen as discriminatory.
Deliberately calling everyone Chalky or Patel, sure. Getting confused perhaps less so, eh?
His ruling came in the case of Abhinav Sharma, who accused Magdelena Badescu, a white colleague, of racism when she referred to him by the name of another Indian employee.
The Jaguar Land Rover engineer said he looked and sounded “very different” to co-worker Bhuvnesh Bhardwaj – who was of a larger build, wore glasses, had a beard and spoke with a British accent.
The tribunal commented that, in comparison, Mr Sharma was slimmer, spoke with an “obvious Indian accent” and was clean-shaven or had “nothing more than stubble”.
The engineer sued for race discrimination over the “mix-up”.
Hmm.
Mr Sharma is now in line for compensation after the judge upheld his claims and ruled that this “would not have happened with non-Indian colleagues”.
Shoot the lawyers I say.