All posts in the New legislation category

As the UK braces itself for the introduction of DPAs: is the tide turning in the US?

The Crime and Courts Bill received Royal Assent on 25 April 2013, which means that Deferred Prosecution Agreements (‘DPAs’) will now be a part of the law of England and Wales.

DPAs have been a feature of the US legal system since 1999. Enormous settlements have been agreed under this system, enabling corporate bodies to escape prosecution for serious criminal allegations. In the US system the court is required to examine the proposed DPA to assess whether it is ‘fair, reasonable, adequate and in the public interest’; however in practice the courts have often swiftly approved the terms of DPAs leading to suggestions that the role of the judge is to ‘rubber-stamp’ the settlement.

Important changes to extradition law

On 5 February 2013, the Home Secretary Theresa May tabled government amendments to the Crime and Courts Bill, introducing the changes to extradition law she announced last October when blocking Gary McKinnon’s extradition to the United States – the introduction of a “forum bar” and the transfer of the Home Secretary’s discretion to block extradition on the grounds of human rights to the courts.

Legalising the use of ‘disproportionate force’ against burglars – a red herring?

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling is seeking to amend the law of self-defence to protect homeowners who, when confronted with a burglar, use force that they believe to be reasonable in the circumstances but is actually disproportionate when viewed with the benefit of hindsight. A criminal lawyer might ask: isn’t that the current legal position anyway?

Avoidance schemes – a morally taxing issue

Tax evasion is illegal. It is deliberately not paying the tax that is due. Tax avoidance, however controversial, is not illegal. It is paying the least amount of tax possible, whilst staying within the law. Average Joe, if offered a completely legal way of paying less tax, would likely jump at the chance. Many of us use ISAs to avoid paying tax on our savings. Moreover, ‘responsible tax planning’ is actively distinguished by the treasury and will not be affected by proposed new legislation. But where is the line to be drawn between this, and millionaires paying as little as 1% tax?

New guidelines for dangerous dogs offences – barking up the right tree?

The law relating to dangerous dogs has garnered substantial media attention in recent years, stemming from a spate of high profile and harrowing attacks on individuals, many involving young children. With each new case, calls for reform of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 have become louder and more persistent. That statute, introduced rapidly and pandering to a public frenzy arising from pitbull attacks, has been widely criticised for banning specific dog breeds rather than creating robust offences which would adequately punish irresponsible dog ownership. The Government, however, has been slow to respond to calls for enhanced regulation and tougher sanctions. Last week saw the first legal fruits of numerous consultations with the publication of new sentencing guidelines. This is not the only development in the pipeline as the Government gears up to close the loophole which allows dog owners whose animals attack a person while lawfully on private property to escape prosecution.

New review of sanctions for disclosure failures in criminal cases announced

On 26 April 2012, the Lord Chief Justice announced that Lord Justice Gross and Mr Justice Treacy will be heading a review of sanctions for disclosure failures in criminal cases, and considering whether there are options for strengthening them. This follows on the heels of a September 2011 review into criminal disclosure in general and is a welcome next step.

On camera – televising criminal proceedings

Television cameras were today allowed to record the sentencing of David Gilroy in the High Court in Edinburgh. This is the first time that sentencing in a UK court has been filmed for broadcast the same day – normally proceedings in Scotland are only occasionally filmed for documentaries to be broadcast weeks or months later and are heavily edited by lawyers involved in the case. Filming in most English courts has been banned since 1925.

US-UK extradition treaty – will Home Affairs Committee report silence public disquiet?

Earlier today the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee published a report on the US-UK extradition treaty. A further report on the operation of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is expected later this year.

Both reports emerge from curious circumstances, coming so soon after the publication of the independent Sir Scott Baker review in September 2011. That review was the most exhaustive analysis of this country’s extradition laws ever undertaken, devoting no less than 51 pages to the US-UK extradition treaty (the report of the Home Affairs Committee stretches to only 10 pages). Many of those who made representations to Sir Scott’s panel gave similar evidence to the MPs comprising the Home Affairs Committee. So why another report?

Clamping down on scrap metal thieves

Following a dramatic rise in prices and a spate of incidents which have seen rail networks disrupted, church roofs pillaged and towns plunged into darkness, the scrap metal theft “epidemic” has been thrust into the spotlight. The issue has even made it into an episode of Eastenders – a sure sign of topicality! But why scrap metal? Simply put, scrap metal is hard to identify and can be sold for cash (at ever-increasing prices), making it an attractive category of stolen merchandise. It may seem like a niche offence but metal theft is estimated to cost the country £1 billion annually, with more than 1,000 offences taking place every week.

Blagging and the DPA – is it time to make offences imprisonable?

Despite it being almost 10 years since the start of Operation Motorman, and the subsequent furore which lead to the closure of the News of the World, it is still not possible for a person found guilty of illegally obtaining and disclosing personal information to be imprisoned for that offence. However, strong words from the Information Commissioner’s Office this week suggest that this may be ripe for change.