When? Thursday 27th November 2014 - 6pm-8pm
Where? Oliver Thompson Lecture Theatre, City University London, Northampton Square EC1V 0HB
Speaker Knut Fournier will briefly introduce competition law in the context of the maritime sector, before looking at a series of case studies - the liner conferences' structure, price announcements among shipping liners and the market for transportation of cars. The final case study will focus on the rejection of the P3 Alliance by the Chinese regulator. The seminar will reflect on whether the maritime sector should be exempted from competition rules, as is the case in Singapore.
Open to teams of undergraduate, GDL and BPTC students, the Kingsland Cup includes moots spanning European, Environmental and Public law and will take place over three rounds. The first round sees entrants judged on their skeleton arguments, with the top-scoring teams appearing at the semi-final in London before a distinguished high court judge in a full mock court in the New Year.
Last year’s Grand Final was held in Courtroom 1 at the Supreme Court, and was judged by Justice of the Supreme Court, Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill. Comparable arrangements for this year’s final are to be confirmed in the very near future.
To get going on this you need to:
1. Find a friend to be your moot partner
2. Download the FTB Mooting Competition Guide
3. Get working on the two skeleton arguments required for entry
4. Download and fill in the entry form, before sending it off, along with your skeleton arguments to firstname.lastname@example.org. Deadline = 4pm Friday 19th December 2014.
5. Cross fingers!
Through the City University emails, I was notified about a Law trip to Scotland with ELSA. ELSA London is an inclusive association with many aims.
These include: helping law students in participating in international study visits/exchanges; forming friendly and collaborative relationships with student law societies based in London law schools and organising seminars, panel discussions, legal research groups and other academic activities.
I had never previously visited Scotland, so I was able to persuade my parents to let me go if the trip was ‘Law’ related, which is was, indeed. After I did some research around ELSA, I was immediately intrigued and consequently, I filled in an online application form - where I tried to explain why visiting Scotland would benefit me.
Still reading? Okay, just checking. The programme ran from the 2nd of November until the 6th of November and the group was composed of 30 students. The students were from a number of universities, such as UCL, Queen Mary, King College London and Middlesex University - studying law at either undergraduate or postgraduate level.
On Monday the 3rd we set off to the Scottish Parliament and this included a guided tour for approximately half an hour. The tour was extremely beneficial as it gave us an insight into when the Scottish Parliament was formed. It was formed in September 1997; the 1997 Scottish devolution referendum was put to the Scottish electorate and secured a majority in favour of the establishment of a new devolved Scottish Parliament. We were also told who was responsible of designing it, taking ideas from all over Scotland. It was fascinating to learn about why the structure was a certain way– it is completely different to what England’s parliament looks like. Later on in the day, we visited the University of Edinburgh for an introductory lecture on Scottish Law. Something that might be of particular interest is the fact that in Scotland there are three verdicts: guilty, not guilty and not proven (which is that the person is guilty but the courts do not have enough evidence against him).
The Senior Moot 2015 has now been launched with a prize pot of £2000 - £1000 to the winner, £500 for the runner-up and £250 for each of the other two finalists.
The Finals and reception will be held at the West End Headquarters of Savills in London on Thursday 7 May 2015 and our distinguished moot judges will be Professor Jeremy Horder of the London School of Economics, and Professor Peter Hungerford-Welch of the City Law School.
The Senior Moot 2015 is a cross-school competition open to postgraduates on the following programmes: BPTC, GDL, LPC and GE LLB. It is available to all students on any of those courses (including any part-timers on the BPTC).
There are 64 places available, of which a small number (called Prestige places) will be pre-allocated on an entirely discretionary basis by Moot Director Joanne Moss. These pre-allocated places are to seed the Moot with excellence.
Important deadlines as follows:
28th November by 6pm - email application for a Prestige Place to Joanne Moss (from your City email address), with a subject line of PRESTIGE PLACE REQUEST.
The email should contain no more than 150 words in which you should list your mooting achievements. Only a truly outstanding record of winning moot competitions is realistically worth submitting - enthusiasm is insufficient. You will be notified if you are successful but applications will not be acknowledged.
18th December at 1pm - sign-up will open on Moodle. Places are likely to go VERY QUICKLY (last year within 52 mins) so be ready.
We are delighted to thank our sponsors, Savills, for their generous support and tremendous hospitality in their magnificent Headquarters. It is a very great pleasure to acknowledge their second sponsorship year.
Quadrant Chambers are holding a Pupillage Open Day on Tuesday 16th December. Those of you interested in pursuing a career at the Commercial Bar might like to sign up for one of the limited places available.
Those attending will get an opportunity to meet Members of Chambers, learn about life as a barrister and see how Chambers operates. In addition, a senior Silk will hold an Advocacy workshop.
Apply for a place with a brief CV and covering letter to Natalie Wallis by 8th December.
A massive well done to City GDL student Chris Richards for winning the inaugural Centre for Professional Legal Education and Research (CEPLER) Essay Competition. This competition from CEPLER, which is based at the University of Birmingham, was open to any law student studying English Law for the first time. The essay question, “In an age of austerity, access to justice is a luxury” was intended to provoke debate about the serious and significant cuts to legal aid and changes to judicial review.
You can read Chris's winning entry, now published as a CEPLER Working Paper in the University of Birmingham's repository.
Chris also took home an iPad mini.
If you're keen to enter some law essay competitions check out the listings on the Learnmore website - still a few with deadlines looming!
The Human Rights Act 1998 has been a PR disaster. Rights once rightly seen as distinctively British are now seen as a foreign imposition. They have been labelled as giving rights to foreigners, terrorists and traitors. So Dinah Rose QC set the scene for her robust defence of the Human Rights Act on Tuesday 28 October.
Rose outlined the development of fundamental rights in English legal history, making the case for the Human Rights Act calmly and with the persuasive force of the oncoming tide. She started with a reminder of Lord Mansfield's judgment in Somerset's case in 1772. His words not only marked a step toward the abolition of slavery but articulated the concept of legality in English Common Law. Rose argued that Blackstone's Commentaries, a vital reference within our uncodified constitution, take that articulation further with their endorsement of the fundamental rights of security of person, liberty and property supported by the Powers of Parliament, Royal Prerogative and its limits, and Access to Justice.
The crux of the lecture was if, given our own trend of developing fundamental rights in common law, we need the Human Rights Act and why? She identified two possible justifications; to plug gaps in the common law canon, and to provide a constitutional framework for those rights we have. As she noted, the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) are generally more limited than common law. Based on the Al Rawi case, she used the example of the right to a fair trial where in common law all evidence must be presented to all parties, whereas the ECHR countenances redaction and secrecy. Her argument was that there is only one area where the common law rights are less than those on statute: the area covered by Article 8, the right to a family and private life.
For Rose it is the second justification that is the root of the problem, that the ECHR and Human Rights Act have challenged the constitutional supremacy of Parliament. However here her argument is simple, it was Parliament itself that passed the Human Rights Act and for the courts to implement it is merely to do the will of Parliament. In fact, the Act has muted the tendency of the courts to apply legality, and has thus weakened traditional common law fundamental rights. Her example was the Justice and Security Act, a response to the Al Rawi case, which permits secret procedures against common law tradition.
The audience was drawn to the conclusion that the real constitutional issue is not with the Act or with common law rights but with a lack of understanding of those three auxiliary rights expressed by Blackstone. Whilst the courts respect the sovereignty of Parliament, access to justice has been eroded within Parliament and the executive. Over the past years there have been public criticisms of rulings but Rose also drew on the ability for expert witnesses from charities to give evidence. She highlighted the government's proposal that any interveners should pay their own and the government's costs, regardless of the outcome of the case. Rose was adamant that it is unconstitutional for the government and Parliament to seek to fetter the discretion of the court when managing a challenge to the government.
There was clearly a lot of support for her argument. When asked why not have a Bill of Rights that leaves Parliament sovereign her clear response was that the Human Rights Act already does that. The audience was given a direct, coherent and calm argument that the current proposals not only need to be reconsidered, the government should go back to first constitutional principles. In short, instead of overhauling rights we've built over centuries, they should conserve what is valuable from our tradition.
Many thanks to Helen for this great review of the Politeia event: What's the point of the Human Rights Act? With Dinah Rose QC. Helen is a GDL student at City Law School.
More than a year has passed since the first of the Government's reforms of our legal aid system came into force. There is a broad consensus across the legal community that these changes have obstructed universal access to justice. No such consensus exists over the most efficacious and viable response. While some argue that only a complete reversal of policy will ensure equality in the courtroom, others believe that pro bono can, and must, step in to fill the gap. Meanwhile, does the popular press, judicial review or the House of Lords present our greatest hope for restraining further cuts?
This event is intended to be a lively and open debate on the strategies available to defenders of justice.
Email email@example.com to reserve your place.
SOLANGE VALDEZ is the supervising solicitor at Ealing Law Centre, where she specialises in immigration law. Her passionate support for migrant children and the children of migrant parents led her to found the Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens. She is particularly concerned about their experience of the cuts, as detailed in her report "Separated Children and Legal Aid Provision", produced for the Immigration Law Practitioners Association, of which she is a former executive committee member. Solange was recently shortlisted for the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year award. She is also a supporter of the Justice Alliance.
FRANCIS FITZGIBBON QC is a criminal silk, with extensive experience in homicide, fraud, historic sex abuse and drug cases. He also sits as an immigration judge. Francis is recommended as a leading advocate in criminal law by the Chambers & Partners Directory. He writes regularly about the legal aid reforms, both for his blog, "Nothing like the sun", and as a contributor to the London Review of Books.
RACHAEL MARSH is Head of Casework at LawWorks, a non-profit organisation which encourages and supports lawyers and law students in carrying out pro bono work. Its membership includes a number of top city law firms. She also works part-time at the Centre for Criminal Appeals, which represents individuals who are subject to miscarriages of justice. With previous experience at both a law centre and a chambers specialising in legal aid work, Rachael has a broad insight into the provision of legal services to disadvantaged groups.
ANDY BOON joined The City Law School in September 2012. He was previously Dean of the School of Law at the University of Westminster, London. He served on the Law Society's Training Framework Review Group and as Vice-Chair of the Bar Standards Board's Education and Training Committee. He was recently consultant to the Law Society of England and Wales on introducing legal ethics to the compulsory curriculum for undergraduates and to the Solicitors Regulation Authority on the mandatory scheme for continuing professional development.
The Future Legal Mind award, which is being launched by the National Accident Helpline in partnership with Lawyer 2B magazine, will offer two law students, one undergraduate and one postgraduate, the chance to win £5,000 towards their studies in 2015.
They will additionally get the opportunity to complete a work experience placement at either the Manchester or London office of nationwide solicitor firm Colemans-CTTS.
Sound good? Here's how you apply:
Entrants need to submit an essay of up to 1000 words - the winning essays will be published in full on the Lawyer2B website.
Undergraduates - your question is “If the justice system were a blank canvas and you had the power to structure it, what would you do in terms of access to justice?”
Those looking to take on a postgraduate law degree, including a Legal Practice Course, Graduate Diploma in Law, Common Professional Examination or CILEX qualification, the question is as follows: “How do you think the provision of legal services should change over the next 10 years? How would this affect access to justice?”
Forget the fireworks parties - there are so many legal events to go along to this month. See the Lawbore Events calendar for a full line-up but here are a few to stick in your diaries:
4th November sees UKLSA Diversifying the legal landscape - event hosted by the UKLSA in association with Society of Asian Lawyers. Students attending will get the chance to ask barristers any questions regarding aspects of the law, international opportunities, applications and future prospects.
Email to secure a place by the 27th October 2014.
On the 6th City Law School hosts its Pro Bono Fair, featuring a wide array of different organisers with pro bono opportunities on offer. Come and talk to them!
Politeia run some fantastic events, and the evening of the 6th kicks off with Funding Justice - Can we afford the Rule of Law? Sir Ivan Lawrence QC and Peter Crisp, Dean at BPP Law School will discuss issues such as:
- How far does government have an obligation to ensure fair access to justice?
- Can the principles on which Britain's justice system rests be maintained against ever tighter budgets?
- Will the proposed changed reduce access to justice, and if so, how should this be countered?
On the 18th is the Law Reform Lecture: the European Courts and the UK - what future? A new role for English Courts. Sir Francis Jacobs will be speaking at this Bar Council event. Email the Bar Council for free tickets.