Podcasts about Law commission

The phrase “State related deaths” might mean little to the average person, but it's an umbrella term referring to a death in custody or a mental health setting. It also applies to situations when people have taken their own lives while in the armed forces or even to disasters like Grenfell or Hillsborough. What all these have in common is that they are followed by inquests or public inquiries, where investigators or coroners try to work out what caused the deaths. Public inquiries are set up to draw conclusions and release their findings, and coroners are required to write a "Prevention of Future Deaths" report when there are lessons to be learned. Hundreds of these PFD reports are released in England and Wales each year - yet there is no system in place to ensure preventative changes are made. In Scotland, the equivalent is a Fatal Accident Inquiry. It's held by a procurator fiscal - and not a coroner - in front of a sheriff, and has a wider remit than an inquest. It too, can flag up systemic failures that led to a death, and precautions that should be made in future. So should the UK have a body that ensures these warnings are heeded?Also on the programme: The government has welcomed Law Commission reforms to Wills - which includes new protections against so-called "predatory marriages". And the Supreme Court case which could change the rules for all divorces in England and Wales. Presenter: Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Deborah Coles, Director of the charity Inquest Kate Stone, barrister at Garden Court North chambers Alexander Learmonth KC, barrister at New Square chambers Tracey Moloney, Moloney Family solicitors

This month we are joined by the Law Commissioner, Professor Nicholas Hopkins (who led the scoping report), Emma Hitchings, Professor of Family Law at the University of Bristol (who led the Fair Shares reports), and Resolution's Family Law Reform Group chair, Jo Edwards of Forsters LLP. The Law Commission has found (in its scoping report published in December) that the current law does not provide a cohesive framework in which couples going through a divorce or dissolution of a civil partnership can expect fair and sufficiently certain outcome. In particular they found that the law lacks certainty and accessibility to the extent that it could be argued to be inconsistent with the rule of law.  They concluded that the law needs reform. We discuss:The Law Commission Scoping report: https://lawcom.gov.uk/publication/financial-remedies-scoping-report-and-summary/The Fair Shares Project: https://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/fair-shares-project/And of course Resolution's own Vision for Family Justice: https://resolution.org.uk/campaigning-for-change/vision/  and our Domestic Abuse in Financial Remedy work https://resolution.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Resolution_DAFRP_Report_ONLINE.pdf Emma and Jo joined us when the first Fair Shares reports were published in 2023.  Do listen to our previous episode in Season 3 episode 6: which explains the detail and data in those reports. We talk about spousal maintenance, and that whilst a lot of discussion has been devoted to the term of spousal maintenance, in fact it is the quantum that causes most uncertainty.  Emma tells us there are twice as many spousal maintenance orders made in London than all the other regions combined.  There seems to be a legitimate explanation for the ‘London difference' in the higher costs of living in London. The Law Commission found that conduct is an additional source of unfairness that victim-survivors face in how financial remedies are determined.  Emma tells us that the Fair Shares research found that domestic abuse survivors were less likely to reach agreement than divorcees where there has not been abuse,  very few domestic abuse survivors successfully used mediation, and that 14% will ultimately have their claims determined by a judge, compared to only 4% of financial remedy cases that do not involve domestic abuse.  The Fair Shares research found that female domestic abuse survivors are in a poorer financial position than other female divorcees.  Jo told us about the incoming Australian legislation that will see family violence taken into account when determining parties' contributions to the marriage as well as the Resolution position on the Law Commission report/financial remedies reform The Law Commission found that there is still real concern that pensions are not sufficiently taken into account.  The reality is that position has not changed that wives often keep a greater share of the home to accommodate the children, and the husband tends to retain his pension.  Should there be a default of equal pension sharing? Finally we discuss the four models of potential reform.  If you are still making your mind up about which model should be the foundation of any reform then this episode is invaluable!

Given the gross miscarriages of justice exposed by the Post Office/Horizon scandal, the extraordinary delay in reversing the wrongful conviction of Andrew Malkinson due to repeated failures by the Criminal Cases Review Commission and the continuing calls for the case of Lucy Letby to be referred back to the Court of Appeal, is the criminal appeal system in need of fundamental reform? Connecting the dots between recent events, and the health of criminal justice in Britain is Professor Penney Lewis who joins Ken Macdonald KC and Tim Owen KC to explain, in accessible terms, insider legal perspectives on topics such as the basis on which the Court of Appeal decides whether a criminal conviction is unsafe; the admissibility of fresh, post-trial evidence;  the need for reform of juror secrecy; compensation for the wrongly convicted; and whether the Supreme Court should be able to decide for itself whether to entertain an appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).  Link to the Law Commission's Summary of its Consultation Paper on criminal appeals: https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/54/2025/02/Criminal-Appeals-CP-Summary.pdf Penney Lewis was formerly Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Centre of Medical Law and Ethics in the Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College, London and is currently the Criminal Law Commissioner of the Law Commission of England and Wales.  The Law Commission is currently consulting on reforms to the law governing criminal appeals including the tests applied by appeal courts and the Criminal Cases Review Commission, post-trial retention of and access to evidence, and compensation and support for the wrongly convicted.  If you're looking for thoughtful legal system insights, a deeper understanding of UK politics, or an unflinching look at UK law and legal battles in Britain, this episode delivers it all. Law, politics, and justice - expertly unpacked on Double Jeopardy. ----- Covering the critical intersections of law and politics in the UK with expert commentary on high-profile legal cases, political controversies, prisons and sentencing, human rights law, current political events and the shifting landscape of justice and democracy. With in-depth discussions and influential guests, Double Jeopardy is the podcast that uncovers the forces shaping Britain's legal and political future. What happens when law and politics collide? How do politics shape the law - and when does the law push back? What happens when judicial independence is tested, human rights come under attack, or freedom of expression is challenged? And who really holds power in Britain's legal and political system? Get answers to questions like these weekly on Wednesdays at 6am GMT. Double Jeopardy is presented by Ken Macdonald KC, former Director of Public Prosecutions, and Tim Owen KC, as they break down the legal and political issues in Britain. From high-profile legal cases to the evolving state of British democracy, Double Jeopardy offers expert legal commentary on the most pressing topics in UK law, politics, and human rights. Ken Macdonald KC served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2003-2008, shaping modern prosecutorial policy and advocating for the rule of law. He is a former Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, a crossbench member of the House of Lords, and a leading writer, commentator and broadcaster on politics and the rule of law.  Tim Owen KC has been involved in many of the most significant public, criminal and human rights law cases over the past four decades. Both bring unparalleled experience from the frontline of Britain's legal and political landscape. If you like The Rest Is Politics, Talking Politics, Law Pod UK and Today in Focus, you'll love Double Jeopardy.

This month we are joined by Sir Jonathan Cohen (now an arbitrator and private FDR Judge at 4PB) to discuss the last half century in family law.  Sir Jonathan tells us about how family law has changed over that time. He recalls the humiliation caused by all divorces being heard in public, and the seminal changes following the Children Act 1989 and White v White.  He also talks about how delayed the system has become, and the difficulty caused by the proliferation of cases without an equal increase in Judges.  Sir Jonathan does not accept the Law Commission concern that the law in respect of how a couple divide their finances is uncertain.  Like many of us, he believes it is certain if you know the detail of the law, the issue is litigants having access to that certainty and being able to find the information without having to comb through judgments and the internet. Sir Jonathan mentions Courtney Legal https://courtney.legal/team as helping provide this information.  We were blown away to hear Sir Jonathan say that in his personal view the justice system has under recognised the impact of domestic abuse in financial remedy cases.  Sir Jonathan refers to the report by KPMG of the impact of domestic abuse on earnings from 2019; ‘The workplace impact of domestic violence and abuse':https://newscentre.vodafone.co.uk/app/uploads/2019/11/KPMG-Domestic-Violence-and-Abuse-Report-Nov19-1-1-1.pdf Sir Jonathan tells us that in his view that there is unfinished business when it comes to transparency in financial remedy cases.  He tells us that reporters are welcomed into Courts now, but there is division as to whether it is right to have parties' names and the details of all their finances published.   Sir Jonathan says that he is not in favour of publishing the names of parties in financial remedy cases, unless their names and finances are already in the public domain or there is some other good reason. Sir Jonathan encourages all practitioners who are thinking about judicial appointment to apply for a part-time role to dip their toe in the water. He opines that if you are starting to mourn the bad results, more than you celebrate the good results, that is when you should be thinking about judicial appointment, and when you get to the stage of wanting to find the ‘right' result rather than a ‘win', that is when you should be thinking about full-time appointment.  He tells us he has thoroughly enjoyed being a full-time Judge.   It's a strong finish with Sir Jonathan saying Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 is no longer fit for purpose, and music to Resolution members' ears that the provision we make for unmarried parents is completely out-dated.

The fast-paced, ever-changing, rock and roll world of town and country planning has been especially fast-paced, ever-changing and rock and roll of late. How then to try to catch up? Sam Stafford thought that the best way of doing so was to reprise the ‘Labour of Love' episode that he published back in August of last year. Here then you will hear elements of nine conversations recorded online between friends of the podcast old and new about nine themes of the Government's crystalising reform agenda. Catriona Riddell, Andrew Taylor, Jane Meek and Alex Coley talk about strategic planning, devolution and local government reorganisation (06.54); Greg Dickson, John Sayer, Rebecca Clutton and Anthony Lee talk about CPO, land value capture and benchmark land value (17.42); Claire Petricca-Riding, Gilian MacInnes, Sarah McLaughlin and Robbie Owen talk about infrastructure planning (28.12); Andrew, Shelly Rouse, Mike Kiely and Adele Morris talk about planning committees (36.26); Claire, Hana Loftus, Nina Pindham and Neil Beamsley talk about development and nature recovery (46.11); Andrew, Annie Gingell, Hana and Sarah Young talk about Grey Belt (54.22); Andrew and Paul Smith talk about statutory consultees (01.02.42); Ben Castell, Katie Wray, Vicky Payne and Hana talk about design and placemaking (01.13.21); and Hashi Mohamed, Kathryn Ventham and Simon Mirams talk about the flood risk sequential test (01.24.45). The full conversations will appear on the 50 Shades YouTube channel in due course and Sam will share the respective links on the 50 Shades Bluesky, LinkedIn and TikTok channels when they are published. Some accompanying reading. JEKC David's Tribute St. John's Hospice Bowel Cancer UK Context 'Biggest building boom' in a generation through planning reforms The Planning and Infrastructure Bill The Planning & Infrastructure Bill: An Overview Devolution Devolving local growth: how do the emerging geographies shape up? CPO / LVC / BLV Compulsory purchase process: guidance (October 2024 update) Law Commission seeks views on compulsory purchase laws Compulsory Purchase Process and Compensation Reforms How far can land value capture be pushed? Infrastructure Growth drives major infrastructure and housing planning reform proposals Planning Committees Planning Reform Working Paper: Planning Committees On modernising planning committees Modernising Planning Committees National Survey 2025 Nature Restoration Planning Reform Working Paper: Development and Nature Recovery Land Use Consultation Grey Belt How grey is the Green Belt? The “Grey Belt” has arrived Colouring In The Grey Belt: The PPG Grey belt policy having only a marginal impact at best Grey Belt Impact Assessment Stat Cons Bureaucratic burden lifted to speed up building in growth agenda Reform of the Statutory Consultee System Cons & Pros On Stat Cons Flood Risk Sequential Test More Afloat – New NPPF and the Sequential Test Enhancing flood and coastal erosion risk digital services with the latest data and mapping Some accompanying listening. Back in Black - AC/DC 50 Shades T-Shirts! If you have listened to Episode 45 of the 50 Shades of Planning you will have heard Clive Betts say that... 'In the Netherlands planning is seen as part of the solution. In the UK, too often, planning is seen as part of the problem'. Sam said in reply that that would look good on a t-shirt and it does. Further details can be found here. Any other business. Sam is on Bluesky (@samuelstafford.bsky.social) and Instagram (@samuel__stafford). His blog contains a link to his newsletter.

In this episode, James and Michael talk to Stephanie Martin from the Free Speech Union (and also the New Zealand Initiative) about a Law Commission consultation paper on hate crime legislation. The discussion examines the shift from treating hate as an aggravating factor in sentencing to creating specific hate crime offenses, while exploring philosophical questions about hate motivation and concerns about free speech implications.

‘Hate crime' laws? Without a clear, shared definition of ‘hate,' we're treading on shaky ground. Who decides what's ‘hateful'? Tell the Law Commission that legislating against ‘hate' is a fool's errand. Submit now - https://www.freespeechsubmission.nz/Support the showhttps://www.fsu.nz/https://x.com/NZFreeSpeechhttps://www.instagram.com/freespeechnz/https://www.tiktok.com/@freespeechunionnz

Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) is a barrister at 39 Essex Chambers in London, specializing in mental capacity, mental health, and healthcare law. In recognition of his significant contributions beyond the courtroom, Alex was appointed Honorary King's Counsel in March 2022. Beyond his legal practice, Alex is involved in academia and policy development. He serves as a Professor of Practice at the Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London, and as a Visiting Senior Lecturer at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King's College London. Alex has been instrumental in shaping mental health and capacity law policy. He was a consultant to the Law Commission's Mental Capacity and Deprivation of Liberty Project and served as the legal adviser to the Independent Review of the Mental Health Act 1983 in 2018. Today we discuss:What is the purpose of the mental health act? What does it mean to be sectioned? What are the safeguards and appeals available to sectioned patients? How to think about complex questions legally like suicide and assisted dying The pressures mental health professionals face when making legal decisions What is  the legal concept of “Capacity”? Warning: This conversation includes frank discussion about serious matters such as suicide and assisted dying. You can find out more about Alex's work here: https://www.mentalcapacitylawandpolicy.org.uk/about-the-author/Further accessible resources regarding the mental health act: https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/legal-rights/mental-health-act-1983/mental-health-act-faqs/If you would like to invite Alex to speak at your organisation please email alexcurmitherapy@gmail.com with "Speaking Enquiry" in the subject line.If you would like to enquire about an online psychotherapy appointment with Dr. Alex, you can email - alexcurmitherapy@gmail.com.Give feedback here - thinkingmindpodcast@gmail.com - Follow us here: Twitter @thinkingmindpod Instagram @thinkingmindpodcast

Lady Hale discusses with Rosalind English the development of the right to privacy, reflects in her career in academia and the Law Commission, and ponders on the position of women in the legal profession today. Law Pod UK is published by 1 Crown Office Row. Supporting articles are published on the UK Human Rights Blog. Follow and interact with the podcast team on Twitter.

Emma Humphreys and Laura Bushaway are joined by Guy Fetherstonhaugh KC and Imogen Dodds of Falcon Chambers to look at what lies ahead for property law during 2025.  Themes discussed include the Law Commission's consultation on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, upcoming appeals related to the Building Safety Act 2022 in March 2025 and an interesting case on injunctions against protestors. The cases and legislation referred to in this episode of Property Patter are: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (and Guy refers to TFS Stores Ltd v. BMG (Ashford) Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 688 – see TFS Stores Ltd v Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner: The end of the road | Falcon Chambers) Leisurespace v. CRT Property Investments – Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Crown Court – Hearing in February 2025 University of London v. Harvie-Clark [2024] EWHC 2895 – Final Injunction to be heard in 2025 (relating to protestors) Building Safety Act 2022 Adriatic Land 5 Limited v. Long Leaseholders at Hippersley Point [2023] UKUT 271 – Court of Appeal hearing on 17 March 2025 Triathlon Homes LLP v. Stratford Village Development Partnership & Others [2024] UKFTT 26 – Court of Appeal hearing on 19 March 2025 Other references: Forthcoming book “Injunctions protecting land” by Falcon Chambers (due for publication later in 2025) The 50th anniversary of the Blundell Lecture series – this is an annual series of four lectures discussing topical issues in Property Law. Guy Fetherstonhaugh KC will be speaking at one of the lectures taking place in June 2025.  The dates for 2025 are 3, 10, 17 and 24 June.

Some councils in England are offering vouchers or money directly to pensioners who've lost out on the Winter Fuel Payment this year. The money is being offered as part of the Household Support Fund, which is money given by the government to local councils to use to help residents who're struggling with essential bills, like energy and food costs. Winter Fuel Payment can be £200 or £300, but this year it's means tested, meaning millions of people will no longer get it. Money Box has found that some pensioners may still be able to get help with their energy bills via their council, if they've just missed on qualifying but are still struggling. The government says over a million pensioners will still receive the Winter Fuel Payment and that its drive to boost Pension Credit take up has seen applications more than double with over 40,000 more pensioners now receiving it.The law relating to how couples split their assets and provide for each other and any children after divorce was last changed in England and Wales more than fifty years ago. On Wednesday the Law Commission which advises the government on how well laws are working will publish its findings on whether the current rules deliver fair and consistent outcomes. If it finds problems it will make suggestions for how they might be solved. We'll discuss what those options might be.And, we often talk about how hard it is for young people to afford buy their first home - but how easy is to manage finances once you get on the property ladder?Presenter: Paul Lewis Reporter: Dan Whitworth Researchers: Emma Smith and Jo Krasner(First broadcast 12noon Saturday 14th December 2024)

Brenda Hale, Baroness Hale of Richmond, is a former judge who served as the first female president of the Supreme Court. In 2019 she announced the court's judgement that the prorogation of Parliament was ‘unlawful, void and of no effect'. The twinkling spider brooch she wore that day caused a sensation and set social media aflame. She was the first woman and the youngest person to be appointed to the Law Commission and in 2004 became the UK's first woman law lord.Lady Hale was born in Yorkshire and read law at the University of Cambridge where she graduated top of her class. She spent almost 20 years in academia and also practised as a barrister. Later at the Law commission she led the work on what became the 1989 Children Act. Lady Hale retired as a judge in January 2020.DISC ONE: Messiah - Part 1: O Thou That Tellest Good Tidings To Zion, composed by Georg Friedrich Händel, performed by Kathleen Ferrier and The London Philharmonic Orchestra, conducted by Sir Adrian Boult DISC TWO: Love Me Do by The Beatles DISC THREE: Move Him Into The Sun. Composed and conducted by Benjamin Britten. Performed by Peter Pears (tenor) and Galina Vishnevskaya (soprano) with the Bach Choir and the London Symphony Orchestra DISC FOUR: Part 1 Nos 4 & 5: Gloria in excelsis Deo – Et in terra pax. Composed by Johann Sebastian Bach, performed by The Monteverdi Choir and The English Baroque Soloists and conducted by Sir John Eliot Gardiner DISC FIVE: The Marriage of Figaro), K. 492 Sull'Aria. Composed by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, performed by sopranos Charlotte Margiono and Barbara Bonney, Netherlands Opera Chorus and the Concertgebouw Orchestra DISC SIX: Hand in Hand by Glória (Ireland's Gay and Lesbian Choir) DISC SEVEN: Parry: I Was Glad, composed by Hubert Parry, performed by Westminster Abbey Choir, Simon Preston (organ) and conducted by William McKinney DISC EIGHT: Dies Irae. Composed by Giuseppe Verdi, performed by Swedish Radio Choir and the Eric Ericson Chamber Choir, with the Berlin Philharmonic, conducted by Claudio AbbadoBOOK CHOICE: A Desert Island survival manual LUXURY ITEM: A solar-powered computer with sudoku puzzles and a writing application CASTAWAY'S FAVOURITE: Part 1 Nos 4 & 5: Gloria in excelsis Deo – Et in terra pax, composed by Johann Sebastian Bach, performed by The Monteverdi Choir and The English Baroque Soloists, conducted by Sir John Eliot Gardiner Presenter Lauren Laverne Producer Paula McGinley

Hot off the presses, the Law Commission has produced a new report on the financial remedies available to divorcing couples. The Law & Disorder trio – Nicholas Mostyn, Helena Kennedy and Charlie Falconer – are joined by Professor Nick Hopkins, the report's commissioner, and Holly Symonds, a barrister specialising in family law, to discuss how the law can evolve to help ensure more equitable separations. If you have questions, criticisms, praise or other feedback, please do send your thoughts to us via lawanddisorderfeedback@gmail.com!Law and Disorder is a Podot podcast.Executive Producer and Editor: Nick Hilton.Associate Producer: Ewan Cameron.Music by Richard Strauss, arranged and performed by Anthony Willis & Brett Bailey.PR by Sally Jones. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The announcement that the Ministry of Justice has commissioned the Law Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of homicide law and sentencing in murder cases alongside the Gauke review of sentencing in non-homicide cases means that sentencing policy in England and Wales will be reviewed simultaneously by two separate bodies. Given the role of longer sentences for murder in increasing sentences across the board, is this  a sensible way to tackle the sentence inflation generated over the past twenty years which is the principal cause of the current prisons crisis? And with the wealth of existing data, including a magisterial 2006 Report by the Law Commission into homicide law, why does the Government need more reports other than to buy time? Beyond attacking Conservative governments for not building more prisons to accommodate yet more prisoners, what original ideas does the Justice Secretary actually have about how to reform the crumbling justice system? In the latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken and Tim take us into the history and evolution of homicide sentencing, from the disastrous 2003 Criminal Justice Act conceived by New Labour to the present calls for change, exploring how these reforms intersect with broader legal principles and questioning whether the current system strikes the right balance between deterrence, punishment, and fairness. Ken and Tim also examine the judiciary's delicate role in managing sentence inflation and resisting political interference, all while advocating for a more logical and cohesive approach to homicide law.

A parliamentary inquiry has just started work into the law around Joint enterprise, and the Law Commission is also looking at ways to reform the law. It will report back next year.Joint enterprise is contentious because if a person is seen to be involved in a crime - from knowing about it, egging someone on, being present, or being able to predict that someone is likely to use a weapon like a gun - then they could be considered as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger. It has a long history, but in recent times, it has been used as a way of prosecuting murder, especially in cases involving groups of people, when it's not known who carried out a killing. But is it being applied fairly? The CPS says “We choose the right charges for the right people based on the evidence in front of us. We look objectively at the evidence before making our own decisions.and they add that “The CPS carefully monitors joint enterprise prosecutions, with senior legal oversight over every case to ensure that our approach is fair and proportionate.”But campaigners say joint enterprise disproportionately results in working-class and black youths being prosecuted and convicted. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik, Arlene Gregorius and Bob Howard Editor Tara McDermottContributors: Alexander Hughes, Head Judicial Assistant at The Supreme Court "Cleeshay" who was convicted of murder under joint enterprise Jan Cunliffe, co-founder of Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association (JENGbA) Tracey Moloney, solicitor, Moloney family Law Dr Sam Fowles, a barrister and author David Duncan, solicitor and Director of the legal firm Duncan & McConnell in Dundee

The job of the Criminal Cases Review Commission - or CCRC - is to investigate cases where people may have been wrongfully convicted of a crime in the criminal courts of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The CCRC has faced criticism over it's actions - or lack of action - in a high-profile miscarriage of justice. In April this year, the CCRC offered an unreserved apology to Andrew Malkinson. He spent 17 years in prison following conviction for a rape in Salford that he didn't commit. DNA testing which led to his conviction being quashed was not commissioned by the CCRC, and in July, an independent review found that he could have been freed five years after receiving a life sentence in 2003. After the report was published, the Justice Secretary called for the resignation of the chair of the CCRC, Helen Pitcher. However, she said she was still the “best person” for the job and that she had no intention of standing down. So how does the Criminal Cases Review Commission work? How does it make decisions about which cases should go back to the Court of Appeal, and which should be rejected?Also this week: - Are the laws around accessing social care for disabled children too complicated? - And if you're selling your home - are you legally bound to mention problem neighbours? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Nathan Gower Editor: Tara McDermott Production Coordinator: Maria OgundeleContributors Dr Hannah Quirk, a Reader in Criminal Law at King's College London, who also used to work at the CCRC. Professor Alison Young, Commissioner for Public and Welsh Law, the Law Commission. Catriona Moore, policy manager at IPSEA, a charity which helps parents with SEND legislation - Special Educational needs and disabilities. Tracey Moloney, from Moloney Family Law, also known as the Legal Queen on social media

Jess Harrold is joined by Professor Nicholas Hopkins, the Law Commissioner for Property, Family and Trusts, to discuss the launch of the Law Commission's consultation on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and the future of security of tenure for commercial tenants. Hopkins outlines the background to the long-anticipated review of Part 2 of the 1954 Act, and explains the Commission's two-stage approach to the project, before presenting the four options for models of security of tenure on which views are being sought in this opening consultation. Listen to the podcast, then have your say at the Law Commission website: https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/business-tenancies-the-right-to-renew/  

To help answer these questions and more, Trade Finance Global (TFG) spoke with Sarah Green at the Law Commission, Susan Ashworth, Senior Trade Finance Specialist at Matalan, and Surath Sengupta, Head of Trade And Working Capital Product at Lloyds.   Read here: https://www.tradefinanceglobal.com/posts/podcast-unpacking-the-impact-of-the-etda/

In this conversation, Freddie New, general counsel at The Little Car and Head of Policy at Bitcoin Policy UK, discusses the evolution of Bitcoin regulation in the UK. He highlights the historical context of regulatory attitudes, the role of the Law Commission in recognizing Bitcoin as property, and the challenges posed by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).  The conversation also touches on banking access issues, the impact of fraud concerns, and the future of Bitcoin custodianship. They also discuss the strategic reserve held by the UK government, regulatory challenges faced by Bitcoin exchanges, and the broader policy goals for Bitcoin advocacy. Freddie sheds light on the political landscape and the need for engagement with politicians to promote Bitcoin-friendly policies. Additionally, they address the ECB's recent criticisms of Bitcoin and contrast the regulatory approaches of the UK and EU. Takeaways Freddie New advocates for Bitcoin policy in the UK. The UK has a history of misunderstanding Bitcoin. The Law Commission has recognized Bitcoin as property. The FCA has restricted access to Bitcoin products. Fraud concerns impact banking access for Bitcoin users. Bitcoin is seen as a unique form of money. The government is becoming more positive about Bitcoin. Banks are primarily concerned with self-preservation. The FCA's stance is a significant barrier to adoption. Bitcoin is for both individuals and institutions. The UK holds 61,000 Bitcoin, making it the third largest holder. There is a need for the UK to capitalize on its Bitcoin holdings. Self-custody of Bitcoin must remain legal in the UK. Access to exchanges and banking services is crucial for Bitcoin adoption. The UK should explore the potential of Bitcoin mining using renewable energy. Political engagement is essential for Bitcoin advocacy in the UK. The ECB's criticisms of Bitcoin are fundamentally flawed. The UK and EU have different regulatory approaches to Bitcoin. Pension funds are beginning to allocate assets to Bitcoin. Support for Bitcoin Policy UK can help influence positive change. Timestamps: (00:00) - Intro (01:00) - Who is Freddie New? (03:26) - An overview of Bitcoin regulatory scenario in the UK (08:00) - The shift in perception: From criminality to legitimacy (17:23) - Are banking onramps/offramps to Bitcoin a hurdle in the UK? (21:13) - AML regulations & their Implications for Bitcoin (26:21) - Sponsors (32:08) - The FCA's resistance to Bitcoin adoption in the UK; Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (40:43) - Sponsors (44:02) - Answering a questionnaire to buy Bitcoin in the UK? (47:51) - What are the Policy Goals for Bitcoin in the UK?; Bitcoin Developer community  (53:06) - Politicians & their stance on Bitcoin advocacy (1:06:27) - Contrasting UK & EU Regulatory approaches (1:12:00) - How to support Bitcoin Policy UK? Links:  https://x.com/freddienew  Bill on digital property that's currently going through Parliament: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3766  Exchange walkthroughs:  https://x.com/freddienew/status/1743644557441470496 https://uk.bitcoinpolicy.net/  http://www.bitcoinpolicy.uk/ Steve Baker speaking on Bitcoin in Parliament in 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXQpXYvUB98  Sponsors: Bold Bitcoin CoinKite.com (code LIVERA) mempool.space/accelerator  Nomadcapitalist.com/apply Stephan Livera links: Follow me on X: @stephanlivera Subscribe to the podcast Subscribe to Substack

Nicole O'Byrne talks to Adam Dodek about his book, Heenan Blaikie: The Making and Unmaking of a Great Canadian Law Firm. In 1973, three young lawyers founded Heenan Blaikie in Montreal, which grew to be a prominent Canadian law firm with notable members, including former political leaders. Despite its close-knit atmosphere, the firm faced significant internal issues, leading to its collapse in 2014. Adam Dodek, an impartial observer, examines the firm's rise and fall, highlighting its unique culture alongside underlying problems like workplace bullying, challenges for women and minorities, and sexual harassment. The narrative is contextualized within broader societal changes, including economic shifts and crises. Dodek's thorough investigation serves as an essential read for legal professionals and those interested in the dynamics of corporate failure. Adam Dodek is a professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Ottawa. Among his numerous publications are In Search of the Ethical Lawyer; The Canadian Constitution, Third Edition, named by the Hill Times as one of the top 100 books on Canadian public policy; and Solicitor-Client Privilege, which won the Walter Owen Book Prize. He is a recipient of the Canadian Association of Law Teachers Prize for Academic Excellence, the Mundell Medal for excellence in legal writing, and the Law Society of Ontario's Law Society Medal. He is also a director of the Canadian Association for Legal Ethics and the Canadian Legal Information Institute, and a past governor of the Law Commission of Ontario. Image Credit: UBC Press If you like our work, please consider supporting it: bit.ly/support_WTY. Your support contributes to the Champlain Society's mission of opening new windows to directly explore and experience Canada's past.

This week my guest is Matthew Handford, a solicitor in the Mayne Wetherell tax team and another of the four finalists for this year's Tax Policy Charitable Trust Scholarship competition. The Tax Policy Charitable Trust was established by Tax Management New Zealand and its founder Ian Kuperus to encourage future tax policy leaders and support leading tax policy thinking in Aotearoa. Matthew is proposing a Tax Law Commission, independent of Inland Revenue, to restore the Generic Tax Policy Process. Under Matthew's proposal, a TLC would have a standing mandate to systematically review the operation of New Zealand's tax laws and make recommendations for their improvement.

In this episode, we are joined by Professor Jens Scherpe (Professor of Comparative Law at Aalborg University, and academic door tenant at QEB), and our very own Resolution Cohabitation Committee Chair, Graeme Fraser (Head of Family at William Sturges) to discuss what model of cohabitation law reform should be introduced in England & Wales.   This is a seminal moment for Resolution.  It has been campaigning to achieve family law remedies for cohabitees almost since its inception in 1983, with it being high on its list of priorities since the mid-1990s. The new government has confirmed they are committed to cohabitation reform, so what shape should that take?  What Resolution members know is that the general law is not good enough for families.  If you need convincing, Jens guides us to think - do you think cohabiting families are families? If yes, then you need family law remedies (rather than remedies for people with no connection because purpose of family law (unlike general law) is to address societal, financial and gender imbalances that arise from being a family.    Which model would you support? Do you think, we should: Assimilate the law for cohabitees – so use the same framework that we do for married couples; OR have aDifference model - so there is a clear difference between the remedy for a  cohabiting couple, or a married couple. With all family law remedies, you then need to decide are you: a.      Compensating a partner for the loss they have experienced generated by the relationship; OR b.      Sharing the fruits of the relationship both parties have participated in.  Graeme and Jens explore the law for cohabitees in Scotland, Ireland and Australia to consider the pros and cons of each model.  We then put them on the spot to what they think we should do in England & Wales.  In the conversation, Graeme refers us to the Law Commission report from 2007: https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/30/2015/03/lc307_Cohabitation.pdfAnd the Vision for Family Justice: https://resolution.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Resolution-Vision-for-Family-Justice-full-221123.pdf If you would like to read more about this, then please do look at Jen's books about comparative law: Jens M. Scherpe (ed.), European Family Law, Edard Elgar 2016 - European Family Law (e-elgar.com)Jens M. Scherpe/Andy Hayward (eds.), Future of Registered Partnerships – Family Recognition Beyond Marriage, Intersentia 2017 -  The Future of Registered Partnerships ~ Book ~ Larcier-IntersentiaJens M. Scherpe/Andy Hayward (eds.), De Facto Relationships – A Comparative Guide, Edward Elgar Publishing, forthcoming in 2025 in the following series: https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/book-series/law-academic/elgar-comparative-family-law-series.html 

Join Nick Hanne, Jillian Heather, and Alex Penk for an FSU Talk on the recent Law Commission's discussion paper which examined the question of amending the Human Rights Act to include trans gender and intersex individuals as a protected class. These potential changes have significant implications for free speech and the weaponisation of a subjective definition of identity and also harm.Support the showhttps://www.fsu.nz/https://x.com/NZFreeSpeechhttps://www.instagram.com/freespeechnz/https://www.tiktok.com/@freespeechunionnz

12th Sep: Blockchain DXB Podcast

Join Nathan, Jonathan, and Hannah for this episode for the Free Speech Union podcast to dive into the pressing issues surrounding free speech in New Zealand, focusing on the implications of recent police training on hate crimes, the role of the Law Commission, and the influence of unelected officials. Jonathan and Hannah provide insightful commentary and updates on ongoing efforts to protect free speech rights in the face of growing challenges. Support the Show.https://www.fsu.nz/https://x.com/NZFreeSpeechhttps://www.instagram.com/freespeechnz/https://www.tiktok.com/@freespeechunionnz

It's a question that many families are facing: how to make decisions for a loved one who can't do it themselves. The Law Commission has just wrapped up a second round of consultation on their review of the surrounding legislation.

Police Commissioner Andrew Coster wants tighter alcohol regulation. RNZ has obtained documents under the Official Information Act showing police estimate alcohol harm costs about 7.8 billion dollars a year, compared to $1.8 billion for illegal drugs. Coster says measures should be considered, including only letting bottle stores open in day-time hours and charging more for alcohol. Alcohol Healthwatch executive director Andrew Galloway says these aren't new ideas. "The Government have been presented with these recommendations by both the Law Commission in 2010 and the Ministry of Justice in 2014. So he's not wrong." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our current drug laws are harmful, according to a group of experts who want to see the Misuse of Drugs Act overhauled 

Speaker: Dr Oliver Butler, University of NottinghamAbstract: When automated decision-making technologies (ADM) are procured and used by public authorities, important design and implementation decisions are often delegated to the professional developers they sub-contract to co-produce such technology. This can undermine accountability, democratic oversight, and the allocation of public functions determined by legislative bodies. On the other hand, in some circumstances officials might appropriately defer to the expertise of developers. This presentation considers how the concept of non-delegation in public law could be reassessed in this context to improve accountable official decision-making and the proper retention of decision-making authority where ADM is co-produced for public purposes.Biography: Oliver Butler is an Assistant Professor at Nottingham University School of Law. He read law at the University of Cambridge and received a Distinction on the BCL at the University of Oxford, where he received the Faculty Prize in Constitutional Theory. He graduated from the LLM at Harvard Law School and was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2013. He worked at the Law Commission of England and Wales as a research assistant on the Data Sharing between Public Bodies project before returning to Cambridge to undertake his PhD on the development of information law in the UK and Europe. He was Fellow at Wadham College, Oxford, jointly with a research fellowship at the Bonavero Institute of Human Rights and has taught constitutional, administrative and human rights law on the BA and BCL and researched emerging digital rights.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminarsThis entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

First, Indian Express' Apurva Vishwanath talks about the concept behind simultaneous polls and the recommendations made by the Law Commission to overcome constitutional and logistical challenges in order to implement this idea.Next, Indian Express' Vidhatri Rao tells us about recent Indian films that are attempting to capitalize on the dominant political narrative in the country (11:42).And in the end, Indian Express' Shantanu Chowdhury discussed the exit of two BJP leaders in West Bengal (24:42).Hosted, written and produced by Shashank BhargavaEdited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

Today's blockchain and cryptocurrency news Bitcoin is down .5% at $51,336 Eth is down 1% at $2,962 BNB is down .5% at $381 Those are your leaders by market cap. Top gainers in the last 24 hours,  The Graph up 20% Render up 16% UK Law commission seeks feedback on draft crypto legislation ECB officials slam US BTC ETF. PSG validator for Chiliz Chain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Monday, the Mass. Ballot Law Commission ruled that Former President Donald Trump can remain on the state's ballot. WBZ's Jim MacKay (@JimMacKayOnAir) reports.

In on the Act kicks off its 2024 series with a deep dive into the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill. Part of the government's commitment to leasehold reform, the Bill was introduced in November 2023 and is now working its way through the Parliamentary process. To unpack its detail, EG's Sarah Jackman is joined by Stephen Jourdan KC, barrister at Falcon Chambers, who sets the scene by discussing the drivers for leasehold reform and recent work undertaken by the Law Commission in the area. He then details the main provisions set out in the Bill, including changes to the lease extension term for houses and flats, as well as covering other elements such as the administration of service charges and buildings insurance costs. He also highlights the Bill's omissions, notably commonhold and a ban on new leasehold property. But with a general election looming, how likely is the Bill to make it onto the statute books in 2024?

In the fifth edition of our regular ISDS podcast series, hosts Suzie Savage and Patrick Beale once again break down the key investment treaty arbitration developments that took place in the latter part of 2023. They discuss the Energy Charter Treaty, award enforcement case updates, the ISDS elements included in the Law Commission's review of the English Arbitration Act 1996,  Indo-Pacific updates (notably the UK signing the CPTPP), s.1782 news, before closing with commentary on UNCITRAL Working Group III's proposed ISDS reforms.

Sarah Jackman is joined by Guy Fetherstonhaugh KC, barrister at Falcon Chambers, to discuss the legislative developments that have had the biggest effect during 2023. Fetherstonhaugh addresses the continuing "huge impact" of the Building Safety Act 2022, which has continued to sire a stream of secondary legislation this year, and is beginning to lead to a number of cases. Turning to residential reform, he addresses proposals in the Renters (Reform) Bill and the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill. In addition, Fetherstonhaugh tackles the implications for landlords of the recently enacted Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, and the massive significance of the Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard regulations. But what are his thoughts on continuing litigation under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and its upcoming scrutiny by the Law Commission - and what legislative change would he most like to find in his Christmas stocking?

In this episode we are joined by Professor Emma Hitchings (Bristol University), Professor Emerita Gillian Douglas (Kings College, London), and Joanne Edwards (Chair of Resolution's Family Law Reform Committee/Forsters) to discuss the Fair Shares report. This report is the first time there is a fully representative picture of the financial arrangements families make (and in a lot of instances, don't make) on separation and divorce, and how they arrive at those arrangements.  It is essential reading for anyone practising, or interested, in this area. The full report can be found here:https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/law/news/2023/Fair%20Shares%20report%20-%20final.pdf In this episode Emma tells us that the report found that the median value of assets on divorce is £135,000.  Thus, the cases that hit the headlines are not representative of most people's experiences.  The research serves to dispel a lot of myths peddled in the media about finances on divorce. In the research the academics classified the divorcees into different types or mindsets i.e. how they viewed their marriage, and their hopes on separation.  This arose from the qualitative data.  We discuss how using this typology can help understanding of how divorcees reach different outcomes despite having similar circumstances.  Broadly, there was: The unequal couples – they can be the most problematic to help. There is invariably a power imbalance, and there could have been domestic abuse, including financial abuse.  In these cases, it is not possible for the parties to genuinely negotiate.  The effect can be that the less dominant party walks away with nothing, or a poor agreement. The partners – these couples were a true joint enterprise during the marriage and that feeds through to how they agree things should be divided on divorce. The housemates – these couples were individualistic during the marriage, they saw things as ‘theirs', they kept their finances separate during the marriage, and they expect to keep what is ‘theirs' on separation. The parents – in these relationships the children are the most important concern, and the division of assets is structured to support parenting.  The parent with care was found to be very focussed on the immediate future.Jo considers how being aware of these divorcee types may feed into practice. Emma and Gillian hope to be able to analyse whether each type impacts on the outcome process in the future. We discussed how spousal maintenance is relatively uncommon, and where it is granted it is definitely not a ‘meal-ticket' for life.  It is virtually always for a fixed term, and that term is generally linked with child-care responsibilities, and it is really associated with financial vulnerability of the receiving spouse.  We consider whether a different term would help dispel the myths as very rarely are people ‘maintained' – they are usually working and just having some assistance in meeting their living expenses. The research found evidence that mediation outcomes did not work out as people expected in many more instances than outcomes arrived at through lawyer negotiations or court. We try to analyse why that may be this case; was it because people had exhausted other options and felt obligated to get to an agreement in mediation. Jo, as a mediator, considers the implications. We invite our guests to share some concluding thoughts for reform.  Gillian believes that how we share pensions (as only 11% of cases have pension sharing orders), and the needs of older children would be obvious areas for reform.  Emma says that this research dispels the proposals that there should be a time-limit on maintenance, or a presumption of 50/50 sharing as that would lead to unfairness and parties being unable to meet their needs.  As we look ahead to the Law Commission publishing a scoping report next September, Jo applauded the fact that Fair Shares gives a proper evidential basis for any reform. If you would like to see all our guests speaking at the launch of the report, please follow the link below:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLTLL77qvW8

Modern families come in all sizes and configurations – and often the law is playing catch-up with the issues raised by contemporary family relationships. In this episode, Linzi Bull, partner at Penningtons Manches Cooper, chats with host Yasmin Sheikh about her modern family legal practice. They focus in particular on the complex legal and ethical issues that surround surrogacy law in the UK, the emotional connections involved in representing families, and the gaps in the law surrounding polyamorous family units. (Please note: The UK government announced on 8 November 2023 that the Law Commission proposals on surrogacy, which Linzi and Yasmin discuss, will not “be taken forward at the moment.” (https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/surrogacy/)

This latest edition of In on the Act features Falcon Chambers barrister, Mark Galtrey, discussing the recent Law Commission recommendations to reform the Arbitration Act 1996, which were published in early September, alongside a draft Bill. Following the announcement in last week's King's speech that an arbitration Bill will be included in this Parliamentary session, Galtrey delves into the detail of what the Law Commission has proposed and what practitioners can expect to see should its recommendations be adopted.  He provides examples of how arbitrations apply in the property context (rent reviews and partnership arrangements being common scenarios), as well as reflecting on whether there were missed opportunities to recommend reform to other parts of the existing Act.  

In this packed episode, Brian dives into a thought-provoking discussion with Tim Robbins, exploring the intricacies of efficiency in arbitration [TIME 05:49]. We're also joined by Simon Camilleri, who brings us keen insights into the Law Commission's final report on the reform of the English Arbitration Act 1996 [TIME 36:58]. And stick around for our Happy Fun Time segment, where Brian and Jan demystify the utility of programming in our professional undertakings [TIME 59:34].

Artificial intelligence has been making headlines where we find the next use for it. Host Alex Pierson speaks with Ryan Fitsch, legal counsel with the Law Commission of Ontario, about taking AI to the next level in order to get access to justice. They are called legal robots. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The numbers of couples choosing to have children via surrogate mothers has been steadily rising in recent years. Now, the UK authorities are considering plans for a radical overhaul of the laws around surrogacy, making it more heavily regulated but also reversing certain presumptions around legal parenthood. In this episode we discuss why surrogacy is gaining in popularity, the pros and cons of the proposed reforms, and whether Christians should endorse surrogacy as a good way to start families. - We previously discussed this issue on an episode of Premier's Unbelievable podcast https://www.premierunbelievable.com/unbelievable/the-surrogacy-industry-john-and-tim-wyatt-on-the-ethics-of-paying-for-pregnancy/12955.article - Tim also wrote an article last year exploring the issue in depth https://www.premierchristianity.com/features/wombs-for-rent-can-christians-really-support-surrogacy/13184.article - The Law Commission report on surrogacy reforms https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prod-storage-11jsxou24uy7q/uploads/2023/03/LC_Surrogacy_Summary_of_Report_2023.pdf - Subscribe to the Matters of Life and Death podcast: https://pod.link/1509923173 - If you want to go deeper into some of the topics we discuss, visit John's website: http://www.johnwyatt.com - For more resources to help you explore faith and the big questions, visit: http://www.premierunbelievable.com

London-based international arbitration partners Suzie Savage and Patrick Beale team up for another investment treaty arbitration update. This episode includes commentary on the status of ECT modernization and State withdrawals, a U.S. court's refusal to enforce an ECT award, and Ecuador's signing of a Host State Agreement with the PCA. The duo then go on to discuss the Law Commission's Second Consultation Paper on reform of the Arbitration Act, updates to the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, and UNCITRAL Working Group III's approach to double hatting. 

This week, host Tanishka Sodhi is joined by Newslaundry's Shwet Pandey and independent journalist Saurav Das. Saurav this week reported on how the government “blocks” requests for information and how a case filed by satirist Tanul Thakur might change this. “If the judgement is in favour of Tanul Thakur, then it could change censorship practices in India,” he says.Shwet, who wrote on the three-year anniversary of Sushant Singh Rajput's death, explains the media frenzy surrounding the case. The assembly election was held in Rajput's home state of Bihar soon after his death, and Shwet says, “Five percent of the political vote bank is the Rajput community. So it was a very effective ploy to politicise his death for their own agenda.”The panel discusses nepotism, mental health awareness, self-censorship among journalists, and a lot more. Tune in.Timecodes00:00:00 - Introduction00:01:28 - Government censorship00:09:36 - SSR's three-year death anniversary 00:40:52 - Law Commission's sedition report00:45:10 - RecommendationsRecommendationsSauravThe Indian Conservative: A History of Indian Right-wing ThoughtShwetKai Po Che!SonchiriyaPKTanishkaSurviving a media trial: The story of Disha Salian's familyProduced by Tehreem Roshan and Saif Ali Ekram, recorded by Anil Kumar, and edited by Umrav Singh. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

First, Indian Express' Apurva Vishwanath talks about the Law Commission of India's recommendations for retaining and strengthening the Sedition law. Second, Indian Express' Jignasa Sinha tells us the issues faced by Tihar officials due to the lack of adequate security and overcrowding in Asia's largest prison complex. (10:14)And in the end, Indian Express' Gopal Kateshiya speaks about the Indian fishermen who have been languishing in Pakistan jails for more than 3-4 years. (16:18)Hosted by Rahel Philipose Produced and scripted by Utsa Sarmin, Shashank Bhargava, and Rahel PhiliposeEdited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

Big Jolt to MiLords after Modi Govt Stance on Sedition Law via Law Commission Sanjay Dixit

Conviction rates for rape trials are lower than those for other criminal trials, and the court experience can be intrusive and harrowing for survivors. The Law Commission of England and Wales (the independent body that advises the government on law reform), has just published a new consultation paper for how to change this. Criminal law commissioner Prof Penney Lewis, and before her Independent Sexual Violence Adviser Annabelle Edwards of Rape Crisis, speak about the reforms they'd like to see. The Scottish government's Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) bill also aims to improve rape trials. If passed, it would abolish the "not proven" option for acquittal, create specialist rape courts, and controversially establish the option of judge-only, non-jury trials as a pilot scheme, as it's feared rape myths might influence some jurors. Fiona Leverick, professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice at the University of Glasgow and Tony Lenehan KC, president of the Faculty of Advocates' Criminal Bar Association discuss the bill. The Hollywood stars and former married couple Johnny Depp and Amber Heard faced each other during two separate libel trials that asked whether or not Mr Depp physically abused Ms Heard. Depp lost the first case, against the owners of the Sun newspaper. It was heard by a judge in the High Court in London. Depp won the second case, against his ex-wife, decided by a jury in the United States. Nick Wallis is the only journalist to have covered both trials. He contrasts them in his new book "Depp v Heard, the Unheard Story". Presenter: Joshua Rozenberg Producer: Arlene Gregorius Researcher: Bethan Ashmead Latham Sound engineer: Neil Churchill Editor: Clare Fordham Production Coordinator: Maria Ogundele

Lexi Ellingsworth, co-founder of Stop Surrogacy Now UK, discusses the state of surrogacy within Britain in the run-up to this week's report jointly published by the Law Commission of England and Wales and the Scottish Law Commission that outlines recommendations for law reform around surrogacy. Ellingsworth outlines the finer points of commercial surrogacy, currently illegal in the UK that are being subtly eroded through “altruistic surrogacy,” demonstrating how this system is a fudge on the commercial model because there are hidden aspects of remuneration in addition to powerful social returns. Ellingsworth vituperates how altruistic surrogacy, in some ways similar to the “sex work” model, is largely based on neoliberal notions of “choice” where pregnancy is a service and a baby the product all under the auspices of helping others create a family. Discussing how the ethical lines that are quickly creating a breeder class of woman to service the elite—be they infertile couples of the professional class or gay men—Ellingsworth outlines how the pro-surrogacy lobby is astroturfed to influence democratic debate while pushing the commercial model even to the exclusion of women's voices up until the public consultation. Ellingsworth frames all forms of surrogacy within the larger legal spectrum of human trafficking noting that while we accept that women can do what they like with their bodies, “Do we also say that she can do what she likes with her children and if she wants to sell them, she can?” noting that laws which currently prohibit the sale of children who are two-years old, paradoxically in many countries uphold the sale of “brand new” children.  Get full access to Savage Minds at savageminds.substack.com/subscribe

Senior associates Jane Miles (Dubai) and Bartek Rutkowski (London) set the scene for the Law Commission of England and Wales' consultation on the Arbitration Act 1996. The duo discuss some of the key areas under review and in relation to which recommendations for legislative change may be on the horizon later this year. Topics include confidentiality, independence and impartiality, immunity, discrimination, scope for national court intervention, emergency arbitrations, challenges to arbitration awards, and Section 69 appeals.

A new report from the U.K. Law Commission has large implications.This episode is sponsored by Nexo.io, Chainalysis and FTX US. On this edition of the “Weekly Recap,” NLW homes in on an interesting report out of the U.K. that would define crypto as a fundamentally new type of property – something that some crypto lawyers have been arguing in the U.S. for some time. -Nexo is a security-first platform where you can buy, exchange and borrow against your crypto. The company safeguards your crypto by relying on five key fundamentals including real-time auditing and insurance on custodial assets. Learn more at nexo.io.-Chainalysis is the blockchain data platform. We provide data, software, services and research to government agencies, exchanges, financial institutions and insurance and cybersecurity companies. Our data powers investigation, compliance and market intelligence software that has been used to solve some of the world's most high-profile criminal cases. For more information, visit www.chainalysis.com.-FTX US is the safe, regulated way to buy Bitcoin, ETH, SOL and other digital assets. Trade crypto with up to 85% lower fees than top competitors and trade ETH and SOL NFTs with no gas fees and subsidized gas on withdrawals. Sign up at FTX.US today.-“The Breakdown” is written, produced by and features Nathaniel Whittemore aka NLW, with editing by Rob Mitchell and research by Scott Hill. Jared Schwartz is our executive producer and our theme music is “Countdown” by Neon Beach. The music you heard today behind our sponsors is “The Now” by Aaron Sprinkle. Image credit: Peter Dazeley/Getty Images, modified by CoinDesk. Join the discussion at discord.gg/VrKRrfKCz8.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.