The ‘West Lothian Question’: Stop Questioning and Do Something About it!
For those of you already familiar with constitutional and administrative law, the ‘West Lothian Question’ will no doubt bring forth a frustrated sigh of recognition as you remember covering it in your legal studies. For those of you unfamiliar with this important point that affects our country’s democracy, allow me to explain as succinctly as possible.
The West Lothian Question was first raised in the House of Commons as far back as 1977, when Parliament was already discussing the possibility of a devolved legislature for Scotland. It was actually a Scottish Member of Parliament that questioned the fairness of non-English MPs being entitled to have a say over legal matters that were only ever likely to affect English constituents. That person was Tom Dalyell and at the time he represented the constituency of West Lothian.
If you have been following this section over the past year or so, you will have noticed how there has been a concerted effort to report on the issues of employment law that are being affected by the economic difficulties being faced within the country. In fact, some previous articles have gone so far as to make predictions on what might be expected in this regard; alas, it would seem that many of these assertions are now coming to fruition.
As part of an ongoing series of articles focusing on Civil Litigation, this month we are considering the growing importance of mediation. There has been a lot of effort over the last few years to reform the civil justice system. One of the key reasons for this has been the high cost of bringing claims to court.
In this article we are considering the Supreme Court formed just over a year ago. Having studied on the Diploma course, you will have already identified yourself to prospective employers as someone with a serious interest in the law. Being aware of current developments in the law and legal practice marks you as someone who has a continuing interest in developing his or her knowledge.
Ever since the United Kingdom ratified the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as far back as 1950, for the most part it has seemed that this international law has been working very well for us. Indeed, the Human Rights Act 1998 was seen as an overdue, final acceptance of the laws contained within the convention. The previous Labour Government were determined to leave some kind of legacy for their period of administration, and this Act of Parliament is probably the most remembered.
Wills are not usually the subject of polite conversation, but they are rarely out of the news. Typically, wills become newsworthy only when things have gone terribly wrong. On this occasion, however, there is a positive reason why wills are being discussed across the nation, namely a new series on television, ‘Can’t Take It With You’. The programme aims to increase people’s awareness and highlight some of the emotional and financial pitfalls of wills and inheritance law.
Rights of equality for all members of our society is one of the most fundamental tenets of our legal system. The protection of minorities and the more vulnerable members of the community has been an issue that has been held dear by the previous Labour Government and now the coalition. With this in mind, the new Equality Act 2010 was enacted and the majority of the provisions under this statute came into effect from 1 October 2010.
Let’s face it: we had to tackle this highly controversial subject at some time or other! At a time when the UK’s economy has seen far better days and when local authorities and public bodies are forced to make dramatic cuts to their budgets, it cannot be helpful that some of the largest companies trading in this country are steering away from paying vast sums of tax to our government.
Ever since legal aid was first introduced in England and Wales back in 1949, many people believe that this fund, which is paid for by the tax-payer, has increasingly continued to move away from the fundamental principles by which it was first established to serve. Indeed, the Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, has established a consultation period for extensive changes to the legal aid system and has stated that one of the most worrying reasons for this is down to the fact that legal aid is accessible in cases where court intervention may not have been the best way forward. It has been recognised that other dispute resolution services may have produced far better results and at a fraction of the cost to the legal aid fund.
Since I obtained my Associate Membership of this Institute, I have been working in litigation. It has equipped me with necessary skills pertaining to the court litigation process after the Philippine Supreme Court’s Approval on the Small Claims Court and the amendments of Civil Procedure in Philippine Courts, as promulgated by Philippine Supreme Court.