Legal Updates

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) was established in 2007 as an independent body responsible for regulating the 180,000 Solicitors in England and Wales. The SRA’s purpose is to protect the public by ensuring that Solicitors and those working for them meet very high standards. The key way that the SRA does this is by publishing and enforcing Principles for the profession and a Code of Conduct contained in the SRA Handbook. This month we will be considering the biggest change to the Handbook since it was introduced in 2011.

Ever since the concept of proportionality was introduced to legal costs as part of the Woolf reforms in 1999, the courts and legal practitioners have wrestled with what this actually means. As part of Lord Justice Jackson’s package of reforms in 2007 the test was set out in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Part 44. This part of the CPR provided that only costs which were considered proportionate to a case would be allowed. Costs which were considered disproportionate would either be disallowed or reduced even if the costs were reasonably or necessarily incurred.

To give a bit more clarity about what the courts consider when deciding whether costs are proportionate, they will look at:

(a) the sums at issue in the proceedings;

(b) the value of any non-monetary relief in the proceedings;

This month we are considering a further push by the government to make the conveyancing process quicker and cheaper. Currently the home buying process takes, on average, between three and four months from the date an offer is accepted until the transaction is completed. Part of the reason it takes this amount of time is because buyers and sellers can struggle to communicate basic initial information. In addition, this failure to communicate well can affect the number of transactions that fail to reach the completion stage. 

This month we are returning to the topic of no-fault divorce. When we last wrote about this, we examined the sad case of Mrs Tini Owens who was not given permission to divorce her husband despite it being an entirely loveless marriage.

In the Owens v Owens Supreme Court case from July 2018, the current failings of the system were highlighted. The Supreme Court ruled in July that the 68-year-old could not divorce her husband and escape her loveless marriage until a period of five years had elapsed. She and her husband, Hugh Owens, had been living separate lives since 2015. Mrs Owens will have to stay married to her husband until they had been separated for five years before she will be allowed to divorce him.

This month we are examining the impact of a June 2018 ruling by the Supreme Court on the state of relationships in Britain. More to the point, we are considering how the ruling could lead to a change in the law on civil partnerships.

A civil partnership is a legal union between same-sex couples. If you are a civil partner, you are entitled to the same treatment as a married couple on a wide range of legal matters. The problem that the case highlighted was that only same-sex couples can enter into a civil partnership. Those opposite-sex couples who do not wish to get married but want some kind of legal recognition are not allowed to form a civil partnership. Now, however, this may change.

The UK’s complex Inheritance Tax (IHT) system could shortly be due for reform depending on the results of a review by the Office for Tax Simplification (OTS). Chancellor Philip Hammond has written to the OTS asking it to review the IHT regime and he said: 

“IHT, and the system within which it operates, is particularly complex and I would like to request that the OTS carry out a review. I would be most interested to hear any proposals you may have for simplification to ensure that the system is fit for purpose and makes the experience of those who interact with it as smooth as possible.”

If you have studied ILSPA’s Criminal Law Diploma course, you will remember how many obstacles prosecution lawyers must overcome in order to secure a conviction against a defendant. Different offences have varying conditions to satisfy, and this article looks at the test for dishonesty, which is most often applied to cases involving theft and fraud.

What is the Forfeiture Rule all about? How did it come about? It is based on the fact that it is against the policies of public law to allow convicted murderers to claim an inheritance. The Forfeiture Rule also applies to gifts that have been left in a will for the “criminal” under intestacy rules, as well as to any property belonging to a surviving descendant, and also the benefits of life insurance. The law is designed to stop murderers from benefiting from their crimes – this is known as the Forfeiture Rule.

How did this rule come about?

The Forfeiture Rule comes from the wider Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Act 2011 and impacts children of murderers.

What is the duty of care that a police force owes to the citizens they protect? Should the police be liable if they fail to detect a crime? What if the police fail to act and this causes an injury? Do the police have a duty to protect victims or witnesses of crime? What if the police give a firearm to an officer who is unstable? The answer to all these questions for the most part has been that the police have no duty of care. In other words, any of these failures could happen and it would be difficult or impossible to bring a claim for compensation. That has been the case up to now, but change seems likely to follow after a Supreme Court judgment in February. The law that has changed relates to policy factors and when it is fair, just and reasonable for a duty of care to be owed.

Criminal Law is extremely interesting and as with many areas of law, it continually evolves to reflect the morals and ethical standards of society.