Supreme Court reverses informed consent ruling: Sidaway is dead

13 March 2015 by

montgomery_3228283bMontgomery v. Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, 11 March 2015  – read judgments here

James Badenoch QC of 1COR was for the mother in this case. He played no part in the writing of this post.

An important new decision from a 7-Justice Supreme Court on informed consent in medical cases. 

In the mid-1980s a majority of the House of Lords in Sidaway decided that it was on the whole a matter for doctors to decide how much to tell patients about the risks of treatment, and that therefore you could not sue your doctor in negligence for failing to inform you of a risk if other reasonable doctors would not have informed you of the risk. Thus the principle that the standard of medical care is to be determined by medical evidence (which all lawyers will know as the Bolam principle) was extended to the quality of information to be provided to a patient about a given treatment.

The Supreme Court, reversing the judgments at first instance and on appeal, has now unequivocally said that Sidaway should not be followed.

The facts

In 1999, Mrs Montgomery gave birth to a baby boy. Unfortunately, he was starved of oxygen during the delivery and sustained severe brain damage. The principal claim was against her obstetrician for failing to give proper warnings. This was because the mother was small and diabetic, and diabetes tends to lead to larger babies. In the event, the shoulders of the baby got stuck during delivery (known as shoulder dystocia) and there was a 12 minute delay in freeing the shoulders during which her son sustained the brain injury. He also sustained paralysis of an arm caused by the force used in pulling him out.

The mother said she should have been warned of the risks of shoulder dystocia, and her evidence was that, had she been so warned, she should have been offered and would have asked for a caesarean section.

The Sidaway point

The obstetrician said she did not warn about shoulder dystocia because the risks of a serious problem ensuing from it were very small, and in this she was supported by some of the experts who gave evidence at trial.

But was this the right approach, namely for the decision about the information to be provided was to be left ultimately to the doctor’s clinical judgment?

The majority decision in Sidaway  supported this, though, as the current Supreme Court explained, the reasoning of the House of Lords was rather more nuanced than has been often stated.

The Scottish courts decided that Sidaway was determinative of the question.

The Supreme Court, after an exhaustive review of the post-Sidaway cases, disagreed. In particular, the Court noted that the English courts (in cases such as Pearce and Chester v. Afsharhad eroded the supposed certainties of Sidaway and have tacitly ceased to follow Sidaway‘s adoption of the Bolam test in this context. Australian and Canadian courts had taken the same view.

The justification for this change of approach will be obvious. A patient has her own right to make her own decision based upon sufficient information. A doctor must respect that right if there were material risks which a reasonably prudent patient would think were significant.  Medical evidence would of course be relevant to that decision, but the decision was ultimately legal rather than one for the doctors.  As the main judgment puts it at [75]

….patients are now widely regarded as persons holding rights, rather than as the passive recipients of the care of the medical profession.

Times have moved on from the “doctor knows best” approach of Sidaway. There are so many other sources of information available to patients (the internet, patient support groups, drug labelling etc) and hence

It would therefore be a mistake to view patients as uninformed, incapable of understanding medical matters, or wholly dependent upon a flow of information from doctors. The idea that patients were medically uninformed and incapable of understanding medical matters was always a questionable generalisation….. To make it the default assumption on which the law is to be based is now manifestly untenable.

This default assumption does not accord with GMC guidance to doctors, nor indeed with other developments in the law:

80. Under the stimulus of the Human Rights Act 1998, the courts have become increasingly conscious of the extent to which the common law reflects fundamental values. As Lord Scarman pointed out in Sidaway’s case, these include the value of self-determination….. As well as underlying aspects of the common law, that value also underlies the right to respect for private life protected by article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court noted that the resulting duty to involve a patient in treatment decisions has been recognised in Strasbourg cases such as Glass v United Kingdom (2004) 39 EHRR 15 and Tysiac v Poland(2007) 45 EHRR 42, as well as in a number of decisions of UK courts.

So the move is away from a model of medical paternalism. Social and legal developments point towards an approach to the law

which, instead of treating patients as placing themselves in the hands of their doctors (and then being prone to sue their doctors in the event of a disappointing outcome), treats them so far as possible as adults who are capable of understanding that medical treatment is uncertain of success and may involve risks, accepting responsibility for the taking of risks affecting their own lives, and living with the consequences of their choices.

This rule comes with an important caveat, known as the therapeutic exception. A doctor is entitled to withhold from the patient information as to a risk if she reasonably considers that its disclosure would be seriously detrimental to the patient’s health. But the Court stressed the limited nature of this exception. It should not be use to subvert the principle in circumstances where the doctor thinks that the patient is liable to make a choice which the doctor believes in contrary to her best interests.

The Court went on to decide that the obstetrician should have warned the mother about the risks of shoulder dystocia and discussed the alternative of an elective caesarean section.

Causation on the facts

A claimant still has to show that she would have made a different decision, had she been properly informed. Here, the first instance judge had concluded that, with full advice about shoulder dystocia, the mother would not have opted for an elective caesarean.

It is usually extremely difficult for an appellate court to reverse that sort of decision on the facts. However, the judge’s conclusions contained two errors, according to the Supreme Court. It focussed on the very small risk of grave consequences from shoulder dystocia, rather than the considerably greater risks of shoulder dystocia itself (9% to 10%). It also omitted one important bit of evidence from the obstetrician herself, who, when explaining why she did not warn about shoulder dystocia, said that most women would actually say, ‘I’d rather have a caesarean section'”.

The obstetrician added

if you were to mention shoulder dystocia to every [diabetic] patient, if you were to mention to any mother who faces labour that there is a very small risk of the baby dying in labour, then everyone would ask for a caesarean section, and it’s not in the maternal interests for women to have caesarean sections.

So the obstetrician herself accepted that mothers would generally opt for a caesarean if so warned; that was a reason for not warning.

The Supreme Court noted that the judge had concluded that the obstetrician was an impressive witness. To find that she was wrong in her evidence on this point does strike one as a little inconsistent.

Hence, taking the mother’s evidence with the obstetrician’s evidence, the Court concluded that it is probable that the mother would have chosen caesarean section had it been offered to her with a proper explanation of the risks of shoulder dystocia.

Lady Hale, in her concurring judgment, pointed out that the obstetrician’s view did not appear to be a purely medical judgment.

It looks like a judgment that vaginal delivery is in some way morally preferable to a caesarean section: so much so that it justifies depriving the pregnant woman of the information needed for her to make a free choice in the matter. Giving birth vaginally is indeed a unique and wonderful experience, but it has not been suggested that it inevitably leads to a closer and better relationship between mother and child than does a caesarean section.

The first is indeed a telling point. As for the second, the only HRB editor with direct experience of childbirth would herself not go quite as far as describing vaginal delivery as a “unique and wonderful experience.”

Conclusion

The Supreme Court has now cleared up the inevitable arguments which occurred from time to time in UK courts as to how Sidaway could be reconciled with the later cases, and has brought Scots law into harmony with the recent English cases. The present judgments show a rather more modern and enlightened approach to the doctor-patient relationship than that adopted 30 years ago in the House of Lords.

And so for the two people shown in my pic above, a successful claim in damages.

Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS

Related posts:

16 comments


  1. Mark C says:

    Where does this leave the wording on Advance Directives? These allow you to refuse treatment ‘even if this risks hastening my death’, but Macmillan are still advising you that you cant refuse pain relief and sedation in advance…we all know morphine and midazolam will kill you, so in effect, they are advising the public to give consent to being killed!
    Shouldnt hospices tell you that they’re about to kill you, rather than ‘keeping you comfy’ nowadays?

  2. wagaba1 says:

    I profoundly agree with Lady Hale’s reasoning as it appears that the obstetrician was more concerned about the bonding of the child with his mum, than giving the relevant information to the mum from which she would have been able to make a reasonable decision taking into account her life and the risks to her unborn baby. Wonderful

  3. markpummell says:

    great decision; having worked as a doctor for many years which included six month stints on obstetric, paediatric and mentally handicapped units (where there were a large number of birth-trauma related children) I have no doubt at all that this is the right decision… whatever you feel about “natural deliveries” (& you only have to look at the mortality/morbidity stats from any third world countries where good obstetric care is not available to at least begin to question this paradigm); maternal interests alongside a right (or at least one would hope for an informed choice) to a vaginal delivery also include a right (or at least a fighting chance) of a healthy non-brain damaged infant…

  4. I still think my late husband, a hospital consultant, was right in maintaining that 90% of making a good diagnosis was spending time talking to the patient, while only 10% was involved in actually making that diagnosis.

    For too long, too many patients have been treated like rather necessary nuisances at best, or naive nincompoops at best – who were expected to do exactly what they were told by doctors, or the nurses following doctors’ orders.

    Again I refer to my husband who firmly believed that, (outside and emergency) time was well spent in explaining, as simply and clearly as possible, exactly what treatment was being considered, and why. In this was, he obtained the cooperation of the patient as well as their family and the benefit of no lawsuits.

  5. c.kenneil says:

    In response to the writer above’s comments: “I could go and read the academic literature and decide that while the standards of the insurance might not be met, it was enough to convince me. But the portion of the population able to do that is slim”.
    Human understanding is not deficient in capacity to take on board and evaluate, these simply a question of presentation and a time factor. But other principals are at stake: patients’ ‘information’ arises from and belongs to that attached patient, the codification of a persons’ condition arises from that person, not from the doctor who only analyses the condition. The doctor comes in at the point where it is considered his skills are required. The skills belong to the doctor, the information as to the condition belongs to the patient. Keeping information about conditions and solutions ‘Esoteric’, away from the patient, alters the balance of power between the doctor and the patient. The doctor ought to do what is best for his patient, regardless of financial liabilities, which insurance risk factor should not be the governing factor as to who owns the information and the legal rights to determine remedies applied a ‘body’.

    The financial insurance implications as to unknown natural risks, or risks arising from ‘botched jobs’ because the rest of the profession practice ‘botched jobs’ and this acceptable by the professional standards of the time, is separate from whether or not a patient is or is not allowed access to his/her own information about his/her own condition, with access or not to help determine solutions as to their own remedy. Liability and information ‘ownership’ are wholly distinct matters. The ownership factor introduce commercial property ownership rights vis who has or does not have ‘property’ rights over a persons own medical condition. On what moral or legal principals should the doctor or health service own a persons information and have sole rights to determine treatment? Obviously the doctor requires legal rights of access to acquire information so as to solve the matter at issue.
    This is politically charged and critical since politicians are aiming to privatise our NHS, so that our medical information, our medical notes could become a corporations private commercial property to dispose of as they will. This could of itself pose grave political risks, by reason that all knowledge is power. He who controls the knowledge has the power.

    1. tyelko says:

      “Human understanding is not deficient in capacity to take on board and evaluate, these simply a question of presentation and a time factor. ”

      There are concepts which do require above average cognitive capabilities, and anyone who ever tried to wrap their head around quantum mechanics can attest to that. In any case, however, the time to understand a certain topic can go way beyond what is feasible for an average patient. Patients with chronic disease will usually invest a great deal of time over many years to understand their condition and can indeed come to a good layman’s understanding. But when it comes to one-shot issues, it’s simply not feasible for the average patient to pour hundreds of hours into the decision.

      But what if I told you that even GPs regularly lack fundamental understanding of the conditions they are dealing with? Because physicians are first and foremost trained to diagnose and treat a disease, and the training of physiology is ancillary to that. More, the understanding of statistical concepts necessary to both write and read (properly) modern academic medical literature is even rarer. The consequence is not just a flood of low-quality publications but also a huge number of physicians unable to recognise that low quality.

      I’ve seen pharmaceutical companies organise statistics seminars for their customers just so that they are actually able to talk with physicians as to the different relative risks for different patient populations between their drug and the competitor’s. Just to enable physicians to make an informed decision as to for what patients which drug is more suitable, as they had different risk profiles depending on other diseases and conditions the patients might have had.

      So if even physicians often struggle to understand the conditions they are treating, how do we expect them to convey information on actual risks and benefits to patients in what little time they have?

  6. ritajoseph says:

    Patient directed treatment has gone too far. Our “choices” as patients are not always rational and objective–particularly in the stress, fearfulness and emotion of a pregnancy–and that’s where professional advice should be respected and heeded.

  7. Keith Nieland says:

    As a MCA trainer this is a most welcome ruling and marks yet another important step away from a paternalistic model of decision making based on “doctor knows best” to a rights based model. Doctors will need to up their game and be able to explain risks ans benefits to patients in a way that the patient understands and be prepared to invest more time in discussing risks and alternative treatments. Let’s hope it does not lead to an unwelcome rise in the already unacceptable number of capacity assessments that are triggered simply because the health professional is of the view the patients decision is unwise.

  8. Excellent comment , for most people tossing a coin is most probably as good a way as any when having to decide what action to take.

  9. Daniel Smith says:

    Sad but true. My father, an engineer for forty years, had an inguinal hernia. He was treated by Leicester Royal and died of peritonitus. We sued but were quoted Bolam. We were very disappointed we couldn’t persue a negligence claim. The Coroner ruled Misadventure.

  10. Lofthouse says:

    Appalling attitudes still abound in NHS End of LIfe Care if you read through their current documentation, ”Actions for End of LIfe Care 2014-16” you’ll see that Mrs Neubergers clique are still being trained that a Dr does not even have to discuss a patient’s medical condition with them, on the subjective assessment that it would harm them!

    p,28 ” The person must have full access to this information (unless
    that is likely to cause him or her harm).” http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/actions-eolc.pdf

    Couple this to the fact that LiverpoolCarePathway v.11(those drugs kill you whether you’re imminently dying or not folks) broke the World Health Organisation analgesic ladder, and had no informed consent process on it until 2 years after the MCA came into force, and recommended prescribing practices for which other doctors have been struck off for ‘reckless prescribing’ by the GMC (because those drugs kill you whether you’re imminently dying or not folks!),
    I think the State is rather fortunate that no one can afford to go to court with a low quantum case and no one seems interested in a corporate manslaughter case..

    1. Lofthouse says:

      ..and as for ‘quality of information’, the NHSEngland are still advising patients they CANNOT refuse pain control and sedation in an advance directive – so the LiverpoolCarePathway drugs (which kill) are compulsory – p.2 of http://www.nhs.uk/ipgmedia/National/Macmillan%20Cancer%20Support/assets/AnadvancedecisiontorefusetreatmentMCS6pages.pdf .!

      On the main site of the new NHS EOLC contractor Macmillan, this information even bears a Government ”Information Standard” Stamp http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Cancerinformation/Livingwithandaftercancer/Advancedcancer/AdvanceDecision.aspx

  11. ILM says:

    Reblogged this on International Law Matters.

  12. […] Supreme Court reverses informed consent ruling: Sidaway is dead Thus the principle that the standard of medical care is to be determined by medical evidence (which all lawyers will know as the Bolam principle) was extended to the quality of information to be provided to a patient about a given treatment. The … Read more on UK Human Rights Blog (blog) […]

  13. tyelko says:

    The issue is a bit more complicated, alas. Accurately assessing risk is tough for people for whom it is professionally relevant but not the main task, it is that much harder for people to assess who have no specific training. There are plenty of studies showing that the average person often grossly misinterprets statistical data, especially when it comes to risk of disease or medical complication. While that is of course no reason to withhold information, accurately explaining the risks and benefits of various choices is something that requires both training in communication and time – neither of which is in ample supply for physicians. Take the caesarean mentioned – in the end, it IS an invasive procedure with its own risks. And telling the patient more about the risks of vaginal delivery doesn’t mean she will fully understand the risks of a caesarean. The only real solution is to take care of the two scarce resources I mentioned. But sufficient patient time is lacking left and right, so it’s unlikely that actual understanding of the risks can be reasonably verified any time soon.

    Yes, patients have lots of resources they did not use to have – but can they use them? When a physician in Germany gave me an option between two procedures, one of which was paid for by the healthcare system and one I would have had to pay for out of pocket, as the deciders were not yet convinced of the long-term chances of success, as a trained biomedical scientist, I could go and read the academic literature and decide that while the standards of the insurance might not be met, it was enough to convince me. But the portion of the population able to do that is slim. And the other extreme is just as frightening: When I once went to a new physician telling him that a slight asthma had been diagnosed in the past by the doc at my last location and I now needed medication, he signed the perscription without even checking me or getting the file from the old doc. Given the abuse possible with asthma medication, I was baffled.

    Yes, patients should be aware of the risks and benefits, but I’m afraid this judgment does little to tackle the actual problem. Telling isn’t hearing and hearing isn’t understanding and just because a patient signs that they understood something doesn’t mean that’s the case. And understanding the risks of one procedure doesn’t mean understanding the risks of the alternative.

    1. Andrew Smith says:

      I should express an interest in this matter. I appeared for the GMC in the Montgomery case as interveners. I should say that the performance by James Badenoch was outstanding and it was a pleasure to work with him.

      The GMC prepared detailed submissions on the issue of consent, and pointed out that the idea of the patient having to provide consent predated the second world war; but it was a consequence of the atrocities in concentration camps when doctors carried out procedures to without any consent that spurred the profession (worldwide) into action. The GMC has been seeking to change Doctors’ attitude and practice for many years and I am hopeful that now things will have to change.

      I fully appreciate the comments by tyelko above: but what the formulaic approach of trying to have a series of tick boxes on issues to be discussed ignores (and I am sorry if that is not what is the ultimate result from the comments) is that the GMC is anxious that patients are involved in a discussion, that reaches the point where there is a mutual understanding of what can be done, what cannot be done, and what the relative risks are. As Lord Reed and Lord Kerr point out, barraging a patient with statistics will not fulfil the duty now clear; nor will pointing to a signature on a consent form.

      The great advantage of consensual medicine, in which the patient truly understands the risks and makes the choice, is that it will reduce litigation: the patient who truly chooses, and takes a risk, can hardly complain that the surgery went wrong for that reason. On the other hand a physician concealing or failing to advise of a risk will be exposed to criticism.

      I am not as a lawyer ignorant of the challenges to medicine: I lecture regularly to one of the Royal Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons on consent (although my lecture notes now require hefty rewriting). A recurrent theme for them is lack of time and resources – patients being “consented” [a phrase I deplore as it reduces it to a form signing exercise] some weeks prior to the surgery and by another doctor. What of the patient who is having second thoughts? How does the operator know what was discussed? Tales of doctors “consenting” for anaesthesia when they are not experts in that field? But the recurrent complaint is “I don’t have the time allocated to me to enter into a chat with the patient”.

      There are challenges ahead for the doctors and lawyers. There are no right answers, only wrong ones and those that may be right. I suspect that lack of consent cases will be those that “you know it when you see it” and in reality by the law of averages the tiny risks of slight harm will never end up in court at all. Lord Neuberger in the course of discussion pointed out the (with respect fairly obvious) point that a 1% risk of earache for an hour is very different to a 1% chance of risk of death. The former may not be that important; but the latter of course it is. But how many would litigate over the former, if not advised of the risk? De minimis non curat lex.

      Andrew Smith QC
      Compass Chambers, Scotland and Crown Office Chambers, London.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the UKHRB


This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe

Categories


Tags


#50cases #catgate #fighthatewithhumanrights #lawblogs 7/7 7/7 bombing 7/7 inquest 7/7 inquests 9/11 100 years of women in law 1688 bill of rights 2010 General Election 2012 in review 2012 year in review 2017 @Iamspartacus a1p1 a1p1 breach A1P1 damages Aarhus Aarhus Convention A B and C abbas hall Abid Naseer ablyazov abortion Absent Witness Abu Hamza abu qatada abuse of dominant position abuse of private information abuse of process academic freedom access to courts access to information Access to justice accountability acoustic shock acquired disorder AC v Berkshire Addison Lee Adetoro v United Kingdom adjudication administrative law admissability criteria adoption adoption orders advance decision advance directive advertisements advertising affirmative action Afghanistan age assessment agency age of criminal responsibility aggravated damages agreement Agriculture Ahava Ahmad Faraz Khan AI air noise air pollution air quality air travel Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi Alan Turing ALBA alcohol dependence algorithm algorithms Alien Tort Statute alignment problem Al Jedda allergy allocation of resources Al Qaeda Al Quaeda Al Rawi Al Skeini alternative medicine alternative therapy altruism American Declaration of Independence Amnesty International Amnesty International 2010 Report amphibians amusement parks ancillary relief Andy Coulson animal cruelty animal culls animal rights Animals animal welfare anonymising anonymity anonymous website anorexia nervosa an rights Ansari ANS v ML [2012] UKSC 30 anti-blasphemy laws anti-discriminatiom anti-semitism anti-terrorism review anti-terrorist legislation antibody antiretrovirals anxious scrutiny AONB A P Herbert appeal Appeals archeology Arctic charr Arhuus Convention Armed forces army arrest Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 article 3 UNCRC article 5 Article 5 ECHR article 5(3) Article 6 article 6 criminal Article 6(3) Article 8 Article 8 claim against council Article 8 protection of privacy Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 Article 50 article 263 TFEU artificial hydration and nutrition Artificial Intelligence artificial nutrition and hydration Artile 8 asbestosis Assange Assange extradition assisted reproduction assisted suicide assisting suicide associated newspapers asylum asylum amnesty asylum claim asylum law asylum seeker asylum seeker death driver asylum seekers ATE premiums atheism Atul Gawande audio Australia australian constitution autism autonomy axel springer axel springer ag ayslum Azelle Rodney babar ahmad baby Baby P badger cull badgers Badger Trust bad judges bad tackle Baha Mousa Public Inquiry Bahta & Ors bail BAILII bailout Balen Report ban bankers bonuses Bank Mellat baptism barclay brothers barristers bats' rights battlefield BBC beaches bedroom tax beijing belief benefit cap benefits bereavement damages best interests big business bike training service bilateral trade treaty bill of right Bill of Rights Bill of rights commission Bingham Rule of Law Centre Binyam Mohamed bioethics biology biomedicine biometric data biotechnology bipolar disorder birds directive birmingham birth certificate births deaths and marriages BJ (INCAPACITATED ADULT) sub nom SALFORD CITY COUNCIL v BJ Black & Morgan v. Wilkinson blawg blawg review blight blogging blogosphere blogs blood Bloody Sunday Bloody Sunday findings BNP boaters boats Body scanners Boris Johnson bovine TB bradley manning BRCA BRCA gene BRCA mutation breach of Article 6 breach of Article 6(1) breach of confidence breast cancer brevet brexit Brian Haw bribery Bribery Act 2010 Brighton Conference Brighton Declaration British Airways British Airways v Unite British Bill of Rights British Chiropractic Association British citizenship British constitution British embassy british lawyers British soldiers Broadmoor bronze soldier brownlie browsing BSkyB BUCKLAND v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 40060/08 - HEJUD Buddhism budget Bull v Hall burkha Burnham Market Book Festival Cadder Cafcass Canada canal cancellation cancer CAP capacity carbon capture cardio-pulmonary resuscitation Care and Support Bill care home care home; elderly people; dementia; capacity; deprivation of liberty care homes care order Care orders care proceedings car insurance carnivores Carson v UK case law Case Note Catholic Care Catholic Church catholic midwives CBI CCTV cerebral palsy CETA CFAs chagos Chagos Islanders charitable objects charity Charity Commission Charles J read judgment Simon Lewis Charlie Hebdo charter Charter of Fundamental Rights chemotherapy chief coroner child child's best interests child abduction child poverty Child Poverty Action Group child protection Children children's homes children's rights Children Act children giving evidence child welfare chimpanzees China Chindamo Chris Grayling Chris Packham Christian christianity church church of scientology CIA circumcision citizens advice bureau citizenship citizens rights civil liberties civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships civil proceedings civl partnerships CJEU CJEU rule of law class of degree client earth climate change climate change sceptic climategate climate research unit clinical need clinical negligence cloning closed material procedure Closed Material Procedures Coalition agreement Coalition Government Code Civile code of conduct Coercive and controlling behaviour cohabitees cold calling Cologne combat immunity comments comment thread commission Commission for Equality & Human Rights Commission on a Bill of Rights common buzzard common law common law rights communications Communications Act 2003 communications data Communications Data Bill 2008 Compassion in World Farming compelementary medicine compensation competition complementary medicine compulsory detention compulsory labour computer hacking computer science concentration camps conditional fee agreements conditions Confederation of British Industry confidentiality confiscation order conscience conscience clause conscientious objection consent conservation Conservative Party Conservatives constitution constitutional court of south africa constitutional disorder construction consultation consultation responses contact order contact point contempt of court contempt of court act content neutrality content providers contingency fee arrangements contract control and restraint Control orders Convention system of protection Conway cookies copying Copyright copyright infringement cornrows coronavirus coroner Coroner's inquest coroners Coroners and Justice Act 2009 corporal punishment cosmetics testing costs Costs and Procedure costs budgets council Council of Europe Counter Terrorism and Security Bill cour de cassation court Court of Justice of the European Union Court of Protection Court of Session Court Orders court procedure Courts Bill Courts Martial Covent Garden Coventry Council CPR gateway CPS CRB challenge credibiility] credibility cricket crime crimes against humanity Criminal criminal conviction Criminal Courts Charge criminal justice Criminal Justice and Courts Bill criminal law Criminal Legal Aid criminal prosecution criminal records criminal responsibility criminal sentencing Cross Examination Crown Prosecution Service crr crucifix cryonic preservation custody custody dispute cuts Cybersecurity D daily mail Daily Mirror Dajid Singh Shergill Dale Farm evictions damage Damages dangerous nonsense database data controller data processing data protection data retention data sharing data snooping date rape david cameron David Chaytor David James David Kelly David Miranda day care closures death death match death penalty Debbie Purdy declaration declaration of incompatibility defamation Defamation Act Defamation Bill defaming the dead defence of illegality defendant's costs order deficit defmation DEFRA delegated legislation democracy Democracy village demolition order demotion Dennis Gill dentist's registration fees Department of Health deportation deportation cases deprivation of liberty deprivation of property derogations Detainee inquiry Detention determinism devolution devolved government Dewani diagnosis Diane Pretty Dica diego garcia Digital Economy Act 2010 Digital Economy Bill Dignitas dignity Dignity in Dying diplomacy diplomatic immunity direct action Directive direct marketing director of public prosecutions disability Disability-related harassment disabled claimants disciplinary hearing disclosure Disclosure of Previous Convictions discretionary leave to remain discretion to quash Discrimination Discrimination law disease dismissal disqualification dissenting judges Divisional Court divorce DNA DNA database DNA home-testing DNA retention DNA testing doctor doctor-patient relationship doctors doctrine of double effect doctrine of state act does it matter? domestic violence domestic workers Dominic Grieve don't ask don't ask don't tell don't tell donor Do Not Resuscitate Notices Doogan and Wood do trees have rights? double conviction DPP guidelines Dr Chhabra dripa driving licence driving penalty Drones Drone strikes drug dealer damages drug offence Dr Zakir Naik Dublin Convention Dublin II Dublin III regulation Dublin II Regulation Dublin Regulation Dudko duties duty of care duty to investigate duty to rescue eastenders eating horses ECHR economic and social rights economic loss economic rights ECtHR Ed Snowden Education Edward Snowden EHRC elderly election election court election results Electoral Commission report Electoral law electric cars electricity Elizabeth Warren ellie butler el masri embryo embryonic stem cells embryos emergency budget emissions trading employers Employment employment appeal tribunal employment disputes employment law employment rights Employment Tribunal fees employment tribunals employment vetting English Defence Leauge English translation enhanced criminal record checks entitlement Environment environmental challenges environmental impact assessment environmental information environmental justice Environmental law environmental law foundation environmental liability directive environmental protection environmental rights environment brexit Envrionmental Information Directive epa endangerment finding eployment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Equality and Human Rights Commission Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister & Ors [2011] EWHC 2401 (Admin) - equality of arms equal marriage equal marriage consultation equal treatment erika espionage ethics EU eu and strasbourg EU Charter EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms eu commission EU competence eu costs eu courts EU criminal Law opt out eu documents eu law Europe european european arrest warrant European Charter European Charter of Fundamental Rights European Charter of Fundamental Rigths European Commission European Communities Act European Convention European Convention on Human Rights European Court European Court of European Court of Human Rights European Court of Human Rights reform European Court of Justice european disability forum European law European Sanctions Blog European Social Charter european union Eurozone EUSFTA eu state liability euthanasia EU transparency EU Turkey summit EU waste directive eviction evidence evidence-based medicine Evidence-based policy evidence of torture evironmental assessment evolution ex-pats exceptional case funding exceptionality excessive taxes exclusion exclusion order executions exhaustion of domestic remedies expenses expenses scandal expert evidence Expert evidence on foreign law Express extinct extinction rebellion extra-jurisdictional reach of ECHR extra-territoriality extradition extradition act extradition procedures extradition review extraordinary rendition Eyjafjallajökull volcano Facebook Facebook contempt facial recognition factitious disorder factory farming fair procedures Fair Trial faith courts fake news false imprisonment false passport Families Need Fathers Family Family Court family courts Family Courts without a Lawyer: A Handbook for Litigants in Person family division Family Justice Review family law family legal aid Family life farage farm farm animals farming fast-track removal fatal accidents act fathers fathers rights feature fertility treatment FGM finance Financial Conduct Authority financial dependency financial harm financial information Financial Services Authority Firat Dink First Amendment first publishers fisheries fishing claims fishing industry fishing quota fishing rights fitness to practise Flood v The Times Flood v Times foetus foia food banks forced marriage force feeding foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy forensic science format shifting Fourteenth Amendment fracking France francovich freedom freedom of assembly Freedom of Association freedom of conscience Freedom of Expression freedom of information Freedom of Information Act 2000 freedom of movement freedom of speech freedom of the press free expression Freemen of the land free movement of goods free speech free will freezing assets French schools FTP fundamental rights Funeral pyre Future of legal blogging G (Children) G4S G20 protest Gabrielle Giffords Gaddafi regime gainsborough game birds Gamu Nhengu gangbo gang injunctions Garry Mann gary dobson Gary McFarlane gay couple gay discrimination Gay marriage gay rights gay soldiers Gaza Gaza conflict gazza GCHQ gdpr GE 2017 gearbox Gender gender reassignment General Dental Council General Duty General Election general election 2010 general election 2019 General Medical Council genes genetic affinity genetic discrimination genetic disorder genetic engineering genetic information Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act genetic modification genetics genetic testing Geneva Convention genome genome sequencing Geoff Hoon George Osborne German Chancellor German court Germany germ line mutation Ghailani GlaxoSmithKlein gmc Goldman Sachs golf course Google government governmental bodies GP privacy grayling consultation Great Repeal Bill green belt grenfell Gresham College grooming gross offence Guantanamo Bay Guardian News and Media Ltd guernsey G v E & Ors G v E & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 939 gwyneth paltrow gypsies H1N1 habeas corpus habitats Habitats Directive habitats protection hackgate Halsbury's Law Exchange hammerton v uk hancock Haney happy new year harassment Hardeep Singh Haringey Council haringey council tax benefit Harkins and Edwards hate speech Health healthcare health insurance hearing loss Heathrow heist heightened scrutiny Henry VII Henry VIII herd immunity hereditary disorder High Court of Justiciary high speed train route Hindu Hirst No. 2 Hirst v UK HIV HJ Iran HM (Iraq) v The Secretary of state for the home department [2010] EWCA Civ 1322 Holder holkham beach holocaust home homelessness Home Office Home Office v Tariq homeopathy Homo Deus homophobia homo sapiens homosexual hooding horisontality horizontal application horizontal effect horsemeat hospitals Hounslow v Powell House of Commons Housing housing benefit housing benefits Howard Donald Howard League for Penal Reform how judges decide cases hra damages claim HRA incorporation Hrant Dink HRLA HS2 hs2 challenge hts http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2011/04/11/us-state-department-reports-on-uk-human-rights/ human being human dignity Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority human genome humanism human rights Human Rights Act Human Rights Act 1998 human rights advocacy Human rights and the UK constitution human rights commission human rights conventions human rights damages Human Rights Day human rights decisions Human Rights Information Project human rights in private disputes human rights news human rights record Human Rights Watch human right to education Human Tissue Act human trafficking hung parliament hunting Huntington's Chorea Huntington's Disease HXA hyper injunctions Ian McEwan ICAO Igor Sutyagin illegal immigration illegality illegality defence illegitimacy image rights imaginary litigation immigration Immigration/Extradition Immigration Act 2014 immigration appeals immigration detention immigration judge immigration rules immunity Imports incorporation HRA increase of sanction indefinite leave to remain indian advocates indian supreme court indirect discrimination Indonesia Industrial Action informed consent Infrastructure Planning Committee inherent jurisdiction inherited disease Inhuman and degrading treatment injunction injunction continued inland revenue Inquest inquest law Inquests inquiry insanity inshore fleet insult insurance insurmountable obstacles intellectual property intelligence intelligence services act intensive care intercept evidence interception interests of the child interim remedies international international comity international conflict international court of justice international criminal court international humanitarian law international human rights international human rights law International Labour Organisation international law International Stem Cell Corporation international treaty obligations internet internet libel internet service providers internment internship interrogation intrusion inuit invasive species invention investigation investigative duty in vitro fertilisation Iran iranian bank sanctions Iranian nuclear program iran sanctions Iraq Iraqi asylum seeker Iraq War Ireland Irish Constitution irrationality ISC ISIL islam isolated nucleic acids isolation Israel israeli palestinian conflict italian ships Italy iTunes IVF ivory ban Jack Dorsey jackson reforms Janowiec and Others v Russia ( Japan japanese knotweed Jason Smith jean charles de menezes Jeet Singh Jefferies jehovah's witnesses Jeremy Clarkson Jeremy Corbyn jeremy hunt jihad Jihadi brides jihadists JIH identity jim duffy job jobseekers' allowance Jogee John Hemming John Terry joint enterprise joint tenancy jonathan sumption Jon Guant Joseph v Spiller journalism judaism judges Judges and Juries judging judgment judgment in default Judicial activism judicial brevity judicial deference Judicial immunity judicial no-mans land judicial oversight judicial power judicial review Judicial Review reform Judicial Studies Board judiciary Julian Assange Julian Asssange Juncker jurisdiction jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Act Justice and Security Bill Justice and Security Green Paper Justice Cameron Justice Human Rights Awards JUSTICE Human Rights Awards 2010 justiciability justification just satisfaction Kant Katyn Massacre Kay v Lambeth Kay v UK kazakstan Ken Clarke Ken Pease Kerry McCarthy Kettling Khan v Advocate General for Scotland khordokovsky Kings College Kiobel Klimas koran burning laboratory animals laboratory test Labour labour law lack of reasons Lady Hale land landfill gas landowner landowners language lansley NHS reforms LASPO Law Commission Law Pod UK Law Society Law Society of Scotland leave to enter leave to remain Lee Rigby legal advice privilege legal aid legal aid cuts Legal Aid desert Legal Aid Reforms legal blogs Legal Certainty legality legal naughty step Legal Ombudsman legal privilege legal profession legal professional privilege legal representation legitimate expectation let as a dwelling Leveson Inquiry Levi Bellfield lewisham hospital closure Lewis Malcolm Calver liability Libel libel reform Liberal Democrat Conference Liberal Democrats liberal humanism Liberty libraries closure library closures licence conditions licence to shoot licensee life insurance life orders life sentence life support limestone pavements limitation lisbon treaty Lithuania litigant in person litvinenko live exports livestock livestock trade living instrument living will LME local authorities local government locked in syndrome locus standi london borough of merton London Legal Walk London Probation Trust Lord Bingham Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Blair Lord Carey Lord Goldsmith lord irvine Lord Judge Lord Judge speech Lord Justice Jackson Lord Kerr Lord Lester Lord Mance Lord Neuberger Lord Phillips Lord Rodger Lord Sales Lord Saville Report Lord Sumption Lord Taylor LSC tender luftur rahman machine learning MAGA Magna Carta Magna Carter Mail Online mail on sunday Majority Verdict Malcolm Kennedy male circumcision malice malicious falsehood mandela M and Others v Her Majesty’s Treasury manifestation of belief manifestos Margaret Thatcher Margin of Appreciation margin of discretion Maria Gallastegui Marie Colvin marine conservation marine environmental law marine sanctuaries Mark Kennedy mark twain marriage marriage act 1949 material support maternity pay Matthew Woods Mattu v The University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust [2011] EWHC 2068 (QB) Maya the Cat Mba v London Borough Of Merton Mcfarlane McKenzie friend me/cfs research Media and Censorship media judge Medical medical confidentiality medical ethics medical evidence medical liability medical negligence medical profession medical qualifications medical records medical treatment medicine mental capacity mental capacity; press; reporting restrictions Mental Capacity Act Mental Capacity Act 2005 Mental Health mental health act mental health advocacy mental health awareness Mental Health Courts mental health hospital Mental illness merits review mesothelioma metgate MGN v UK michael gove Middle Temple Midwives Milly Dowler minimally conscious minimum income minimum sentence Ministerial Code Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice cuts miscarriage of justice misfeasance in public office missiles misuse of private information mitochondrial disease MMR MMR vaccination modern slavery Mohamed monitoring powers monsanto montgomery mooring moral circle morality morocco mortgage fraud mortuaries motherhood motor neuron disease Motor Neurone disease Moulton Mousa movement for democratic change MP expenses Mr Brewer Mr Gul Mr Justice Eady Mr Justice Sharp MS (Palestinian Territories) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Munchausen Munchausen by proxy murder murder reform music Musician's Union Muslim mustafa kamal mutation mutations myanmar MY Cannis my kingdom for a horse Myriad NADA v. SWITZERLAND - 10593/08 - HEJUD [2012] ECHR 1691 Nadja Benaissa naked rambler Naomi Campbell narcolepsy National Health Act nationality National Origin National Pro Bono Week national security national sovereignty Natural England natural rights nature nature conservation naturism Nazi neanderthals necessary implication need for legal aid needs assessment negligence neighbour dispute Neuberger neural degeneration neurogenerative disease neuroscience Newcastle university news News of the World news roundup new Supreme Court President NGO standing NHS NHS Risk Register NICE Nick Clegg Nicklinson Niqaab niqab No Angels Noise Regulations 2005 non-justiciability nonhuman animals non voluntary euthanasia Northern Ireland Northern Irish Assembly notification requirements nuclear challenges nuisance nurse nursing nursing home obiter dicta Occupy London offensive jokes Offensive Speech offensive t shirt official solicitor of Rights Commission oil and gas oil spill olympics open justice oppress oppressive treatment OPQ v BJM orchestra orthodox schools Osama Bin Laden Osborn v The Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61 ouster clause overseas aid Oxford University Palestinian Territories palliative care palliative sedation paramount consideration paramountcy principle parental responsibility order parental rights parenthood parents responsibility parking spaces parliament parliamentary expenses parliamentary expenses scandal Parliamentary sovereignty Parliament square parole parole board party funding passengers rights passing off passive smoking passport passport seizure pastor Terry Jones patent patents paternity Pathway Students patiets' rights Patrick Quinn murder Paul Chambers PCOs peace-keeping operations Pensions people for the ethical treatment of animals (Peta) performers' rights permanent injunction persecution persistent vegetative state personal data personal information Personal Injury personality rights Personal life perversity Pet Animals Act 1951 Peter and Hazelmary Bull Peter Gibson pet shops PF and EF v UK Philip Lawrence Phil Woolas phone hacking phone taps photos photovoltaics physical and mental disabilities physical restraint physician assisted death Pinnock Piracy PJS placement order planning planning human rights planning system planning time limits plantagenet plebgate pleural plaques POCA podcast points poison Poland Police police investigations police liability police misconduct police powers police surveillance policing Policy Exchange report political advertising political judges political persecution politicians for hire Politics Politics/Public Order pollution polonium poor reporting Pope Pope's visit Pope Benedict porsche 917 portal possession order possession proceedings post mortem Posts power of attorney PoW letters to ministers pre-nup pre-nuptial Pre-trial detention predator control pregnancy preliminary reference prerogative powers press Press Association press briefing press freedom Priest priests primary legislation Prince Andrew Prince Charles prince of wales princess caroline of monaco principle of subsidiarity prior restraint prison Prisoners prisoners rights prisoners voting prisoner vote prisoner votes prisoner voting prison numbers prison rules Prisons prison vote privacy privacy injunction privacy law through the front door private disputes Private life private nuisance private use procedural unfairness Procedure proceeds of crime Professional Discipline professional indemnity Professional life Property property rights proportionality prosecution Protection of Freedoms Act Protection of Freedoms Bill protective costs Protest protest camp protest rights Protocol 15 psychiatric hospitals psychology psychotherapy Public/Private public access publication public authorities public authority public bodies Public Bodies Bill public figure public funding public inquiries public inquiry public interest public interest environmental litigation public interest immunity public interest litigation publicity public law unfairness Public Order public powers public procurement Public Sector Equality Duty Public Services Ombudsman Putin putting the past behind quango quantum quarantine Queen's Speech queer in the 21st century R (on the application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 472 R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 R (on the application of) v The General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 2839 (Admin) R (on the application of EH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 2569 (Admin) R (on the application of G) v The Governors of X School Rabone Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2 Race race relations Rachel Corrie racial discrimination Racial equality radio radiotherapy Radmacher Raed Salah Mahajna Raed Saleh Ramsgate randomised controlled trial rape rape case raptors Ratcliffe 6 Ratcliffe on Soar Ratcliffe power station rating rationality rcs RCW v A Local Authority reasonableness reasons reasons challenges recent case law and news Recent posts reception conditions recognition of judgments recreational rights Redfearn v UK referendum reform refugee applications refugee crisis refugee status refusal of treatment Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages registration regulatory rehabilitation of offenders Reith Lectures Re J (A Child: Disclosure) [2012] EWCA Civ 1204 relgious freedom Religion religion in the courts religious beliefs religious discrimination religious freedom religious prosecution remedies renewables subsidies rent repeal reporting restrictions representation reproductive rights reproductive technologies reproductive wrongs rescue rescuer's claim resettlement of offenders resource allocation respect for family life responsibility in tort restrictions on exports restrictions on liberty results 2010 resuscitation retrospective application of the Human Rights Act retrospective legislation retrospective penalty retrospectivity rev paul nicholson reynolds Reynolds defence Re [2012] EWCA Civ 1233 richard III Richard O'Dwyer right of appeal rightsifno RightsInfo rights of children Right to a fair hearing right to a fair trial right to a home right to a remedy right to artistic expression right to a student loan right to autonomy right to autonomy and privacy right to die right to dies right to die with dignity right to dignity right to education right to expression right to family life right to food right to free enjoyment of possessions right to information right to liberty right to life right to peaceful enjoyment of property Right to Privacy right to private and family life right to refuse treatment right to respect for private life right to silence right to strike right to swim right to truth right to vote Rihanna Rio Ferdinand riots ripa rise of fascism risk risk assessment rival supermarkets Roma Roman Catholic Roman Catholic Church roman catholic schools Romania Rooney's Gold roundup roundup ready Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust royal dutch petroleum royal name Royal Oper House Royal Prerogative rule of law Rupert Jackson Rusal Russia russia and human rights Russian Federal Security Service Rutherford Ryanair s sadie frost Safari same-sex same sex parents same sex partnerships same sex relationship sanctions set aside sanctity of life Sandiford Sapiens Sarah Ferguson sark satire saudi arabia Savage (Respondent) v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Saville Report schedule 7 schizophrenia school building school surveillance schrems science scientific atheism scientific research scientology Scoppola Scotland Scotland Act Scotland Act 1998 Scotland Bill Scottish Government Scottish Human Rights Commission scottish landlord and tenant Scottish Parliament SCOTUS sea fishing seals Seal v UK search engines search powers secondary legislation secondary smoking secrecy Secretary of State Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP secret courts secret criminal trial secret evidence secret justice Secret trials sectarianism secularism security security cameras security services security vetting Sedar Mohammed segregation Select Committee on AI self-defence self-incrimination seminar sentencing September 11 serco serious harm sermon Seroxat service outside jurisdiction set-off Sewel Convention sex abuse sex ban sex ban low IQ sex offender Sex offenders sex register sexual abuse Sexual Offences sexual orientation sexual orientation regulations SFO investigation sfo unlawfulness shaker aamer Shamima Begum sham marriage shared residence order Sharon Shoesmith shetland shipping shipwreck Shirley Chaplin shooting shoulder shrug should trees have rights SIAC sihkism Simon Singh sir alan ward Sir Nicholas Wall Sir Peter six months rule slander slaughterhouses slavery smacking small claims court small solar Smith Smith & Ors v The Ministry of Defence [2012] EWCA Civ 1365 smog smoking ban Snyder v Phelps social and economic rights social benefits social housing socialite social media social security law social welfare social workers Solicitorsfromhell website solitary confinement soma somali pirates sources South Africa south african constitution sovereignty Sovereignty clause soviet union soybean Spanish properties spare room subsidy special advocate special advocates species specific performance spending cuts spielmann squatters Standing standing rules starvation state immunity statelessness statute statutory power Statutory purpose stay of execution stem cell research stem cells stem cell therapy Stephen Gough stephen sedley stepping hill hospital Sterilisation steve macqueen Steven Neary stobart-law stop and search stop powers Stormont Assembly storms Strasborug Strasbourg Strasbourg Court strasbourg damages pirates strasbourg law Strasbourg terminology strategic environmental assessment strike strike out Strikes student loans sturgeon subsidies Sugar v BBC suicide suicide act 1961 super injunction super injunctions supermax prisons superstition Supreme Court Supreme Court Live Supreme Court of Canada Supreme Court Scotland surgery surrogacy surrogacy arrangement surveillance swine flu Syria systemic violence Take That tallinn tariff Taser Tax tax avoidance tax discrimination tchenguiz technology Telegraph telephone preference service television justice tenancy tent city termination termination of pregnancy terror asset freezing Terrorism terrorism act terrorism act 2000 terrorism legislation terrorism prosecution terrorist finance terrorist threat terry pratchett Tesla testamentary dispositions The Bike Project the Catholic church The Corner House theism The Law in These Parts therapy Theresa May the right to privacy The Stig The Sun third countries third party appeals three way case time limits time limits in human rights Tobacco tobacco cartels Top Gear tort Torture torture inquiry totally without merit TPIM TPP tracking trade trade secrets trades unions trade union congress Trade Unions transexual transsexual transsexuals travel travellers travel restrictions treason treatment treaty treaty accession trial by jury trolling TTIP TTM v London Borough of Hackney & Ors Tugendhat tumour Turkey tweeting in court Twitter twitter in court Twitter Joke Trial UK UK citizenship uk constitution UK election UK Human Rights Blog UK Human Rights Roundup UKIP UK Jewish Film Festival ukraine UK Supreme Court UK Uncut ultra orthodox jews ultra vires UN unable to vote unacceptable behaviour policy unaccompanied minors unborn child UN Convention on the Rights of the Child unelected judges unemployment unfair consultation unfair dismissal unfairness at hearing Unison Unite United Against Fascism Group United Kingdom United Nations United States United States v Windsor universal declaration of human rights universal jurisdiction Universal Periodic Review University University Fees university of east anglia University of Southampton unjust and oppressive unlawful arrest unlawful detention unpaid work schemes UN Resolution unsolicited calls UPR US aviation US Constitution use as of right US Supreme Court vaccination Valkyries variants veganism vehicle breakdown vetting and barring vicarious liability victim victim status Victoria Climbie victorian charter Vienna airport vigilantism villagisation vinton cerf violence violist visa scheme vivisection voluntary euthanasia Volunteers voter compensation voters compensation voting voting compensation vulnerable Wagner Wakefield Wales War war correspondents ward of court War Horse water utilities Watts Wayne Rooney Websites welfare of child welfare of children welfare of the child welfare state welsh bill western sahara whaling What would happen if the UK withdrew from the European Court of Human Rights whimbrel whisky Whistleblowing WHO who is JIH whole gene sequencing whole life orders whorship Wikileaked cable Wikileaks wiklleaks Wild Law wildlife Wildlife and Countryside Act will William Hague William Marbury wills wind farms wind turbine Winterbourne View witchcraft withdrawal of treatment wolves women's rights Woolas worboys Workers working time directive wrongful birth wrongful conception wrongful life WTO wuhan X AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA - 19010/07 - HEJUD [2013] ECHR 148 X Factor XX v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 742 X Y and Z v UK Yemshaw Yildirim v Turkey Your freedom website YouTube yukos Yuval Noah Hariri Zakir Naik Zanu-PF Zero Hours Contracts ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Zimbabwe Zimbabwe farm invasions ZN (Afghanistan) (FC) and others ZZ [2015] CSIH 29 [2015] CSOH 168 £750

Disclaimer


This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.

%d bloggers like this: