The Weekly Round-Up: Lockdown Again (Again)

5 January 2021 by

In the News:

So: here we are again.

Rampant spread, fuelled by a combination of a new variant that is around 50-70% more transmissible, plus a lifting of restrictions at the beginning of December, brings us into another national lockdown.

In many ways, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s first address of 2021 felt unpleasantly like a return to early 2020.

The original “Stay Home” messaging made a comeback. The Prime Minister was deliberately vague about how long lockdown would last. Big Brother Watch criticised the  government for “yet again … evading the democratic process” by denying MPs a meaningful vote on the new national restrictions prior to their televised announcement to the nation, or their coming into force. The new guidance differs from the Tier 4 guidance in emphasis, if not substance.

Ever the optimist, the Prime Minister was keen to emphasise “one huge difference” between this lockdown and the first one: the UK is “rolling out the biggest vaccination programme in its history”. He also managed to get in a jab at the UK having delivered more vaccines than the rest of Europe combined.

There were other, more subtle differences, as No. 10 tweaked its messaging in light of past mistakes.

After disturbing figures indicating that domestic abuse during 2020 was a “pandemic within a pandemic”, the Prime Minister was clear that people could leave their homes “to escape domestic abuse”, among other essential reasons.

After footballer Marcus Rashford helped force the government into a U-turn on school meals last year, the Prime Minister explicitly referenced free school meal extension during his speech.

Speaking to the FT yesterday, Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust and a pandemic adviser, highlighted differences which the government was slow to accept in the period after Christmas. The number of people in hospital with Covid-19 is already higher than the April peak. Many healthcare workers are sick, isolating or exhausted. The time of year is working against us.

So: here we are again. Even if the Prime Minister manages to deliver on his projected timeline for the vaccine, for the next two months at least, we haven’t seen the back of 2020 yet.

In Other News:

  • Today, the long-awaited Domestic Abuse Bill reaches its final stage in the House of Lords. If all goes to plan, the bill will create the role of domestic abuse commissioner for England and Wales, and Nicole Jacobs will become the first person in that role.
  • The Guardian has reported that the use of force against prison inmates has doubled over the past decade. According to data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, force was used 59.1 times per 100 inmates in the year from April 2019. The last such figures, published in 2011-12, showed force used about 27 times per 100 prisoners.
  • The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy reintroduced a policy of publishing a list of companies who paid staff wages which illegally fell below the national minimum. The list included Tesco, which is the UK’s largest private employer; Pizza Hut; and a hotel group owned by Sir Jim Ratcliffe, former owner of the Hotel du Vin chin and chairman of Soho House.

In the Courts:

  • United States Of America v Assange [2021] EW Misc 1: District Judge Vanessa Baritser blocked the extradition of Julian Assange to the US to stand trial on one charge of computer hacking and 17 charges of violating the US’s 1917 Espionage Act. She did not accept that the extradition would be violate Mr Assange’s human rights, or that extradition was barred by the passage of time under s82 of the Extradition Act 2003. However, due to Mr Assange’s suicidal mental state, his extradition would be unjust or oppressive under s91 of the EA 2003. Baraitser quickly came under fire for delivering “the right decision, but for the wrong reason”, and it was argued that she should have framed her decision as a criticism of US atrocities and a defence of whistle-blowers and the free press.
  • S (A Child) v TikTok Inc. & Ors [2020] EWHC 3589 (QB): Mr Justice Warby granted a pre-action application for permission to issue proceedings under a pseudonym on behalf of a 12-year-old child intending to bring a claim for breach of privacy against the social media platform TikTok. The child’s intention, through the Children’s Commissioner, is to bring a representative action pursuant to CPR 19.6 on behalf of other young users. This approach was clearly inspired by a case Warby J dismissed at first instance, now pending in the Supreme Court: a representative action against Google on behalf of a class of 4 million Apple iPhone users.


  1. Alethea Redfern says:

    Thanks for flagging this, David.

  2. David Lamming says:

    Re S (A Child) v TikTok Inc, the is wrong and link needs changing: clicking on the case name opens up the BAILII report of Norfolk CC v Durrant [2020] EWHC 3590 (QB)

    1. hrupdateadmin says:

      Thank you for flagging this up and corrected to the correct link on BAILII.

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.




Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals Anne Sacoolas anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 article 263 TFEU Artificial Intelligence Asbestos Assange assisted suicide asylum asylum seekers Australia autism badgers benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board care homes Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Commission on a Bill of Rights common law communications competition confidentiality consent conservation constitution contact order contact tracing contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus coronavirus act 2020 costs costs budgets Court of Protection covid crime criminal law Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation DEFRA deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention Dignitas diplomacy diplomatic relations disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights European Court of Justice evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Facebook Facial Recognition Family Fatal Accidents Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage gay rights Gaza Gender genetics Germany Google Grenfell Gun Control hague convention Harry Dunn Health HIV home office Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Human Rights Watch Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests insurance international law internet inuit Iran Iraq Ireland islam Israel Italy IVF ivory ban Japan joint enterprise judaism judicial review Judicial Review reform Julian Assange jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid legal aid cuts Leveson Inquiry lgbtq liability Libel Liberty Libya lisbon treaty Lithuania local authorities marriage Media and Censorship mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery morocco murder music Muslim nationality national security naturism neuroscience NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance Obituary ouster clauses parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury physician assisted death Piracy Plagiarism planning planning system Poland Police Politics Pope press prison Prisoners prisoner votes Prisons privacy procurement Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecutions prostituton Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries quarantine Radicalisation refugee rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania round-up Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials sexual offence shamima begum Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance sweatshops Syria Tax technology Terrorism The Round Up tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal credit universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Weekly Round-up Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wildlife wind farms WomenInLaw Worboys wrongful birth YearInReview Zimbabwe


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: