The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 introduced significant changes to sentencing law and came into force on 14 July 2008. Consequently, anyone falling to be sentenced after that date will be dealt with under the new regime. As a result, where an adult Defendant is convicted of a serious offence and the Court is satisfied that the Defendant is dangerous but a life sentence is either not available or not justified, a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection, and Extended Sentence or any other lawful sentence may be imposed.

The Criminal Justice Act 2003, along with many other concepts, swept in a plethora of new sentencing provisions. Amongst the most controversial are those relating to offenders sentenced to indeterminate prison sentences, either life or those sentenced to imprisonment for public protection (IPP).

Practitioners with clients facing long term care placements will have read the recent decision in Chantelle Peters (by her litigation friend, Susan Mary Miles) v East Midlands Strategic Health Authority and Others [2008] EWHC 778 (QB). One of the many interesting points considered in the judgement was the feasibility of the undertaking offered by the litigation friend to prevent the Claimant seeking to recover the cost of a privately funded placement but post judgment

The Court of Appeal has recently given us a further reminder that the label given to an agreement between a ‘licensor’ and a ‘licensee’ will not alter the legal implications of the agreement which has been reached. This is even if the written express intentions of the parties (both of whom were legally represented) were such as to exclude the statutory consequences of such an agreement. (Mansfield District Council –v- Langridge [2008] EWCA Civ 264)

Those of us who are regularly confronted with clients who ask for advice but are unwilling to accept that their position is without merit, will be relieved to hear that the EAT has decided that wasted costs should not be awarded against us. (Ratcliffe Duce and Gammer v Binns UKEAT 0100/08).

Criminal practitioners should be aware of what are yet more new offences which are brought in by the Government under the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008; the phased introduction of which began on 9th June 2008 which included s.26 (relating to the release of prisoners sentenced for offences committed prior to 4 April 2005 (subject to release under the CJA 1991)).

Mr and Mrs Crossley were married in January 2006. The couple had brought substantial wealth to the marriage; the husband’s wealth was estimated at £45m and the wife’s at £18m. They entered into a pre-nuptial agreement that stated that both parties would walk away from the marriage with what they had brought into it.

The Children and Adoption Act 2006 makes provision (amongst others) as regards contact with children, enforcing contact orders and greater involvement by CAFCASS post-order. The CAA 2006 follows the recommendation as set out in the July 2004 Green Paper Parental Separation: Children’s Needs and Parents’ Responsibilities and the follow up report Next Steps.

For many years, claims brought by claimants who have developed pleural plaques have been settled by insurance companies on the basis that pleural plaques constitute an ‘actionable’ injury.

The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 (DVCVA) makes significant changes to Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA). Most importantly, the definitions of ‘associated persons’ and ‘cohabitants’ are widened and the breach of a non-molestation order is criminalised.

What do you say when asked this by The Right Honorable Lord Justice Thomas in the case of G v Llanelli Magistrates Youth Court in the Divisional Court [2006] EWHC 1413 (Admin) (Co/1453/2006), to the man who told an audience at Swansea University that there were too many criminal trials. I would like to say that it’s not surprising given the inexorable downgrading of the Criminal Justice system from the gastronomic equivalent of a relatively healthy chicken sandwich to a pot noodle. No, I merely expressed the view that although papers had only been served on solicitors at Court and an adjournment refused those instructing me had correctly submitted that the matter should remain at the Youth Court, unlike the CPS lawyer and legally qualified Court clerk.

Exciting changes brought into effect on 1 October 2007 may encourage more people to seek out the services of a solicitor. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 permits anyone over the age 18 who has capacity (referred to as “Donor”) to confer on another (or others) a Lasting Power of Attorney. The authority must comply with the requirements of Schedule 1 of the Act, which include setting out the authority in writing and registering the instrument with the Public Guardian. The authority must also comply with the principles set out in Section One (acting in the Donor’s best interests in a manner which is the least restrictive to the Donor’s freedom.) There are further conditions (Sections 10 and 11) which include a prohibition on bankrupts being appointed as Attorneys.

When considering a claimants unfair dismissal case, the issue as to whether the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) has territorial jurisdiction is increasingly being raised at the Pre-Hearing Review stage.