It was public knowledge before last weekend that the Times Higher Education had received a solicitors’ letter about its Arday story and its journalist had been investigated by the police. A mere “THE decided not to run the story” in defending the Good Law Project’s solidarity letter was inadequate

In praise of Canary Wharf in London’s Docklands

He did indeed. But unsurprisingly even friends are questioning this latest apparent misjudgement from the helmsman of the GLP. Oh for the long lost days of the world not needing a tax lawyer expressing an opinion on some issue of the day or other

Not exactly in the spirit of the GLP’s Code of Conduct to make stealth alterations to the text of a letter of solidarity, as controversy engulfs its subject and fuels questions about the premise of the letter goodlawproject.org/good-law-pro...

The swimming at Royal Victoria Dock was based off a pontoon from the west side of the dock, between the cable car station and the artificial beach to the south, with various buoys marked out at different distances from it

Have you been to the new Sea Lanes pool at Canary Wharf yet? I really like it there - the water’s pretty cold, though, even on a hot day

Here’s an example of that. A couple of friendly tweets procure him a branded tote bag from a set of barristers’ chambers, with the word “barristers” prominent on it. And it even accompanies him when he happens to photobomb a video someone has made for tourists about his home town in the Netherlands

I imagine you must have seen “advice from a random stranger on social mores” before?

One for the Little Book of Maugham. This is one of my perennial favourites

And some of the back catalogue 1. Failed judicial review of custody time limits decision in recent trial 2. Supreme Court of Ireland extradition ruling against her 3. High Court of Ireland ditto 4. Previous criminal appeal, reduced sentence, otherwise dismissed 5. Failed vexatious FOIA request

Yes, your comment on the original judgment was percipient. There was also a good letter from Stephen Hockman KC in the Times a few days after the original judgment which was equally percipient

And Jenrick’s mistake has been amplified, unnoticed, by Lawyers for Borders, the group encouraging local authorities to seek these planning injunctions against asylum hotels. An embarrassing blunder for whoever posted it to have made

Quite appallingly, the shadow Lord Chancellor and shadow Secretary of State for Justice has posted to X an inaccurate and misleading statement about the Court of Appeal’s judgment, mistakenly quoting and describing paragraph 114 of the judgment it overruled, not the Court of Appeal’s own reasoning

There’s a fantastic set of carved alabaster effigies in the church: clothes, armour, animals, all frozen in time, even a miniature bedesman saying prayers for a departed soul, or sole, as it’s attached to the foot of one of the effigies

A little excursion into legal history. The effigy of Sir William Gascoigne, Henry IV’s Lord Chancellor, who died in 1419, and his first wife, and a memorial to Sir Thomas Denison, an 18th century judge of the King’s Bench Division, All Saints’ Church, Harewood, Yorkshire

And Hoffmann and Pinochet is not a relevant comparison. He and his wife were actively involved with Amnesty, an intervener in the case. Past political affiliations of a judge aren’t generally a ground for recusal (see Locabail). None of the parties in the Epping case even asked for it

Two important omissions from this story The reporting barrister, Steven Barrett, is associated with “Lawyers for Borders” who encourage and assist local authorities seeking these injunctions Complaints about judicial case management decisions are outside the remit of the conduct body

Not tired of London, not tired of life

Thames Valley Police published a fantastic picture of Paddington sitting in the driver’s seat of their squad car as if he had TWOCed it, which showed they had an appropriate sense of humour about it all

A plea for a sense of proportion. Criminal damage is criminal damage. Guilty defendants shouldn’t be sentenced as if the inanimate objects they’ve damaged or destroyed had human qualities and had read out their victim impact statements in court

Have you read Carmen Callil’s book, Bad Faith? It stayed in my mind for a long time after reading it

I see you’ve had several replies to this already, Judith. The explanation in the original judgment, quoted in paragraph 23 of the Court of Appeal judgment is here. It was connected with the domicile of each spouse at the time www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWC...

At least the judges of the UK Supreme Court forbear from the vanity of auctioning invitations to dinner with themselves for charity

St George and the dragon, church painting in Georgia

Today 22 April at 5pm I and 5 Stone Buildings colleagues are holding a free webinar on the Assisted Dying Bill www.5sblaw.com/events/upcom...

On a previous occasion in 2019 (the unanimous ruling that Boris Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was unlawful) when a judgment of the UK Supreme Court attracted public controversy, this selfsame commentator said something very different about the legitimacy of the court and its decision

Good Friday St John Passion at St John’s Smith Square, with Polyphony and the OAE under Stephen Layton and a fine line up of soloists and evangelist (two brothers from Hereford cathedral)

If you want to depress yourself, scroll through posts here containing the text “UK Supreme Court”. Abysmal stuff. A lot of water under the bridge since the prorogation case in 2019 and the absurd judicial hagiography epitomised by this NYT story

That’s very thin ice to skate on, as I discovered some time ago

“Deligitimising”. In these posts a lawyer, a KC who formerly practised in tax law, who now runs a not for profit campaigning law organisation he set up, and who has a close personal interest in these issues, delegitimises the judgment of our country’s final court of appeal