Important Bermuda trust decision concerning settlor’s wishes

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 861-863
Author(s):  
Keith Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Important Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Relevant Consideration

Abstract The intersection between the court’s power to bless the decision of a trustee and the impact of a settlor’s wishes on trustee decision-making has recently been considered by the Supreme Court of Bermuda in the important decision of In the Matter of the R Trust. In blessing the decision of the trustee in this case, the court referred with approval of the dicta of the UK Supreme Court in Pitt v Holt that the settlor’s wishes are simply a “relevant consideration”.

Winner of the SLS Annual Conference Best Paper Prize 2014: Reframing the judicial diversity debate: personal values and tacit diversity

Legal Studies ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel J Cahill-O'Callaghan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Personal Values ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

It has long been argued that the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, now the UK Supreme Court, is characterised by Justices who are white and male, with a public school and Oxbridge education. Despite continuous debate and reflection on the lack of diversity, by academics, government and the popular press, little has changed. These debates have centred on explicit diversity, overt characteristics that are easily codified and reflect how the judiciary is seen. Drawing on the psychological theory of decision making, this paper argues that judicial decisions are subject to tacit influences that are not limited to overt characteristics. Personal values serve as one such tacit influence on decision making. Personal values are formed by life experiences and reflect many of the characteristics identified within the explicit diversity debates. However, personal values are influenced by more than simple demographic variables. This paper uses the example of personal values to highlight the fact that despite the lack of explicit diversity, there is an element of tacit diversity in the Supreme Court, which is reflected in judicial decisions. The impact of these findings serves to extend the debates surrounding diversity, highlighting the limitation of debates centred on explicit diversity alone.

scholarly journals Judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court

Legal Studies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Hunter ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Community Leadership ◽  
The Other ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Substantial Degree

AbstractThis paper examines judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court. It does not confine itself to the formal roles of the President and Deputy President. Rather, building on existing categories of judicial leadership, including administrative, jurisprudential and community leadership, it considers the contributions of all 12 Justices. In so doing, it provides a significant compilation of quantitative data on the activities of the Justices of the Supreme Court both on and off the bench from the the Court's inception in 2009 to the end of the 2014-2015 legal year. From this, we suggest that while a number of the Justices engaged in one or two broad forms of leadership – with Lady Hale in particular demonstrating a substantial degree of leadership across all three dimensions – at the other end of the spectrum, at least on the measures used in this paper, a significant minority did not. In the light of this, and the significant number of recent and forthcoming retirements from the Court, the paper concludes by considering the implications of our findings for the future of the Court. We argue that these retirements will result in gaps in both formal and informal judicial leadership, and it is vital that these gaps are filled by appointees who are capable of, and prepared to step up to, diverse and varied forms of judicial leadership.

scholarly journals Dishonesty

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Alumni Association ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Obiter Dictum

This article provides an exposition and assessment of the UK Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. It identifies the Supreme Court’s reconsideration, obiter dictum, of the test of dishonesty in civil and criminal law. This term is used in particular in offences such as those set out in the Theft Act 1968. Prior to the Supreme Court’s intervention, the leading case was R v Ghosh [1982] EWCA Crim 2. However, the Ghosh test in that case has been the subject of significant criticism in the academy and elsewhere, and some such critiques are discussed in the Supreme Court judgment. This article, which considers these developments, was first delivered as the Bristol Alumni Association Lecture on 23 February 2018.

scholarly journals ABORTION IN NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: REFLECTIONS FROM THE UK SUPREME COURT

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494
Author(s):  
Bríd Ní Ghráinne ◽  
Aisling McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

AbstractOn 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSCt) issued its decision on, inter alia, whether Northern Ireland's near-total abortion ban was compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This article critically assesses the UKSC's treatment of international law in this case. It argues that the UKSCt was justified in finding that Northern Ireland's ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and FFA was a violation of Article 8, but that the majority erred in its assessment of Article 3 ECHR and of the relevance of international law more generally.

Science and Politics in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-233
Author(s):  
Benjamin Michael Superfine ◽  
Regina R. Umpstead ◽  
David Mayrowetz ◽  
Sarah Winchell Lenhoff ◽  
Ben Pogodzinski
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Educational Opportunities ◽  
Partisan Politics ◽  
Teachers Unions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Public Sector Unions ◽  
Science And Politics ◽  
The Impact

In March 2017, the Supreme Court decided Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association and upheld the constitutionality of agency fees for nonunion teachers. We examine how Friedrichs reflects a host of issues grouped around a patchwork of ideological commitments regarding teachers unions and public-sector unions more generally, partisan politics, and empirically oriented claims about the impact of teachers unions on students’ educational opportunities. We particularly argue that the case reflects a tension between judicial, scientific, and democratic decision-making, and that courts and reformers should be sensitive to this tension as they consider similar cases moving forward.

Morrisons off the hook as employers welcome clarity on vicarious liability for data breach

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 504-506
Author(s):  
Emma Flett ◽  
Jenny Wilson ◽  
Rebecca Gover
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Causal Chain ◽  
Cautionary Tale ◽  
Vicarious Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Data Controller ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Abstract The UK Supreme Court has granted the appeal of supermarket chain WW Morrison Supermarkets plc (Morrisons), finding that the Court of Appeal had misunderstood a number of the governing principles of vicarious liability. Considering Morrisons’ liability afresh, the Supreme Court clarified that the motive and authorized acts of the wrongdoing employee are highly material to a finding of vicarious liability, whilst a causal chain of events is not. Whilst Morrisons’ victory is a welcome clarification on the law of vicarious liability, data controllers should take note: had Morrisons not been a sophisticated data controller paying particular attention to its obligations under data protection legislation, the outcome would likely have been more of a cautionary tale.

Cross-fertilisation of Constitutional Ideas

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Butler
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

This chapter discusses the New Zealand courts' jurisprudence in regard to the interpretative provisions — sections 4, 5, and 6 — of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. It not only gives an overview of the relevant New Zealand case law but also compares the courts' approaches to those of their UK counterparts, in particular the UK Supreme Court (formerly, the House of Lords) in regard to section 3 of the UK Human Rights Act 1998. It is argued that the perceived difference in the approaches can be explained by different contexts rather than different methodology. The chapter thereby questions the view held in New Zealand that the UK courts, and especially the Supreme Court, are more activist than the New Zealand courts.

The ‘reasonable patient’ of 2025 envisioned (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Dowie ◽  
Mette Kjer Kaltoft
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Medical Practice ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Made In

UNSTRUCTURED . The verdict of the UK Supreme court in the case of Bellman versus Boojum-Snark Integrated Care Trust (2025) will have profound implications for all medical practice, medical education and medical research, as well as the regulation of medicine and allied healthcare fields. Major changes will result from the judgment made in favour of Bellman’s negligence claim, reflecting an expanded and more precise definition of informed and preference-based consent, compared with that in Montgomery (2015) and also with the principles laid out in the UK GMC guidance on Decision Making and Consent (2020). (In case of doubt, this is a vision paper.)

scholarly journals Balancing Power: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Impartial Role in Federalism

Federalism-E ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-53
Author(s):  
Darcy Drury
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Federal System ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
The Third ◽  
Canadian Federalism ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legal Theorist

The problem with Lord Acton’s state-ment is that it leaves out the third essential ingredient to a federal system of government: a supreme court. In Canada, like most federa-tions, the Supreme Court (SC) is responsible for articulating the constitution and serving as an independent mediator in intergovernmen-tal relations. Each decision made by the SC in regards to government jurisdiction changes the dynamics of Canadian federalism, and some critics fear it can be used as a centraliz-ing device by the federal government. This paper will discuss the nature of the SC by demonstrating its necessity, purpose, and the importance of its independence by examining its crucial role in Canadian federalism. Next, there will be a historical breakdown of the impact of2 the SC on the federal balance of powers through an examination of three es-sential eras: Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (decentralizing), Laskin (centralizing), and Charter (mixed), with analysis involving the attitudinal and legal theorist models of decision making in SC decisions. Finally, the SC’s impartiality towards provincial and feder-al preferences will be evaluated to show that justices have remained immune to direct po-litical pressures [...]

scholarly journals Are essay mills committing fraud? A further analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 fraud act (UK)

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Draper ◽  
Callum Reid-Hutchings
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Lead Author ◽  
Contract Cheating ◽  
The Law ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
Recent Action ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Advertising Standards

AbstractMany strategies have been proposed to address the supply of bespoke essays and other assignments by companies often described as ‘Essay Mills’ with the act of supply and use being invariably described as ‘contract cheating’. These proposals increasingly refer to the law as a solution in common with other action. In this article, the lead author revisits work undertaken in 2016 as a result of recent legal and extra-legal developments to assess whether the UK Fraud Act (2006) might now be used to tackle some of the activities of the companies involved, by comparing their common practises, and their Terms and Conditions, with the Act. It was previously found that all sites have disclaimers regarding the use of their products but there were some obvious contradictions in the activities of the sites which undermined those disclaimers, for example plagiarism-free guarantees for the work. In this article, we ask and consider the question whether this is still the case having regard to the impact of a change in the law by the UK supreme court and recent action of the UK Advertising Standards Authority. We also consider whether a call for a new offence to be created which specifically targets the undesirable behaviours of these companies is still justified.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document