I wrote to my MP (@brianleishmanmp.bsky.social) about this issue. The argument advanced by the UK Govt is fundamentally disingenuous and the Scottish Govt has tried several times recently to reduce/remove juries. Success in England and Wales would likely spur them on to try again.
Why do companies insist on a recorded message that says theyβre experiencing higher than usual call volumes? Everyone knows itβs a lie; itβs simply they donβt employ enough people. In the last two days Iβve phoned @arnoldclark.bsky.social TSB and @virginmedianews.bsky.social; all have said the same.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article... Well this is going to help with the cost of living...
This is a good piece, but the attacks on Dorothy Bain are not the only recent example of attempts to undermine trust in the legal system for political gain, and the press and others who have been insinuating wrongdoing on the flimsiest of evidence are also complicit.
Indeed. It is a concern that good candidates will not put themselves forward which will only be to the detriment of the office and the system as a whole.
Labour governments don't come along often; it would, therefore, be good if this so-called Labour government actually started acting like a Labour government.
The Scottish Government has announced a 13% increase in civil, criminal and children's legal aid fees with effect from 1 September 2026: www.gov.scot/news/legal-a...
Interesting point because, of course, the "devolution jursidiction" in relation to criminal cases in Scotland (a wholly new invention in 1998) initially rested with the JCPC (e.g. DS v HM Advocate was heard by the JCPC, not the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords)
Kier and Daily are an example of the UKSC exercising its "devolution jurisdiction"; it's difficult to see how questions around the convention compliance of the Scots law of evidence and criminal procedure can be directly read over to, for example, E&W as binding precedent.
Indeed; which is itself a very odd provision given that there are substantial differences between the devolution schemes operating in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.
I recall Lady Justice Whipple (as she now is) having some issues in a Tax appeal which went from the Upper Tribunal to the Court of Session: Taylor Clarke Leisure Plc v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2015] CSIH 32
There's also oddities around precedent too where issues of the distinct legal systems are in play as well as "pure" Employment law. The Supreme Court isn't even a unified court either: see section 41 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
Once you get out of the tribunals though it gets complicated; there isn't a unified court structure for appeals. Scottish EAT/UT appeals go to the Court of Session, for example. The ET even has a separate Scottish president and Employment Judges in Scotland are appointed separately etc.
Indeed. There isn't really anything called "UK law" (a bug bear of mine) - Statutes passed by the UK Parliament which extend to Scotland form part of Scots law; they're not separate and distinct in the way that, for example, US Federal law is from the law of New Jersey or California.
The proposals will be interesting. It's not, of course, the first time a policing agency has been given the unofficial title of "Britain's FBI" - both the Serious and Organised Crime Agency and the National Crime Agency were given that seam title when they were proposed.
In Scotland, we have recently passed regulatory reform of the legal sector. One proposal which didn't make it into what is now the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2025 was for there to be a single regulatory body.
Indeed. The Practice Note does state that a Lord Ordinary will usually fix a permission hearing where they are minded to refuse permission. Petitioner is certainly starting from a position of weakness at a permission hearing.
It's certainly not a guaranteed refusal of permission.
You're right, it is. I hadn't noticed that initially (although the first clue should have been the 09:30 start which is when permission hearings usually take place).
On Monday the Court of Session will hear a judicial review of the decision to make an order under the Terrorism Act 2000 proscribing Palestine Action. The hearing, before Lord Young, appears as though it is to be livestreamed: www.scotcourts.gov.uk/livestream/
I have written a short blog post on the Scottish Government's consultation on extending FOI laws to care homes and care at home services provided by private and third sector organisations: blog.alistairsloan.co.uk/2026/01/08/s...
MSPs will debate legal aid reform this afternoon following an important inquiry into Civil Legal Assistance in Scotland
βΆοΈWatch the debate at www.scottishparliament.tv/
#LegalAidMatters #AccessToJustice
For my first blog post of 2026 I return to a subject that I've written about before which is section 166 of the Data Protection Act 2018 and its very limited scope: blog.alistairsloan.co.uk/2026/01/06/s...
Was Maduro a good man and leader? Absolutely not. Should the USA have violated Venezuelan territorial sovereignty and kidnap him? Also, absolutely not. Will this embolden Putin over Zelenskyy? Quite possibly.
Bulgaria is welcoming a new year and a new currency.
Muε IS an absolute IDIOT!
www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/elon-mu...
Merry Christmas; may everyone have a lovely day.
and Wales in E v Northern Care Alliance NHS Trust [2022] Fam 130. Lady Tate's opinion can be read here: scotcourts.gov.uk/media/gj4ku0...
medical treatment but was refusing to provide consent to the transfusion of primary blood components. Indeed, there were no reported considerations of the particular issues arising in this case from the Scottish courts ([5]). In short, Lady Tate adopted the approach of the Court of Appeal in England
in Scotland. Today an opinion of Lady Tate from earlier in the month was published in respect of a petition by a Scottish Health Board seeking the exercise of the Court of Session's parens patriae jurisdiction in relation to a 14-year old Jehovahβs Witness who had capacity to consent to
