Family convicted of allowing wife’s death

Criminal

First case in West Yorkshire where the provisions of the Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004 have been used

s.5 (1) (d)

A person (‘D’) is guilty of the offence if : D failed to take such steps as he

could reasonably have been expected to take to protect V from the risk

Aim of the act is to address “which of you did it?”

Main use: Failure to protect abused women Children

Concerns about the offence There is a strong co-occurrence of child abuse

and domestic violence. Where D is the victim of domestic violence, can they always stop the death of vulnerable child or adult?

For a woman to report domestic violence, it may endanger her life- is the law asking her too much to do this?

If the mother is reported to the local authority, she can still be guilty under s.5; whilst the local authority has no legal responsibility.

Solutions? State needs to provide “safe” homes,

financial help and domestic violence needs to be taken more seriously by the courts and police.

“Glorification of motherhood” needs to be tempered with realities of life

It is not good law if victims can be prosecuted as secondary parties

Social services should take more responsibility

Judicial Review

Police Pay

• Government decided to go against the recommendations of an independent arbitration panel

• The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, was criticised for showing "a total lack of respect" for the police by introducing their pay rise from last month rather than backdating it to September, effectively reducing the award from 2.5% to less than 2%.

• Police protest in London

Access to Judicial Review

• 2 stage procedure:– Claimant issues a claim form in the Administrative

Court which is then ‘served’ on the defendant– Court will then decide whether to grant permission to

the claimant to proceed with the claim. Permission will not be granted if the claimant cannot demonstrate a “sufficient interest” in the claim

– If successful the court will now proceed to stage 2, the substantive hearing of the claim, for which it will fix a date

• Mr Justice Collins said he "had no hesitation" in finding that the Police Federation had an arguable case and so should be given permission to bring an urgent application for judicial review of the decision.

• The judge ordered that the case should go to a two-day hearing for which he pencilled in April 15-16.

Substantive grounds of challenge

• Illegality• Acting without legal authority ?

– The federation claims that Smith has no legal power to set aside a recommendation by an independent pay tribunal - the only exception being for reasons of the "utmost national importance".

• Relevant/Irrelevant considerations?– Miss Smith approached the negotiations with a closed

mind.

• Human Rights ?– Freedom of association

Procedural grounds of challenge

• Procedural Fairness?– Miss Smith's decision was "procedurally

defective" and was an "abuse of the Police Negotiating Board process" by failing to tell the federation before announcing her decision.

– Legitimate expectation

• Procedural Ultra Vires ?– Mandatory or Directory requirements

Remedies?

• Public la remedies:– A Quashing Order: retrospectively quashes a

decision which is ultra vires

• Private law remedies:– Damages, injunctions, declarations

A Review on Bail

• 2 murders recently by violent offenders released on bail.

• Review launched by Gordon Brown.

Counter-Terrorism Bill

Cheeky Bugger.