Student Law Journal (LJMU)
Not a member yet
32 research outputs found
Sort by
Revolutions in Family Law and Their Effect on Family Disputes
Full text linkHerring once set out that family law has undergone a profound revolution over the last few years which has shaped the way in which family law disputes are handled. Whilst there is some truth in this statement, the extent to which the aforementioned reforms have impacted the law in this area is up for debate. This paper questions how such reforms have provided the courts with alternative methods of dealing with family law cases and particularly focuses on the areas of access to justice and familial breakdown. It is concluded that, despite the amendments, the legal system remains flawed in handling family matters. This paper explores the adverse effects of such changes with a particular focus on cuts to legal aid and litigants in person. Further, the research discusses the proposal of a non-fault divorce system and how, despite the goal being to reconstruct the previous divorce law into one which existed on a ‘no fault’ basis, fault continues to be a central position within the process of a divorce
Are the Laws Forbidding Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in the UK Taking Away the Personal Autonomy of Terminally Ill Citizens?
Full text linkThe purpose of this article is to examine the view that the current blanket ban on assisted suicide in the UK actively takes away the personal autonomy of citizens with terminal illnesses who wish to end their own lives. This work will examine a variety of factors that may contribute to this legal debate such as personal autonomy, end-of-life decisions, human rights and medical ethics. The current problems associated with the law on euthanasia will also be addressed in order to better comprehend the socio-legal debate surrounding whether or not assisted suicide ought to be legalised. This article will also discuss the potential measures that could be implemented in the future to legalise euthanasia and how law-makers can prevent the slippery-slope which is a fear of those against the legalisation of assisted suicide
Have the Legal and Social Concepts of Domestic Abuse Been Profoundly Revolutionised, or Is Further Reform Required?
Full text linkDomestic abuse is an important aspect of family law that is governed by everyday attitudes, personal beliefs, legislation, and legal precedents. These are important to consider when assessing how society has reacted, and still reacts, to ‘controversial’ issues that challenge the norm. This article analyses to what extent domestic abuse law may be reforming and how these changes will influence future decisions. It is suggested that although the definition of domestic abuse has broadened to include coercive control and recognise women, men, and children as potential victims. There is a need for more to be done to eliminate patriarchal views and attitudes that shape society’s understanding of domestic abuse and legal responses
Racial Discrimination: A Society Divided by Legal or Moral Injustices?
Full text linkThe devastating consequences of racial inequalities have been highlighted by recent events, with striking evidence showing the disproportionate rates of diagnosis and deaths of ethnic minorities amid the COVID-19 pandemic.[1] Tracing these disparities back to social and economic factors and a lack of opportunities, it is evident that a substantial degree of racism exists in the UK. Still, the Government has yet to provide an adequate plan to tackle such issues and has instead dismissed claims of institutional racism.[2] The data combined with subsequent inaction reflects the harmful attitudes that are still prevalent, placing minorities at a dangerous disadvantage.
This article will determine whether the extent of the racism that we see in the UK today is rooted in a legal or moral fault. This will be done by tracing the history of law and morality to Ancient Greece and by using natural law theory and legal positivism to consider how racial discrimination has gained legal or moral support. Using this understanding, legal developments at national and international level will be traced to demonstrate how both legal and moral attitudes have changed over time, with specific reference being given to the city of Liverpool. Recent racial inequalities will then be examined with police powers and health care receiving the most scrutiny. It will be concluded that there has been little effective change in law and morality since the findings of the MacPherson Report[3] which has recently become a topical issue for policing leaders.[4]
[1] Public Health England, ‘Disparities in the Risk and Outcomes of COVID-19’ (GW-1447, PHE Publications, August 2020) <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/908434/Disparities_in_the_risk_and_outcomes_of_COVID_August_2020_update.pdf> accessed 17 March 2021.
[2] Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, ‘Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities: The Report’ (Gov.uk, March 2021) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-report-of-the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities> accessed 3 April 2021.
[3] William MacPherson, ‘The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry’ (Cm 4262-I, 1999).
[4] Vikram Dodd, ‘UK Police Chiefs Consider Public Admission of Institutional Racism’ The Guardian (12 December 2021) <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/12/uk-police-leaders-debate-public-admission-institutional-racism> accessed 5 January 2022
Evidencing sexual violence: a socio-legal analysis of (gendered) norms and policies
Full text linkAs MacKinnon suggested, ‘women who work with the law have learned that while legal change may not always make social change, sometimes it helps, and law unchanged can make social change impossible.’This paper offers a comparative analysis of several jurisdictions, looking particularly at gendered, often systemic, patriarchal attitudes towards sexual violence. It draws upon a wide range of resources to argue that law and policy reforms alone cannot address the challenges associated with preventing - or prosecuting - acts of sexual violence, given certain socio-cultural attitudes towards victims generally. Clearly, sexual violence may lead to (often highly gendered) public health and human rights violations, with both short and longer-term consequences. Given that, globally, as many as one in five women are likely to be sexually assaulted over the course of their lifetime, female victims may feel that their evidence will be largely or completely discredited, or their experiences simply ignored. And yet, violence against women is not unique to any specific historical period or culture. As Sigsworth has further argued (in relation to South Africa) a perceived need to assert – or reassert - masculinity may also be relevant in many cases. The concept of the ‘vulnerable population’ can often be reflective of social attitudes or of ambiguous laws or policies. (Disabled women, for example, are more likely to be sexually abused, raped, or assaulted that those who are able-bodied. ) Within many criminal justice systems, long delays, judicial or jury bias, and potentially degrading cross-examinations of victims cannot be ignored. Victim-blaming can further exacerbate inherent vulnerabilities. The reporting of sexual violence often varies significantly across jurisdictions: as such, the extent to which victimhood and gendered stereotypes might be either constructed or interpreted by wider society will also be discussed here.
 
Litigants in Person – Access to Justice via the Court Process?
Full text linkSince the enactment of The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, there has been an increase in litigants in person. This is owing to the fact that this Act implemented harsh cuts to legal aid which has made legal aid virtually impossible for many cases within the civil and family courts. Legal aid is still available where there are certain types of documentary evidence that the client has suffered domestic violence. The increase in litigants in person can be seen in a recent comparison of statistics which show that in the financial year of 2012/13, a total of 58% of parties were recorded as having legal representation in private law cases that had at least one hearing. Compared to the financial year of 2017/18, this figure had reduced to only 36% of parties. It could be suggested that as a result of these cuts, many litigants are struggling with their case. Not only are litigants struggling but the civil and family courts are now struggling with the influx of litigants in person. This article will examine whether the concept of justice is achievable by litigants in person. This will be done by firstly explaining what litigants in person are and outlining the issues which they may encounter. The help which litigants in person may experience will then be outlined; this will include the different organisations available to litigants in person and the role of the judiciary. Suggestions for possible reforms aimed at offering more assistance to litigants in person are also made.
 
Where to next? Advancing Indigenous cultural rights within a ‘universal’ human rights framework
Full text linkInternational law underwent a major shift when the second World War ended; the creation of the United Nations (UN) led to a system based upon human rights. The UN Charter, which affirmed support for equal rights and self-determination, was adopted in 1945, followed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. A number of binding treaties were ratified in the years that followed, most notably the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1966. This shift, together with the first explicit endorsement of self-determination, (defined as the freedom of a group of people to choose a political status and pursue development ) led to the demise of colonial powers dominating entire peoples and the creation of a number of new states. Indigenous peoples, effectively trapped within the borders laid down by their colonial oppressors, were largely left out of this. Indigenous peoples, broadly defined as tribal groups that have been somewhat engulfed by settler states, have often been left at a severe disadvantage by this subjugation. They make up about 5% of the world population but 15% of them exist in extreme poverty. The human rights of Indigenous peoples had long been treated as a domestic matter for the states in which their territory fell. This often had disastrous consequences, particularly in terms of their culture and socio-cultural human rights. Forcible attempts were made to assimilate Indigenous peoples in Canada, for example, through the state-sponsored residential school system, in which children were separated from their families, and housed in inhumane conditions. They were ‘educated’ as a means to stamping out Indigenous culture, whilst transferring the children onto the lower rungs of the economy. This practice continued for over a century and, along with other government policies, has been termed a cultural genocide.
An international Indigenous rights system has developed during that time frame, however. There are now a number of international agreements and treaties that concern Indigenous peoples, most notably the UN’s Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Whilst this has brought necessary attention to the plight of Indigenous peoples, it is not regarded as a fix-all solution. General Assembly President Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa has warned that ‘even with this progress, Indigenous peoples still face marginalization, extreme poverty and other human rights violations. They are often dragged into conflicts and land disputes that threaten their way of life and very survival.’ This article argues that these clashes have, to an extent, undermined the protections of Indigenous rights, and whilst Indigenous peoples are now recognized by the international human rights regime, they continue to be marginalized. There are fundamental disagreements between several states, not least Canada, and the international Indigenous rights regime. Some of these are ideological, owing to the nature of Indigenous cultural rights themselves and to their uncomfortable fit within the international, ‘universal’ human rights regime that has been prominent since 1945. Other problems are more practical, stemming from the profound clashes between Indigenous cultural beliefs and the more Eurocentric values that tend to underpin modern, Western political and economic systems. A critical examination of the international Indigenous rights system is presented here, with Canada used as a case study. The background and development of the international Indigenous right system is outlined and explained, and its evident strengths and weaknesses briefly described. The article then examines ideological clashes between Western conceptions of human rights and Indigenous rights: self-determination, cultural, and land rights, as well as the collective nature of Indigenous rights. The practical incompatibilities between Indigenous peoples in Canada, and Canada as a sovereign settler state are then evaluated. This will point to the conclusion that the cause of Indigenous peoples has been only marginally advanced by the international Indigenous right system and that the future is not particularly promising
Has the 2016 General Data Protection Regulation really given consumers more control over their personal data?
Full text linkThe General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - which came into force in May 2018 - introduced a complete change to data privacy law. Arguably one of the most comprehensive pieces of European Union legislation, the GDPR appears to put data subjects in charge, with new and improved subject rights, wider territorial scope and increased accountability and enforcement mechanisms, all of which aim to strengthen their individual rights. The digital revolution presented the existing data protection legislation, namely the Data Protection Directive (DPD) (1995), with significant challenges. New means of processing personal information have led to increasingly acute consumer concerns over how personal data is gathered, handled, and stored. Modern - and largely intangible - processing methods may result in data subjects lacking control over their personal data. Control is in itself an essential aspect of data protection, not only in terms of privacy, but to uphold informational autonomy. As their own data is affected, a consumer should be able to ‘…predict with sufficient certainty which information about himself in certain areas is known to his social milieu…’ in order to have control over it. This may be done by having the right to choose how data is dealt with and where it will eventually end up.
This article analyses what the Regulation has achieved in relation to giving consumers more control over their personal data. The wording and principles of the GDPR appear to prioritise consumer control, more so than any other European legal instrument. The issue of how GDPR has affected consumers has however received far less attention than the repercussions of the legislation upon organisations. Much academic commentary has focused upon commending, comparing or criticising the European initiative: this article will look to these to gauge whether this ‘gold standard’ reform really ‘does what it says on the tin.’ It compares GDPR with DPD to set out the rationale for reform, having regard to the increased influence and advance of modern technologies in a globalised market; it then argues that the breakdown of technological boundaries means that the DPD had perhaps lost touch, in terms of territorial scope, definitions, and terminologies. It therefore then examines those rights and principles that give rise to greater consumer control over personal data, not least transparency, fairness, lawfulness and accountability. Arguably, changes were not truly ground breaking, given that these principles are similar to those set out in the earlier Directive. The rights contained in the 2016 Regulation clearly reinforce these core principles however, not least the rights to be forgotten, to have data access, and portability. An enforcement mechanism is a crucial aspect of consumer control. The conclusion argues that, despite clearly improving individual control, the Regulation may still not provide adequate protection when it comes to the most advanced areas in the technological field, namely, where mechanisms automatically or unknowingly process personal data. With this area of law constantly developing, however, it may be premature to critique certain obscure methods of processing: UK citizens similarly face a perhaps unknowable future post-Brexit. The concept of data protection remains a fundamental right however, given how the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union works alongside the GDPR to uphold individual rights. In other words, both the Regulation – and the concept of a right to data protection - may be redundant if existing in isolation; they must rely upon each other to operate effectively.
 
To what extent is the regulation of sport effective in terms of financial management of clubs? An evaluation of corporate and financial governance, in the context of failing football clubs and salary cap clauses.
Full text linkThe 2018 events surrounding the financial fair play dispute that arose between Manchester City Football Club and UEFA provides the background for this article. Much case law and literature has focused upon professional sport financial issues, including salary caps and financial fair play. Three specific legal issues are discussed here, however, framed by three core questions, and using European football as the primary example: do current professional sports financial management regulations (Financial Fair Play, or hereinafter FFP) provide sufficient deterrence against club financial misconduct? Do football clubs’ corporate governance principles differ to those applicable to other corporate environments? Are salary caps a viable football financial management option? The article will then argue the need for reforms to current football FFP approaches. The opening section offers definitions and explanatory notes on the relevant governance in sport, including what constitutes ‘financial fair play.’ Section two looks to the Manchester City Football Club - UEFA dispute, to offer analysis of the current financial regulations - and the long-term football governance consequences – to suggest that FFP has not (yet) translated into improvements for financial sustainability. Section three offer suggestions for reform, including the proposition that a well-constructed salary cap system would perhaps prevent future disputes. The conclusion further argues that an appropriate salary cap model provides for surer, more transparent financial governance than the current FFP system
Data sources:
LJMU Research Online (Liverpool John Moo...PATT40 (LJMU)Biomolecular Research Reports (BRR) (LJM...Design and Technology Education (LJMU)BLResearchDay (LJMU)Journal of Living Labs (LJMU)Journal of Natural Products Discovery (L...Journal of Social Media for Learning (LJ...
Student Law Journal (LJMU)PRISM (LJMU)Public Health Institute Journal (LJMU)SPARK (LJMU)Student Experience Proceedings (LJMU)Transformation in Education (LJMU)Innovations in Practice (LJMU)Links to Health and Social Care (LJMU)
Student Law Journal (LJMU)PRISM (LJMU)Public Health Institute Journal (LJMU)SPARK (LJMU)Student Experience Proceedings (LJMU)Transformation in Education (LJMU)Innovations in Practice (LJMU)Links to Health and Social Care (LJMU)Access Repository Dashboard
Do you manage Student Law Journal (LJMU)? Access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard!