spinninghugo.bsky.social
Always ask yourself, what would Lord Diplock think?
https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/
4,082 posts
8,384 followers
644 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
NB spelling!
comment in response to
post
And Sumption, despite his take in the Brexit cases, probably was the most "rightwing" of all of them (if such a label really makes sense in this context) and he has gone.
comment in response to
post
No, but nor was it because the government cherry picked rightwingers. It is just the cycle of these things. Kerr and Hale used to reinforce one another, and once they both went around the same time, it was unlikely they'd be replaced like for like.
comment in response to
post
Nah. There is the form and then there is the reality.
comment in response to
post
The Scottish judges, with the obvious exception of Reid, were not great before Rodger and Hope.
comment in response to
post
No. The Court is a self perpetuating oligarchy. He got the job because the others at least have the judgement to know who the best judge is.
comment in response to
post
But, as Reed hints, we need to guard now against the election of a rightwing populist government (and one looks like being elected in my lifetime). So, adapt now before it is too late.
/ends
comment in response to
post
Of course all change is dangerous. The cosmetic move from the Judicial Committee of the House of ds to the United Kingdom Supreme Court was, in retrospect, a serious political mistake (the Law Lords who opposed it have been clearly vindicated IMO).
/6
comment in response to
post
The time has come for change, and we should reform along the lines Derrick Wyatt proposes. That should enable a better gender balance, wider representation of people from different backgrounds, anonymising, and better representation of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland when actually needed.
/5
comment in response to
post
But if you go back to the interwar years, dear oh dear. What a sorry bunch they were in the main. And in the 60s, the reason Reid stands out is that so many of the others were pretty ropey.
/4
comment in response to
post
Bingham himself was, of course, a fine judge, but he was also surrounded by brilliant people. Hoffmann was the most brilliant judge of his generation, and his friend Rodger (along with Hope) started an era where the Scottish appointments were great (which they had not been for generations).
/3
comment in response to
post
Ultimate appellate courts go through cycles, sometimes with collections of brilliant people, sometimes through troughs where fewer are really able.
The peak, in my lifetime, 2000-2008, with Bingham as Senior Law Lord.
/2
comment in response to
post
The real problem with a constitutional monarchy is this poor sod, whose life choices are severely curtailed by it.
#nokings
comment in response to
post
Polyamory. Play by Noel Coward.
comment in response to
post
Design for Living, Miriam Hopkins. It'll be on YouTube. Ooof.
comment in response to
post
The second is the sexiest scene in any film ever made. Humphrey Bogart and Dorothy Malone in the bookstore, in The Big Sleep.
"Looks like we're closed for the rest of the afternoon."
/ends
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgoD...
comment in response to
post
The first is the scene with Peggy Ashcroft in the bothy in the 39 Steps (half hour in).
Suddenly, you see a powerful actor, and the screen lights up.
/2
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmSd...
comment in response to
post
I suspect he has his decades muddled. Di he mean Costa?
comment in response to
post
Yes, they have a moel that works. i don't know whether the Graun's donations model is working. Selling the Observer to get journalists off the books indicates no, but I've not studied the books.
comment in response to
post
Let us be honest though, we're the FT target audience. With a laser
comment in response to
post
The Graun that is, not the FT.
comment in response to
post
The film reviews are still pretty good,and they have an amusing football cartoonist.
comment in response to
post
But that too isn't supported by the history of the drafting.
/Ends
comment in response to
post
Focussing on Maxwell -Fyfe is misleading in another way. Because he was a prosecutor at Nuremberg, the impression gets created that what drove the agreement for the ECHR was the holocaust, and a UK desire to stop it happening again.
/6
comment in response to
post
It isn't a coincidence that the collapse of support for the ECHR on the Tory right coincided with the collapse of the Berlin wall. The geopolitical justification for it was gone in their eyes.
/5
comment in response to
post
The reason for the (mild) support of the Tories at the time was they thought that UK law was obviously compliant anyway, and so nothing to see, the text was just a political document, and a useful way of creating a distinction from the Soviet Union.
/4
comment in response to
post
Lauterpacht had far more impact on the draft that eventuated, as did (somewhat embarrassingly) earlier European constitutional documents (as is apparent from the text).
/3
comment in response to
post
Maxwell-Fyfe was a good barrister, his performance at Nuremberg was much better than that of the Americans, but he wasn't exactly amongst the brightest and best lawyers.
/2
comment in response to
post
I've not read this PE thing, but the idea Maxwell-Fyfe had much input into the drafting is untrue.
See
N Duxbury, Viscount Kilmuir (2015)
and
AWB Simpson, Human Rights and the End of Empire (2004)
/1
comment in response to
post
Shameful they've not heard of the fifth rule.
comment in response to
post
As a member of USS, I am less than delighted that it has been managed so incompetently.
comment in response to
post
This is trivia. It is an expense of the proceeding and is given priority in the insolvency legislation. It is a world away from re-writing the parties rights in the way you supposed possible.