header-logo header-logo

10 March 2021
Issue: 7924 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Health & safety , Profession
printer mail-detail

Keep courts infection-free

Concerns around COVID-19 safety measures as Isleworth falls short

Lawyers have expressed fears about safety in court after Isleworth Crown Court failed a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) COVID-19 inspection on cleaning and social distancing measures.

The inspector visited the court on 29 January and identified contraventions relating to ‘cleaning regimes, social distancing and the monitoring of occupancy levels within the building’, an HSE spokesperson said. HM Courts and Tribunals (HMCTS) have been issued with a notification of contravention and asked to respond to the inspector by 12 April.

Solicitors have raised concerns with the Law Society about potential risks at courts throughout the pandemic. These have included concerns about the enforcement of face masks in public and communal areas, the frequency of cleaning, and having to take instructions in confined and unventilated rooms where social distancing is impossible to maintain. Solicitors have complained of being required to attend court in-person for matters they believed could reasonably be dealt with via remote means.

Law Society president David Greene said: ‘Even though we may be seeing a planned exit from the pandemic it remains absolutely essential that all court users can be assured of the safety of the court environment.

‘If that cannot be assured, as appears to be the case at Isleworth, HMCTS must take immediate action―including possibly closing a court―until it can be.’ 

Safety measures such as plexiglass screens, social distancing marks and frequent cleaning have been implemented to keep court users safe.

However, fears about unsafe courts emerged in January, when the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) revealed figures showing 434 court staff, 69 judges and magistrates, 23 jurors and 73 other court users tested positive for COVID-19 between 24 November 2020 and 11 January 2021. Cases were confirmed at 196 courts within the same period.

The MoJ pointed out that this rate tracked the national average and it should not be assumed that infection took place at court.

Issue: 7924 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Health & safety , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll