header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 February 2021
Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession , In Court
printer mail-detail

LNB news: HMCTS announces Southwark Crown Court is to pilot rapid testing for coronavirus (COVID-19)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has announced that Southwark Crown Court will be the next place to pilot rapid coronavirus (COVID-19) testing of court users
Lexis®Library update: The pilot will run for the next four weeks and all jurors, judiciary, legal professionals, staff, contactors and professional court users will be offered the lateral flow test, regardless of whether they have experienced any coronavirus symptoms.


Speaking about the announcement, the interim Executive Chair of the National Institute for Health Protection, Baroness Dido Harding, said: ‘Around one in three people with COVID-19 don’t display symptoms, meaning you can infect others unknowingly. This rapid testing programme with HM Courts & Tribunals Service is one of many that will inform our understanding of how rapid asymptomatic testing can be operationalised in the real world to protect those at high risk, find the virus and help us go back to as normal a way of life as possible.’

Source: Second rapid testing pilot starts at Southwark Crown Court

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 18 February 2021 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk

Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Corporate team welcomes paralegal in Southampton

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

London firm strengthens real estate team with partner appointment

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Surrogacy children caught in succession gap
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’
NLJ this week: Online safety law at a crossroads
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
NLJ this week: Do Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor meet the misconduct bar?
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
NLJ this week: Supreme Court unlocks ‘lost years’ windfall for injured children
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
NLJ this week: Finality trumps freedom in arbitration showdown
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll