header-logo header-logo

07 December 2016
Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Snooper’s charter “falls short”

Lawyers have expressed concerns about the impact on lawyer-client confidentiality as a result of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016—the so-called “snooper’s charter”.

The Act, which covers state surveillance, received Royal Assent last month. Both the Law Society and the Bar Council campaigned for legal professional privilege to be given statutory protection in the Act through express recognition of its importance and provisions making it unlawful to deliberately target legally privileged communications.

This was not achieved. However, late amendments to the Bill in the House of Lords introduced “additional safeguards” strengthening requirements to destroy legally privileged material caught by surveillance. Such materials must now be destroyed unless it is in the public interest that they be kept. A code of practice will also be drawn up.

Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, chairman of the Bar, said: “Despite claims that the Investigatory Powers Act offers new protections for legally privileged material, sadly the Act falls significantly short of what we would consider sufficient to protect this important and fundamental right which underpins the rule of law. 

“We expect that draft codes of practice will be published in due course to give operational guidance to authorities. The Bar Council will scrutinise closely these draft codes, which ultimately must be approved by Parliament.”

Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
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
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
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll