header-logo header-logo

24 April 2008
Issue: 7318 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Family , Community care
printer mail-detail

Statwatch

News

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) Order 2008 (SI 2008/973) Commenced 6 April 2008. Adds certain swords, commonly known as “samurai swords”, to the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988 (SI 1988/2019). The effect of this is to make it an offence to manufacture, sell, hire (etc) these swords and to prohibit their importation, subject to an exemption for antique swords and certain defences.

 

 

Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008 (SI 2008/1054) Commences 1 May 2008. An incremental fee is introduced in relation to proceedings for a care or supervision order under the Children Act 1989, s 31. The first fee (£2,225) is paid on an application for such an order. The second fee (£700) is payable if an issues resolution hearing or pre-hearing review is listed, at least 14 days before the day on which the hearing is listed, and the third fee (£1,900) is payable if a final hearing is listed, at least 14 days before the day on which that hearing is listed. Provision is made for a refund to be made if a final order is made at a case management conference or if a hearing which has been listed does not take place.

 

Early Removal of Short-Term and Long-Term Prisoners (Amendment of Requisite Period) Order 2008, (SI 2008/977) Commenced 7 April 2008. Amends the definition of “the requisite period” in the Criminal Justice Act 1991, s 46A(5) which is the period that must be served in prison before the Secretary of State can order that the individual concerned be removed from prison for the purpose of removal from the UK. Removes the requirement that a prisoner serving a sentence of between three and four months must serve 30 days before the prisoner can be removed from prison. Provides that a prisoner serving less than three years must serve one-quarter of the term before he can be removed from prison. Brings forward the time at which a prisoner serving a sentence of three years or over can be removed from prison.

Issue: 7318 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Family , Community care
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