Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Adam Wagner Profile picture
@AdamWagner1
Jun 24, 2020 • 3 tweets • 2 min read • Read on X
First ruling in #HarryDunn's parents' case against Foreign Secretary and police
1 Application for further disclosure from FCO rejected
2 App. to rely on expert evidence rejected
3 Application to add ground that FCO obstructed police investigation allowed
bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/…
The Court trusted that the FCO and their lawyers would have disclosed any other relevant information including the rest of a half-complete text message sent by a FCO official to a US Embassy Official Image
Claimants given permission to amend grounds of claim to add that FCO obstructed the police investigation by not revealing key information to them (such as the unusual arrangements in place for Croughton immunity) and that the base was not used for diplomacy at least since 2006 Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Adam Wagner

Adam Wagner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AdamWagner1

Adam Wagner Profile picture
Feb 12
Important appeal judgment - Court of Appeal finds that teacher was unfairly dismissed after she posted messages on her personal Facebook account opposing the teaching in schools of “gender fluidity” and that same-sex marriage is equivalent to marriage between a man and a woman: her belief that such teaching is wrong is derived from her Christian faith.

There is a useful press summary (judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…) and also a summary in the judgment for "lawyers or skim-readers" (are we not the same?!)Image
I haven't read it in full but my first reaction is that the judgment seems to have changed the way direct discrimination in the Equality Act works - allowing in some instances for "objective justification" to be considered as it is in European Convention on Human Rights cases about direct discrimination.

In short, under the Equality Act there is no possible justification for direct discrimination, you simply cannot put someone to a detriment because of their protected characteristic (e.g. religion, race etc) - but what the court is saying her is there will be some situations where the conduct of an employee, despite being because of their religion may be so bad that it can justify sacking because it's not "objectively justifiable", e.g. if the posts demonstrated discriminatory attitudes in her treatment of pupils (which they didn't here, which is part of the reason she succeeded). This is in line with the way direct discrimination is dealt with under human rights law. [correct me if I'm wrong on this].

This seems very important, and a big change (though there are some cases before which the courts say justify it). The reasoning at paragraphs 81-97 is somewhat... complex, so seems ripe for a Supreme Court appeal given the importance of the point.
Obviously I have beautifully exposed my own skim reading because it says "non-lawyers" not "lawyers"!
Read 4 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
Jan 31, 2024
The Divisional Court has ruled that the Government acted unlawfully and irrationally when deciding not to implement the full funding recommendation in Lord Bellamy’s Criminal Legal Aid Review.

I had the rare honour of acting for my professional colleagues, Criminal Law Solicitors Association (@CrimeSolicitors) and the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association (@lccsa), the Interested Parties in the case. Their press release is below.Image
Image
The Claimant @TheLawSociety was superbly represented by Tom de la Mare KC @thebrieftweet, Gayatri Sarathy and Emmeline Plews of @BlackstoneChbrs, instructed by John Halford of Bindmans LLP Gayatri Sarathy and Emmeline Plews of Blackstone Chambers, instructed by John Halford of @BindmansLLP.

The amount of work which went into putting the case together and presenting the oral arguments, and standing up for the rule of law, was extraordinary - a credit to the profession.
Together with the Law Society, the CLSA and the LCCSA provided the Court with a large number of witness statements from solicitors up and down the country, at every level of seniority, describing the relentless, physically demanding and emotionally draining nature of criminal defence work and the chronic underfunding which has led to a crisis in the retention of solicitors who are leaving in their droves for better pay and conditions that can be found elsewhere.

The Government response to the Criminal Legal Aid Review utterly failed to grasp the extent of the crisis. Despite the review recommending a 15% increase to solicitors fees as “no more than a minimum starting point”, it increased fees by only 9% with a further 2% promised this year.

The ruling today confirms that the Government response to the review was so flawed as to be unlawful and irrational.

In today’s ruling Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Jay described the evidence we submitted from our members alongside the Law Society as “a mass of convergent evidence from honest, professional people working up and down the country”, which is “cogent”, “impressive” and “compelling”, and which “brings home [that] women and men working up and down the country at all hours of the day and night, in difficult and stressful circumstances, carrying out an essential service which depends to a large extent on their goodwill and sense of public duty”.
Read 8 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
Dec 6, 2023
It begins inauspiciously
Image
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ Image
Notwithstadingy clause Image
Read 12 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
Nov 15, 2023
Some very public-facing comments by Lord Reed in the opening of his summary of the judgment:

- Policy is not that the UK will process asylum claims whilst people are in Rwanda, Rwanda will process them (despite the former often being claimed)
- The non-refoulement principle is contained in a number of treaties not just the European Convention on Human Rights and Human Rights Act
Prediction is a mug's game but if I were giving a public judgment rejecting the government's appeal this is how I would begin it!
This is a beautifully clear summary of the relevant legal principles. A model of its form - plain English, focussed on the public
Read 10 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
Jul 27, 2023
The Home Secretary acted unlawfully by accommodating, since December 2021, thousands of unaccompanied child asylum seekers in hotels. Kent Council also acted unlawfully in passing on responsibility for them.

https://t.co/sFYZqVHJogjudiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…
Image
A judgment suffused with humanity, legal rigour and common sense from Mr Justice Chamberlain, starting from changing the parties' preferred acronym to emphasise the human element.

Judgment:
Summary: https://t.co/cMXxZJdw4a https://t.co/bGdb6svfNSjudiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…
judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…
Image
The first paragraph is great too - is Martin Chamberlain the unlikely inheritor to Lady Hale? Simple language, child rights focussed, legally spot on Image
Read 8 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
Jun 29, 2023
The House of Commons Privileges Committee has reported on the conduct of MPs who impugned 'the integrity of that Committee and its members' and attempted 'to lobby or intimidate those members or to encourage others to do so'

Implies that the members are in contempt and asks… https://t.co/P9WRXWMOOPtwitter.com/i/web/status/1…






This is the suggestion of contempt based on Erskine May (the Parliamentary procedure bible) - which I think is quite convincing. The comments of members about the Privileges Committee being essentially corrupted were very arguably over the line
One point which I think was striking about the MPs who criticised the report is none of them seemed to point to any particular finding they disagreed with. They just went for the committee and the individuals on it.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(