I appreciate some will see the Hancock story as a private affair - but there is an important question of whether the Health Secretary broke his own lockdown laws
As I explain 👇🏼, private indoor meetings between people not living together were unlawful for most of the past year
Were they meeting up before this? The Sun suggests they were.
If they were at work, they might argue this fell within the work exception but I think - especially for Health Secretary - that's not a good argument.
If they went elsewhere to meet up, that would clearly be illegal
I wouldn't be surprised if this is the issue which becomes most salient - for the rest of the population, indoor relationships with someone you don't live with were (bizarrely) illegal until 17 May 2021
For people saying "they weren't socially distanced" - correct, but that wasn't against the law, it was (and remains) guidance for work.
A gathering has to be “reasonably necessary” for work purposes to fall within the exception and be legal. Was this particular meeting “reasonably necessary” for work purposes?
Lord Sumption makes a convincing argument in the new Law Quarterly Review that Dolan was wrongly decided and use of the Public Health Act to impose lockdowns was contrary to the principle of legality
Important new @HumanRightsCtte report on the government bill which is going to significantly limit the right to protest. I agree the but allowing police to prevent ‘noisy protests’ happening has to go
This really is a power grab by the government against inconvenient protests. It’s anti-democratic. Parliamentarians from all parties should rise up against it
I'm getting a lot of questions about rules for organising weddings 💒
Obviously a big worry for people as could end up with a £10,000 fixed penalty notice if they don't follow rules (including law and even guidance).
What questions do you have about covid rules and weddings?
OK, so the problem, I think, isn't with people organising weddings - it's that the law is confusing. And I'm afraid I might not be able to make it entirely clear. Because it's not.
The starting point is anyone who "hold[s], or [is] involved in the holding of, a relevant gathering" can get a £10,000 fixed penalty notice
A relevant gathering is a gathering of more than 30 people where no exception applies
This would raise interesting issues if it went to court. A long-standing teacher at an Orthodox Jewish studies college lost her post because she qualified as a female rabbi (still not permitted by most of the Orthodox world).
Sounds like sex discrimination as I assume she wouldn't have lost her post if she was a man who qualified as a rabbi. They would argue, I imagine, that any individual who breached Orthodox 'red lines' would not be able to teach. But if those red lines only exist for women...
I know there are exemptions for religious institutions in the Equality Act 2010. But would they apply in this case?