Regius Professor of Law at @UofGlasgow @UofGLaw. Nothing should be inferred from the absence of unnecessary disclaimers on this profile.
Dec 23, 2021 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
I’ve seen several people mocking the idea that champagne producers might want to produce UK-specific bottles, so it’s time for a fun bit of trivia: the UK is the world’s single biggest champagne export market. We drink more than the US - not per capita, but *in total*.
Absolutely not trying to make any sort of political point here, btw.
Sep 25, 2020 • 24 tweets • 6 min read
The lecture went well (well, I thought so: views may differ) and no-one asked any awkward questions about coronavirus regulations. So in lieu of that, a few quick thoughts about yesterday’s announcement.
The announcement yesterday was backed up by some pretty heavy firepower: “...potential discontinuation of study”; “we will not hesitate...”
Sep 24, 2020 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
Doing my first live online lecture tomorrow morning and have included some coronavirus regulations to illustrate some points. Now regretting that as it might prompt some rather awkward questions about what is and is not prohibited...
These measures are pushing the limits of what universities can require students to do. And at the least it would be helpful to be much clearer about their scope: in part they read as if they are solely about university accommodation and in part they are expressed more generally.
Sep 21, 2020 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
I don’t want to be a pessimist, but I don’t think this problem is going to be solved by tests you have to pay for which don’t exist yet.
I’m still astonished that, after what happened with antibody tests earlier in the year, the government is pitching a solution based on another technology that we don’t actually have, as if we’ve learned nothing.
Sep 16, 2020 • 11 tweets • 3 min read
It was good to speak to @estwebber for this piece, and it made me think about three different criticisms of the coronavirus regulations which get unhelpfully conflated on Twitter.
There are, broadly, four criticisms: (1) they are being made in an inappropriate way, bypassing Parliamentary scrutiny; (2) they are bad policy, infringing excessively on individual liberty; (3) they are badly drafted; (4) they are being published too close to taking effect.
Sep 14, 2020 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
This has been the law since 1976. I am not aware of any actors being prosecuted under that law. The change which the Bill would make is to extend the legal test from race to other protected characteristics (eg stirring up hatred on the ground of sexuality or disability).
On the interpretation suggested in that thread, it has been a serious criminal offence for an actor to play a racist character for over four decades. I don’t believe that’s correct. Depicting racism and stirring up racism are two very different things.
Sep 14, 2020 • 15 tweets • 4 min read
Controversial opinion: I think this is fine. Mingle is an ordinary word of the English language and the context makes it clear how this is meant to operate. Not everything has to be - or can be - defined to death.
A footnote, as “mingle” is still provoking discussion: criminal law uses hard to pin down concepts all the time. We’ve got a shedload of them. The point of a “thin ice!” sign is not to enable you to skate out to the precise point at which the surface still bears your weight.
Aug 13, 2020 • 7 tweets • 3 min read
This is very funny, but if you didn’t notice it wasn’t in quotation marks you now restrospectively get one grade deducted from your English A-level.
