Landlords who served eviction notice on tenant too early fail in Upper Tribunal appeal

By Mitchell Skilling

It was argued by the appellants, Amer and Nosheen Rafique, that the relevant eviction ground under the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016 could be used where the tenant was in rent arrears for three or more months by the time the application reached the Tribunal. The respondent, Ryan Morgan, opposed the application on the ground that the FtT had made the correct decision.

The appeal was heard by Sheriff Tony Kelly. The appellants were represented by Mr Taylor, solicitor, while the respondent appeared in person.

Three full months

The parties entered into a private residential tenancy on 28 September 2020 at a rent of £750 per month. The appellants submitted to the FtT that only the first month’s rent had been paid and that they had served a Notice to Leave on the tenant dated 30 December 2020 on the ground of rent arrears, which stated that an application would not be submitted to the Tribunal for an eviction order before 6 July 2021.

Upon receipt of the application, the FtT informed the appellants’ agents that it was unlikely to succeed as at the time that the tenant was given notice, he was not in three full months of arrears, advising them to consult the decision of the Upper Tribunal in Majid v Gaffney (2019) on the point. At a case management discussion, the appellants argued that Majid had been wrongly decided by the UT, a submission which was rejected by the FtT.

It was submitted for the appellants that the provisions of the 2016 Act did not support the UT’s finding that the eviction ground relied on had to apply at the time of the service of notice. The time for ascertaining when the ground applied was, per Schedule 3 of the Act, the day on which the Tribunal first considered the application for an eviction order on its merits.

The appellants further argued that section 62(1)(c) of the Act created an ambiguity in that it was not made clear on the face of the provision whether the eviction ground to be relied upon before the FtT had to exist at the time of the service of the notice to leave. They sought to rely on statements made by the Scottish Minister for Housing and Welfare during the Stage 2 proceedings of the Private Housing Bill in support of their construction of the Act.

Although he was present at the appeal, no substantive submissions were made by the respondent.

Consistency in the scheme

In his decision, Sheriff Kelly observed: “The landlord was speculating not only that the state of affairs would remain (arrears of rent) but that they would deteriorate to such an extent that the circumstances in ground 12 would come to pass. That is, at some point in time (unspecified), the arrears would accrue over three consecutive months and thus application could be made to the FtT for an eviction order.”

He continued: “It makes sense for the clock on the computation of that period to start running from when the tenant is told that he must leave and for that notice to contain information that at that point in time forms a sufficient basis in fact to amount to an eviction ground. The purpose of these requirements is difficult to make sense of if all that the landlord requires to intimate to the tenant when serving a notice to leave is that an application based upon a specified eviction ground may, at some unspecified point in the future, be made to the FtT.”

On whether there was an ambiguity in the 2016 Act, the sheriff said: “There appears to be a consistency in the statutory scheme. Rather than view any perceived conflict between the regulations providing for the terms of the forms to be used in a notice to be served on a tenant and the primary legislation as some deficiency of drafting I prefer to view them as parts of a complete whole.”

He concluded: “It would not be correct to put on an equal footing the words used by the legislature in the 2016 Act and the content of the parliamentary debates which featured prospectively those provisions. I consider Mr Taylor was in error in rendering as synonymous with the intention of parliament what the Minister said in the course of the parliamentary committee’s deliberations on the Bill.”

In a postscript addressing the UT’s decision in Majid, Sheriff Kelly added: “I had deliberately refrained from reading the UT decision of Majid v Gaffney until the close of submissions in this case. On reading it I agree with it. I do not detect any conflict with my reasons and those of Sheriff Fleming in that case.”

The appeal was therefore refused.

Angus farmer in breach of planning control fails to challenge decision to uphold part of notice

By Mitchell Skilling

Martin Gibb challenged the decision of a reporter for the Scottish Ministers to partially uphold a notice served upon him by Angus Council in October 2020. He argued that the reporter had erred in certain procedural respects and failed to consider relevant evidence that he had provided.

The appeal was heard by the Lord President, Lord Carloway, sitting with Lord Malcolm and Lord Woolman. The appellant was represented by lay representative Carolann Curran and the respondents by N McLean, solicitor advocate.

Change of use

It was considered by Angus Council that the appellant had changed the use of his land west of Boath Burn, Muirdum, by using it to store and site storage containers and machinery. Additionally, it was considered that fences he had erected on the southern boundary of the site adjacent to a main road had been constructed without permission.

The appellant challenged the notice in an appeal to the respondents on the grounds that the land continued to be used for agricultural purposes, mostly the care of horses, and the containers and vehicles were required to store feed and maintain the land. Alternatively, he argued that the enforcement notice was time-barred as the containers, gates, and fencing had all been there for more than four years.

An unaccompanied site visit was conducted by the reporter in November 2020, who did not find any animals on the site and noted that the containers were empty and the machinery present related to the construction and forestry industries. Although he found that the council had required the appellant to take excessive steps to remedy the breach and thus partially allowed the appeal, he refused the appeal on all other grounds.

It was submitted for the appellant that the reporter had erred in not providing reasons for his unaccompanied site visit, as well as in failing to prefer photographs he had provided said to be of the containers and fencing on-site in 2015 and 2016 over the photographs produced by the council. Alternatively, the reporter’s investigation had been excessive and oppressive and thus breached the appellant’s rights under article 6 of the ECHR.

Ample opportunity

Lord Carloway, delivering the opinion of the court, began: “The appellant, having been given due notice of the alleged breach, was afforded an opportunity to provide evidence relating to, and to make submissions about, the use of the containers. He did so. There was no need for the reporter to provide reasons for his site visit. He was entitled to carry out an unaccompanied visit. The reason for the visit was obviously to assist in the determination of the appeal.”

He continued: “The reporter, in light of the photographic evidence, his site visit and other information, was entitled to reject the appellant’s contentions on the use of the containers. He did not require to pose further questions to the appellant, as if he were cross-examining him. The appeal on the ground of fairness is rejected.”

Addressing whether the reporter had erred in his consideration of the appellant’s evidence, he said: “The reporter did not base his decision on the land being used for grazing horses. He accepted that some of the plant and equipment was for agricultural use, including the storage of animal feed. His decision was based upon his conclusions on the use of the containers and other plant and equipment. The reporter did not identify any trailer as being specifically for logs. He did say that he considered that certain of the equipment was for use in forestry and construction. The appellant was given an ample opportunity to provide his explanation relative to the use of the equipment on site.”

Lord Carloway concluded: “The reporter considered the appellant’s photographs and other materials and, as he was entitled to do, rejected either their provenance or relevance or both. The appeal seeks to re-open matters concerning the merits of the case which are outwith the scope of an appeal to this court.”

The appeal was therefore refused.

Scottish human rights ‘report card’ submitted to United Nations

In its “report card” to the UN’s latest Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of human rights in the UK, the commission reiterates its strong opposition to UK government plans to reduce existing human rights protections by creating a new Bill of Rights.

It notes that the UK government is disregarding its own Independent Human Rights Act Review as well as opposition from the Scottish Parliament, Scottish government, civil society groups, and Westminster’s Joint Committee on Human Rights.

The comprehensive report was submitted to the UN in advance of its Human Rights Council Review of the UK, set to take place in November.

The report highlights widespread support in Scotland for stronger human rights laws and recommends the Scottish government proceed with legislation to incorporate a wider range of human rights treaties into domestic law.

The report also examines how rights are being protected in practice across Scotland and draws attention to concerns in multiple areas. These include:

• Mental health – a range of concerns persist in relation to mental health care and outcomes in Scotland, particularly a continued failure to meet targets for children and young people. The report spotlights the higher prevalence of mental health issues amongst women, children, young people and those living in deprived areas including the much higher suicide rate in those areas, and says a human rights based approach must be taken to investigating and tackling healthcare inequalities.
• Poverty – the report points out that the Scottish government is still not on track to meet Scotland’s child poverty targets. Additionally, food and fuel poverty persist and Scottish research highlights a household is made homeless every 19 minutes, many being families with children, contravening the right to an adequate standard of living. The commission recommends the Scottish government strengthen efforts to reduce all aspects of poverty.
• Prison conditions – the report highlights that many concerns raised by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture after it visited Scottish prisons have not been fully addressed, for example, on overcrowding. There are also significant concerns about other detention conditions, including the use of restraints, strip searching of adults and young people, and the increased use of remand, especially for young people.  The commission recommends the Scottish government take urgent action to meet human rights standards.

Other concerns set out in the report include health inequalities, rights affected by social care, and environmental rights, as well as hate crime, human trafficking and access to justice.

Dr Anna Black, a GP and a commissioner at the Scottish Human Rights commission, said: “As Scotland’s accredited National Human Rights Institution, the commission reports regularly to the UN on both progress and ongoing challenges with human rights in Scotland. Our latest comprehensive review heard from a wide range of people living and working in communities across Scotland. Their evidence, and our own research, makes clear that Scotland still has some way to go before we can confidently claim that human rights are a reality in everyone’s lives.

“Our recommendations to the Scottish government would help to close this implementation gap in a number of key areas and we urge the Scottish government to act on the issues we have highlighted.

“We remain extremely concerned about the risks to legal protection for people’s rights in Scotland if the UK government moves ahead with its proposals to replace the Human Rights Act with a watered-down Bill of Rights. We have now highlighted this to the UN, as the Human Rights Council prepares for its November review of the UK’s human rights performance.”

The commission will now share its findings and recommendations with representatives of UN member states in advance of a meeting in Geneva in September, which will then inform the UN Human Rights Council’s final review in November.

DJ Alexander warns private rented sector will shrink if reforms go ahead

The firm, part of the Lomond Group which is the largest lettings and estate agency in Scotland, said that the Scottish government should be concerned about what will happen to the private rented sector (PRS) and the wider housing market in the coming five years if they implement the proposals outlined in their paper.

DJ Alexander believes that by 2027 – two years after the legislation is proposed to be implemented – the likelihood, based on lessons from similar proposals in Berlin, Stockholm, and San Francisco, is that the private rented sector will have shrunk in size in Scotland; overcrowding in homes will have increased; waiting times for homes in the PRS will be longer; rents will be much higher for newer tenants than for incumbents; and the Scottish economy will suffer because of a lack of homes for EU workers.

David Alexander, chief executive officer of DJ Alexander Scotland, said: “Unfortunately this paper has been created for ideological reasons rather than as a practical approach to effective legislation. It seeks to address a problem that the paper itself denies exists. While the Scottish Government states that rents are soaring and becoming unaffordable the consultation paper states that “Two-bedroom PRS rents over the last eleven years have risen at a rate comparable to inflation, 25.1 per cent compared to inflation of 24.3 per cent over the same period.

“Median gross earnings have also increased broadly ahead of rents (26 per cent since 2010 compared to 25 per cent rise in rents) and there has been an estimated increase of 36 per cent in the median monthly household income in the private rented sector from 2010 to 2020.”

He continued: “Clearly there are higher rent increases in the most popular areas but that is simply market forces. Individuals can choose to live in less expensive areas which would represent a lower percentage of their income.”

“The PRS in Scotland is already, rightly, the most heavily regulated and controlled rental market in the UK with no administrative fees; no section 21 evictions; a rent tribunal to mediate in conflicted cases; the strongest security of tenure in the UK; and one month notice for tenants to withdraw from rental agreements. Therefore, the PRS in Scotland is already a fairer deal for tenants than any other part of the UK.”

Mr Alexander concluded: “There is undoubtedly an issue with demand exceeding supply in the Scottish housing market. There are too few homes to sell and rent and prices are rising in response. However, the answer is to build more homes, to expand the social housing sector, to boost the home building sector, and to encourage greater investment in the private rental market. This may not generate headlines, and is certainly more expensive and complex to implement, but it will ultimately produce a more effective, fairer housing market in the future.”

Legal tech expert awarded Law Society of Scotland accredited legal technologist status

Mr Bowker is managing director and owner of Advanced Analytica, a company that specialises in the delivery of tech-enabled services for legal functions seeking to improve efficiency and rethink service delivery models.

His work includes collaborative projects with Malcolm Dowden, partner in the data privacy, cybersecurity and digital assets team at global law firm Squire Patton Boggs, to develop innovative and integrated legal services.

Mr Bowker has over 25 years’ experience in IT development and knows there are many technical challenges that available commercial or open-source solutions cannot solve alone. He has developed a platform agnostic framework and range of technology assets to fill the gaps in legal processing, text and data mining, and analytics solutions. He helps legal functions accelerate project timelines and increase speed-to-value.

Mr Dowden said: “This is fantastic recognition and reflects Jonathan’s exceptional ability to translate tech jargon into plain language that can be understood in the c-suite. Working with Jonathan has taught me a great deal about the need for collaboration to overcome the barriers between technology and legal functions and to de-risk clients’ compliance operations.”

The professional accreditation for those working in legal technology was the first of its kind in the UK. Launched by the Law Society of Scotland in November 2019, it reflects the growing impact of technology on the legal sector and the need for technological solutions specific to the industry, alongside the emergence of roles, such as legal process engineer, legal analyst, and legal technologist.

Rob Marrs, head of education at the Law Society of Scotland, said: “It is great to see Jonathan accredited as a legal technologist. I know that the panel who looked over his application were extremely impressed by his experience, knowledge and skills. We look forward to working with him to build the status and the wider Accredited Legal Technologist community in the future.”

Public inquiry into UK’s Post Office scandal to hear evidence in Glasgow

More than 700 people were wrongly convicted of false accounting, theft and fraud between 2000 and 2014 due to a fault in the Post Office’s Horizon computer system.

Sir Wyn Williams, who is leading the statutory inquiry into the most widespread miscarriage of justice in UK history, yesterday announced that further human impact hearings will take place in Glasgow on 11 and 12 May 2022 and in Belfast on 18 and 19 May 2022.

“At these hearings the inquiry will take evidence from persons adversely affected by the Horizon IT system who were and are resident, respectively, in Scotland and Northern Ireland,” the judge said. “These hearings will bring to a close the sessions in which oral evidence is taken relating to human impact.”

The human impact hearings form part of the first phase of the inquiry, which began in February. The second and third phases were due to commence in June and July 2022 but have been delayed.

Sir Wyn said he had decided “with considerable reluctance” to delay the start of the Phase 2 hearings to the week commencing 12 September 2022, with Phase 3 to commence “shortly after Phase 2 has been completed”.

The judge added: “I would like to stress that I remain committed to progressing matters as swiftly as I can, but I must keep firmly in mind the overriding objective of fulfilling my terms of reference and analysing appropriately the evidence which has been and will be provided to me.”

Andrew Black: New pension reporting requirements in corporate deals expected – soon

Draft regulations making the proposed changes had been expected to come into force today. But with 6 April here, it seems the planned changes have been delayed – for now at least.

Current pension reporting requirements

At the moment, employers with a defined benefit pension scheme are required to notify the Pensions Regulator if various events occur.

For example, if the employer stops trading in the UK or breaches a banking covenant while the scheme is underfunded.

Reporting requirements in the context of a corporate deal are usually limited to cases where a group company is relinquishing control of a subsidiary that participates in an underfunded defined benefit pension scheme.

The consultation on pension reporting

The government is keen to improve the Pensions Regulator’s powers so that it can get involved ahead of time where necessary, before employers of defined benefit pension schemes make changes which could impact on their ability to support the pension scheme.

Last September, the government consulted on amending its list of notifiable events to include two new employer-related events. The new events would capture a much broader swathe of corporate activity at a far earlier stage than employers are used to.

Under the draft regulations, employers with a defined benefit pension scheme would need to report to the Pensions Regulator:

• the intended sale by the employer of a material proportion of its business or assets; and
• the granting or extension of certain securities over its assets if the secured creditor would be ranked above the pension scheme for debt recovery purposes.
• The reporting duty for these new events would arise at a much earlier point of the deal – once a “decision in principle” has been reached, so before any negotiation or agreements being entered into. This has caused concern in the industry, particularly in relation to confidentiality.
• Alongside these new notifiable events, it is proposed that employers will also have a duty to give a further notice and accompanying statements to the Pensions Regulator and the pension scheme trustees at a later stage in corporate transactions (usually when the main terms are agreed or there is a material change).

The statement would set out the implications for the scheme and how any risks to the scheme will be mitigated.

This had also been expected to come into force on 6 April.

The delay

While the reason for delay has not been confirmed, we expect that the government is working through all the feedback received on the consultation.

The government will want to avoid a situation where it is cumbersome for companies to work out if/when a deal is captured by the changes or the sheer scale of information sent to the Regulator makes it difficult to identify riskier corporate activity.

Although the changes have been delayed for now, the consensus in the industry is that new regulations are still expected this year.

We will back in touch with more information on the changes once this is available.

Andrew Black is a senior solicitor at Burness Paull

Major report shows Scotland’s changing rural land market

The report published today by the Scottish Land Commission shows the Scottish rural land market is characterised by exceptionally high demand but continued low supply, resulting in rising values.

The Rural Land Market Insights Report established that non-farming investors are playing an increasing role throughout the land market and there is heightened demand for smaller farms as lifestyle holdings and from corporate entities and investors interested in plantable land and forestry holdings.

The report was compiled by Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) in partnership with land agents Savills and Strutt & Parker, with support from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS).

It draws on published market information and interviews with sector experts, to provide a current picture of buyer and seller motivations, to better understand the land market and what is driving it.

Hamish Trench, chief executive of the Scottish Land Commission, said: “This report shows what is happening in the rural land market and helps us understand why. Emerging carbon and natural capital value is an increasing influence, but other drivers, particularly high timber prices and forestry values remain significant.

“It emphasises that while the amount of land coming to the market has remained largely the same over recent years, demand from different types of buyer has increased significantly, raising prices.”

The report found the growing role of non-farming investors has resulted in land values being increasingly influenced by long-term investment potential and corporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations. With farmland values rising by 31.2 per cent in Scotland in 2021 against 6.2 per cent across UK.

There has also been a marked shift in buyer types, with nearly half of all estates purchased in Scotland in 2021 sold to corporate bodies, investment funds or charitable trusts – motivated by the potential for carbon offsetting and developing large-scale environmental improvement.

Off-market sales make up a growing proportion of land market activity, the report finds, with up to one-third of farmland, forestry and plantable land occurring off-market, rising to almost two-thirds of estate sales.

The off-market sales trend may exclude certain buyers and constrain access to land for individuals, communities and businesses, raising questions about transparency of the land market, which the report suggests could further reinforce Scotland’s existing pattern of concentrated land ownership.

The report recognises that there is an element of speculation in the land market as investors look for a safe haven in a turbulent global economy and gamble on future carbon values rising. Strong growth in land values is expected to continue due to continued low supply and high demand, high levels of private wealth and corporate interests seeking land, long-term policy on climate change, and increasing pressure on global timber markets and food supply chains.

In the Scottish estates market there was an estimated 87 per cent increase on prices paid in 2020, and last year two estates sold for more than £20 million, while five sold for between £10-£20 million. Echoing the national trend, 64 per cent of successful estates sales were off-market, up from 33 per cent in 2020, and around one-third of buyers were from overseas.

Mr Trench added: “The way the land market functions is important to Scotland’s ambitions such as net zero, nature restoration, repopulation, and community empowerment. Being able to participate in the market shapes not just who owns Scotland’s land, but who is able to make decisions and who benefits from land and its economic, social and environmental value.

“The report highlights a complex set of influences at work in the land market with implications for the diversity and accountability of land ownership, community participation in the market, land use decision making and market transparency. There is no simple answer, shaping the market in the public interest will require a careful and joined up approach in policy as well as responsible practice on the ground.

“To inform our advice to Scottish government we will be holding a series of events and discussions with stakeholders to discuss the findings of this report and its implications for both policy and practice.”

Euan Ryan, public affairs lead for Scotland at RICS said: “This research marks an important first step in building a greater understanding of the land market in Scotland. It is particularly helpful in illuminating the multiple factors currently driving demand.

“The natural environment will play a crucial role in enabling a just transition to net zero in Scotland, from the effective use of land in creating a sustainable built environment, to shepherding public and private investment into natural capital and carbon sequestration. But it is paramount that such activity works to the benefit of, and following engagement with, local communities, and in the public interest.

“The greater understanding and transparency enabled by this research is essential. RICS looks forward to working with the Scottish Land Commission, Scottish government, and other stakeholders across Scotland to develop this understanding further and help realise such ambitions.”

Derek Couper: Cosmetic surgery – compensation and regulation

Given that many cosmetic treatments are either unavailable on the NHS, or only available in very specific cases, those determined to go under the knife will most often find themselves working with private treatment centres, independent salons or individual therapists. While in most cases, cosmetic treatments are carried out without issue and to the satisfaction of patients, there are cases in which issues arise as a result of the procedure including the potential for a patient to sustain serious and often lifelong injuries. It may be possible to seek compensation for those injuries if a mistake was made because of professional negligence, which has caused further suffering.

Legislation and enforcement of rules in this emerging area of medical practice have been the subject of much criticism, with many arguing there is merely an incomplete patchwork of regulation in place applicable to private therapists, with significant burdens to enforcement of relevant provisions in circumstances where certain practitioners are not regulated by any professional body. The Scottish government has recently confirmed that it will set out proposals to law and regulations which will apply to individual practitioners carrying out cosmetic treatments “in the near future”. However, many are concerned this is too little too late including Edinburgh-based Dr Demosthenous, who specialises in the field of cosmetic medicine at his own regulated practice  Last month he stated: “The regulations in Scotland started off with good intent however have become the joke of aesthetic medicine globally.”

Like Dr Demosthenous, many others are concerned that the proposed legislation from Scottish government is likely to focus on healthcare professionals who are already tightly governed and held accountable by their own regulatory bodies including the General Medical Council, the General Dental Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. Of greatest concern is perhaps the individual, unlicensed practitioners who advertise openly and most often on social media, and who carry out treatments either at home or in other informal settings. The concern is that the continued lack of regulation of these individuals, who are most likely to cause harm to the patients who attend with them for treatment, will continue unregulated and without sufficient safeguards in place. 

Practitioners who carry out procedures such as Botox filler, thread lifts, teeth whitening and skin peels or other treatments are not currently required to register with Health Improvement Scotland. Conversely, doctors, nurses, dentists, dental assistants and other healthcare practitioners are required to register with the relevant body which has responsibility for oversight of the quality and delivery of their care including any cosmetic treatments they carry out. Nail technicians, salon owners and others are not required to register with HIS and so are not bound by the same regulations and safeguards as apply to other medical professions. It is for this reason that many consider the regulations are necessary, notwithstanding the concern many have that they are unlikely to go far enough. There will be a great deal of focus on the scope of the new provisions, how they can be applied to those who offer treatment to the public including those not registered with a professional body, and how enforcement would work in that latter scenario. 

There will be much further comment on patient safety as it relates to cosmetic procedures once the draft regulations have been published by the Scottish government. Until then, many are concerned that we remain in a situation whereby individuals are risking adverse consequences by agreeing to procedures undertaken in unregulated premises and by unregulated practitioners. Should those procedures be carried out negligently, and harm to the patient arises from that, there is presently a real risk that the patient would be unable to pursue a claim for negligence against that individual if they are unregulated and without sufficient indemnity insurance. Legal professionals, medical practitioners and patients alike will be eager to understand the intent of the regulations once published and how this may impact the availability, affordability and expected standards of cosmetic procedures in Scotland going forward.

Derek Couper is an associate at Morton Fraser LLP

England: Braverman refers questions of law to Court of Appeal in wake of ‘Colston Four’ case

Her “questions of law” follow the acquittals of the ‘Colston Four’ in January, when Jake Skuse, 33, Rhian Graham, 30, Milo Ponsford, 26, and Sage Willoughby, 22, admitted participating in toppling the statue of 17th-century slave trader Edward Colston and throwing it in the River Avon during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protest.

Ms Braverman believes the case has led to uncertainty regarding the interaction between the offence of criminal damage and the rights relevant to protesting peacefully.

The Court of Appeal will be asked to clarify the law around whether someone can use a defence related to their human rights when they are accused of criminal damage.

The court will also consider whether juries should be asked to decide if a conviction for criminal damage is a proportionate interference with the human rights of the accused, particularly the right to protest and freedom of expression.

In the Colston statue case, the judge directed the jury that, before they could convict, they must be sure that doing so would be a “proportionate interference” – i.e. compatible – with the defendants’ rights to freedom of thought and to freedom of expression.

Acting independently of the UK government, in her role as the Guardian of the Public Interest, Ms Braverman made the decision “in the interests of future cases involving the same point of law”.

Since 2000, there have been 19 instances of this power being used by attorneys general. The last time this power was used was in December 2020 when clarification was sought on the law in relation to sexual assault.

Ms Braverman said: “After careful consideration, I have decided to refer the Colston statue case to the Court of Appeal to clarify the law around protests.

“Trial by jury is an important guardian of liberty and critical to that are the legal directions given to the jury. It is in the public interest to clarify the points of law raised in these cases for the future. This is a legal matter which is separate from the politics of the case involved.”

Malaysia: Lawyers warn against use of AI in sentencing

In a pilot scheme on the island of Borneo, AI is being used to assist judges in sentencing drug dealers and rapists.

The scheme sees judges advised by software made by Sarawak Information Systems, a firm owned by the government. It is, however, unpopular with some lawyers.

“Our criminal procedure code does not provide for use of AI in the courts … I think it’s unconstitutional,” Hamid Ismail told Reuters. “In sentencing, judges don’t just look at the facts of the case — they also consider mitigating factors, and use their discretion. But AI cannot use discretion.”

The designers of the software said they have tried to avoid bias on the basis, for example, of the race of the convicted person.

In 2019 France banned research on judicial behaviour in an attempt to suppress the litigation analytics and predictions sector from building models of judicial reasoning.

ECtHR: Italy violated Article 2 after failing to protect woman and her children

Ms Landi alleged that the Italian state had failed to take the requisite action to protect her and her two children from the domestic violence inflicted by her partner, which had led to the murder of her one-year-old son and her own attempted murder in 2018.

The court noted that the national authorities had failed in their duty to conduct an immediate and proactive assessment of the risk of a repetition of the violent acts committed against Ms Landi and her children, and to adopt operational and preventive measures to mitigate the risk and to protect those concerned.

In particular, the authorities had remained passive in the face of the serious risk of ill-treatment of Ms Landi, and their inaction had enabled the applicant’s partner to continue to threaten, harass and attack her unhindered and with impunity. The authorities ought to have assessed the risk of renewed violence and adopted appropriate and adequate measures.

Such measures could have been adopted by the authorities, pursuant to Italian legislation, whether or not there had been a complaint or any change in the victim’s perception of the risk. The authorities had reacted neither immediately, as required in cases of domestic violence, nor at any other time. They had therefore failed to show the requisite diligence and to honour their obligation to protect Ms Landi’s and her sons’ lives.

Nevertheless, the court did not consider that the impugned shortcomings could be considered, per se, as pointing to any discriminatory attitude on the authorities’ part. The complaint concerning Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) read in conjunction with Article 2 was therefore manifestly ill-founded.

The court awarded the applicant just satisfaction of €32,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

Quote of the day

If a person is stupid, we excuse him by saying that he cannot help it; but if we attempted to excuse in precisely the same way the person who is bad, we should be laughed at.

Schopenhauer

And finally… motiveless crime

The autonomous Chevrolet Bolt EV was stopped as its headlights were off. An officer can be heard saying “there’s nobody in it”.

However, after the officer walks away, the car begins driving off. Self-driving car service Cruise, the owner, said the car was not trying to escape from police and that it had pulled over to a safe spot when it was stopped.

The car did not receive a ticket.

AQP have an expert team dedicated to Executry and Trust affairs

email: exeinstructions@alexquinn.co.uk

http://www.alexquinn.co.uk

The Great Resignation: What firms must consider to retain talent

It is important to understand that ‘The Great Resignation’ doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is going to jump into a new career, but instead a ‘reset’ of an individual’s life. Crucially, businesses must identify and respond to these needs, whilst also understanding the level of responsibility that must fall on legal technology providers in turn.

For us at PracticeEvolve, our investment falls into three categories: Competency, Cloud, and Connectivity; all designed to ensure that not only firm’s needs are met, but individual’s needs alike.

It is imperative for firms to ensure they have a satisfied team of users who are fully competent in the software they are using, in order to maximise their ROI. It’s one of the many reasons we have introduced EvolveLearning (alongside EvolveCommunity). Designed to offer users a platform to interact and learn at a pace to suit their needs, EvolveLearning will improve user competence and in turn, allow law firms the accessibility to receive the most from their chosen product (PracticeEvolve, SOS, or Linetime).

Equally, as firms look to reduce the costs and the risks associated with infrastructure, we see more of an onus on Cloud solutions. Fully native Cloud solutions, for example, remove the maintenance of physical servers and allow users to operate on any device with a browser. PracticeEvolve are currently trailing their new software, our next generation native Cloud beta solution, in Australia.

Finally, the software needs to be connected to other applications to ensure operations are far easier for the user and the firm. This is why PracticeEvolve, incorporating SOS and Linetime, are constantly evolving with better integrations to software (including InfoTrack and DocuSign), automating many of the processes for ease of use. Similarly, we understand the need to provide access for a workforce who are wanting the mobility to work at home, at the office, or while on the move.

Ultimately, to retain talent in the long term, firms must invest in software with a service to give users control of their working lives while ensuring firms benefit from a happy workforce and better efficiencies.

If you are looking to get more from your software, talk to one of the team and request a free demo.

Why New Business Teams are catching on

Jose Mourinho famously said, “Good teams win titles, but great teams retain them”. Makes sense. And acquisition and retention, albeit in the form of clients, is definitely something we are seeing more law firms focusing on in 2022.

If it’s not broken, don’t fix it…?

It is far more complicated for champions to strengthen their side than it is for their rivals. Winning the league is a veil; it means that even a flawed team has a legitimacy, that even those players whom a manager believes might be improved upon most easily have a right to keep their place. Football has always believed that you do not change a winning formula, that if something is not broken, you do not fix it, even when actually it might be rather more broken than it first appears.

The same can be said for law firms. Firms sometimes don’t know there are better ways to work. They do quite well, they’re bringing in fees, so all is well. But not adapting to a changing environment can be costly. And as much as many lawyers and law firms have formed great relationships and in many cases friendships, the desire of your rivals is to win, to do better, to catch and overhaul the firm that did better than them the previous year. That is a powerful emotional impulse, particularly when combined with a freedom to change their working practices to address their problems.

A taste for success

Great football managers often talk about a hunger for trophies. Brian Clough always said that the most important triumph in his time at Nottingham Forest was not the league title or the European Cup, but the 1977 Anglo-Scottish Cup, because that was the one that set the team on the way to further glory, which included two European Cups. That first gave them a taste for success. This is called the “Champagne Effect.”

For law firms to change and succeed can be difficult. Mainly because as friendly as you might be with the firm at the opposite end of the High St, you really don’t know what they’re up to internally. You don’t know what they’re planning, the trends they are following or the work the backroom staff are doing to get their team ready to not just compete, but to potentially take the title! But what you can do is create small wins to give you that taste for success.

Structured success

Many of the law firms we speak to are gearing up and restructuring their business for a busy year. One even used the term, “Its Game On!”, hence the title of this article. The trend we’re seeing is that the introduction and/or expansion of ‘New Business Teams’ (NBTs) are going to be business critical for law firms.

We’ve heard so many law firms talking about this, and many are now adopting a dedicated New Business Team to enhance and structure their sales processes. Primarily because the importance of tracking the marketing spend and conversion values can’t be underestimated in today’s market. Firms are becoming laser focused on not only driving new business but improving comms and analysing their client data to ensure they retain them.

Change your tactics

The general rule that successful firms are following is that if the cost of client acquisition is too expensive for the work the client is paying you for then it’s time to change tactics.

The trouble with law firms is they are normally hired for a one off piece of work for a client and struggle to sell other services to enhance the income stream they worked hard to sign up. The enthusiasm to try and structure this process and retain business weans because most firms are busy and believe they don’t have the time. This may be true, but the amount of money being lost and the likelihood of you falling way down the law firm league table because you don’t focus on this growth area is going to make our break the long term success of your business.

Here are 3 key areas you need to consider to succeed in the NBT challenge:

1. Methodology and Process – how to do it within the context of your work types, legal knowledge and customers.
2. People and Organisation – are you structured in the right way for success, with the right people owning the right things?
3. Systems and Resources – using the right tech and resources is critical, and ensuring your software includes a dedicated way to Intake, Track & Convert enquires easily.

Denovo’s “Champagne Effect”

It’s a law firm leaders’ job to teach their team to be hungry for success. It’s Denovo’s job to give your team the “The Champaign Effect”. In other words, we’ll show you how using the right technology to manage new business and retain existing clients will help your law firm be successful. Coupled with great people and a structured process we’ll give you the efficiency and data you need to see success. We’ll give you some wins.

If you’re ready to change your tactics, visit denovobi.com, call us on 0141 331 5290, or if you would prefer to write to us our email is info@denovobi.com.

Property Market – A Perfect Storm for Fraudsters?

A report on money laundering activity showed these fears to be well founded, as property fraud was a key theme with £200 Million of criminal activity in 2020.

Many of these cases relate to transactions where a criminal purports to sell a property without the knowledge or consent of the proper legal owner. Where they are successful, a legitimate buyer and their lender can face enormous losses.

Protection against this type of loss is provided by Stewart Title’s Fraud Solution Policy. This policy offers safeguards against losses arising from fraud for buyers and their lenders where a criminal successfully impersonates the owner of a property. Cover of up to £1,000,000 is available for residential properties in England, Wales and Scotland with premiums starting at £28 (inclusive of IPT).

Solicitors acting for buyers are also protected as all rights of subrogation are expressly waived so their Professional Indemnity Insurance is protected.

Policies can be ordered online at: www.stewartsolution.com. Where cover is required for all of a firm’s buyer and lender clients, it is also available as a Block Policy.

For more details, please contact:

John Logan
Country Manager
01698 833308
john.logan@stewart.com

Elizabeth Birrell
Business Development Executive
07940 513681
elizabeth.birrell@stewart.com

Your trusted partner for title indemnities

We can provide the following:

Online Ordering

Our Stewart Solution application enables you to get a quote for more than 150 title risks in three easy steps. Our technology can reduce time, costs and the risk of errors, streamlining your practice.

Bespoke Solutions

Our knowledgeable Underwriting Team is available for more complex matters or where you need to discuss your transaction.

Dedicated Service

We approach working with our clients as a partnership – responding quickly to your needs, understanding the problems you face and providing prompt solutions to help resolve potential issues.

Contact us to discuss your transaction. We would be pleased to assist you.

Elizabeth Birrell

07940513681

elizabeth.birrell@stewart.com

www.stewartsolution.com