Pod's law

=ABOUT THIS EPISODE=This is a special edition of Pod's law for the General Election, concerning the law and conventions concerning who governs the country in the event of a hung parliament.If you wish to read more about what we discuss during the show, you might like to look at the following links:Carl Gardner's Blog: "Ed can enter No. 10 without Nicola’s keys":www.headoflegal.com/2015/04/19/ed-can-enter-no-10-without-nicolas-keys/The Guardian, "Alex Salmond threatens to call election after Scottish parliament rejects SNP's budget":www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/jan/28/scotland-snpFixed Term Parliaments Act 2011:www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/contents/enactedHouse of Commons Library, "Hung Parliaments":http://tinyurl.com/HCL-hung-parliamentElection Forecast website:www.electionforecast.co.uk=ABOUT CARL GARDNER=My guest is Carl Gardner, previously a practicing barrister and government lawyer, presently lecturer at the Open University and legal blogger at www.headoflegal.com.Carl tweets at www.twitter.com/carlgardner=ABOUT JULIUS KOMOROWSKI=I am a practising member of the Scottish bar (an Advocate). I am a member of Terra Firma Chambers. You can find out details about me here: www.tinyurl.com/JuliusKoYou can follow me on twitter here: www.twitter.com/podslaw=ABOUT THE PODCAST=You can find previous episodes of the podcast online at:www.tinyurl.com/podslawYou can also find episodes at iTunes at:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunesIf you subscribe to iTunes, then you will automatically have new episodes downloaded to your phone or computer once they become available.

This episode features an interview with Hayley Hooper, of Homerton College, University of Cambridge on Closed Material Procedure and National Security.You can view her profile here: www.tinyurl.com/H-J-HooperWe discuss the following recent cases:= CF -v- Ministry of Defence =High Court of England & Wales: Queen's Bench Division (Irwin J)14 October 2014[2014] EWHC 3171 (QB)An applicant alleged that the UK government had colluded in torture and other ill-treatment that he had suffered abroad. He sought to recover damages from the government in a civil action. It had already been decided that it was necessary to exclude the applicant from parts of the civil trial to protect national security. The question was what level of detail of the government's defence must be disclosed to the applicant in order for him to have a fair trial of his civil action.www.tinyurl.com/CF-v-MOD-CMP= VB & ors -v- Westminster Magistrates' Court, Govt. of Rwanda & Crown Prosecution Service =Supreme Court (Lords Neuburger, Mance, Reed, Hughes & Toulson)5 November 2014[2014] UKSC 59The Government of Rwanda sought extradition of certain persons in the United Kingdom. Those persons claimed that their extradition would expose them to serious harm. The witnessess necessary to establish this could not be led, they said, if the witnessess thought the Government of Rwanda would become aware of the evidence they had given. The question was whether the court had any power to employ special measures to avoid this.www.tinyurl.com/VB-v-Rwanda= Carlile -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department =Supreme Court (Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lords Kerr, Clarke & Sumption)12 November 2014[2014] UKSC 60A group of MPs and members of the House of Lords wished to host a meeting with a prominent Iranian opposition politician. The Home Office denied a visa to that politician. The Home Secretary said granting a visa would damage relations with Iran and might expose the British Embassy to retaliation from the Iranian public. In assessing whether the interference with the freedom of expression of the politician and parliamentarians was proportionate, what degree of respect should be accorded to the views of the Home Secretary? How intrusive should review be by the court?www.tinyurl.com/Carlile-v-SSHD== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced. You can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

The sixth show in the new series is with David Hay, Advocate, of Westwater Advocates. You can find out about him here:www.tinyurl.com/David-JP-HayYou can also read the judgment in his recent victory in the EAT here: www.tinyurl.com/Swissport-v-TaylorWe discuss the following case:= General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd -v- Carranza =Employment Appeal Tribunal10 October 2014[2014] UKEAT 0107Whether an Employment Tribunal erred in finding that, where a sick and disabled person was subject to disciplinary proceedings due to his absences, a reasonable adjustment would have been to disregard a final written warning for previous absences.www.tinyurl.com/General-Dynamics-v-Carranza== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced, and like the show on Facebook:www.facebook.com/podslawjkYou can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

The fifth show in our series is with Owen Mullan, Advocate, of Mackinnon Advocates. You can find out about him here:www.mullanadvocate.co.ukWe discuss the following case:= Beurskens v HM Advocate =Appeal Court, High Court of Justiciary26 February 2013[2014] HJAC 99Were signed statements taken by police officers on the instructions of the procurator fiscal "precognitions" and therefore inadmissable as evidence?Judgment: http://tinyurl.com/Beurskens-v-HMAOwen's blog: http://www.mullanadvocate.co.uk/beurskens-v-hma-precognition-or-statement/== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced, and like the show on Facebook:www.facebook.com/podslawjkYou can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

The fourth show in our series is with Scott McAlpine, Advocate, of Westwater Advocates. You can find out about him here:www.tinyurl.com/Scott-McAlpineWe discuss the following cases:= S, Petitioners =Inner House, Court of Session9 May 2014[2014] CSIH 43; 2014 Fam LR 23Whether ECHR, Article 8 considerations relevant to whether parental consent to adoption should be dispensed with.http://tinyurl.com/S-petitioners= JM v Taylor =Inner House, Court of Session10 July 2014[2014] CSIH 62In what circumstances is it expedient to pursue an appeal against a decision of the children's panel to the Inner House?http://tinyurl.com/JM-v-Taylor= JS v Mulrooney =Inner House, Court of Session29 July 2014[2014] CSIH 70In a hearing for determining whether grounds of referral to a children's hearing are established, what does the sheriff's duty to give reasons consist of? In an appeal against that sheriff's decision, when can the Inner House interfere?http://tinyurl.com/JS-v-Mulrooney== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced, and like the show on Facebook:www.facebook.com/podslawjkYou can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

The third show in our new series is with David Leighton, Advocate, of Hastie Stable. You can find out about him here:www.tinyurl.com/DavidLeightonWe discuss the following case:= P v Cheshire West and Cheshire Council ("Cheshire West") =Supreme Court of the United Kingdom19 March 2014[2014] UKSC 19Whether and in what circumstances individuals with learning disabilities, cared for in a residential setting, were detained in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 5.www.tinyurl.com/CheshireWestAt the end of the podcast I also mention:= Re X (deprivation of liberty) =Court of Protection of England & Wales7 August 2014[2014] EWCOP 25In what manner should the cases of those who must be regarded as being detained following the Cheshire West judgment be reviewed by the Court of Protection?www.tinyurl.com/X-Deprivation== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced. You can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

The second show in our new series is with Dr Findlay Stark of Jesus College, University of Cambridge. You can find out about him here:www.tinyurl.com/FindlayStarkYou can also follow Dr Stark on twitter here:www.twitter.com/findlaystarkWe discuss the following case:= R (o.t.a. Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice =Supreme Court of the United Kingdom[2014] UKSC 38Whether the blanket ban on assisted suicide contained in the Suicide Act 1961 was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights; and whether the Director of Public Prosecutions was required by Article 8 to give more precise guidance as to when prosecutions of assisted suicide would ensue.www.tinyurl.com/Nicklinson== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced. You can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes

Our new series begins with an interview with Niall McCluskey, Advocate. Niall is a member of Black Chambers.You can view his profile here: www.tinyurl.com/NiallMcCWe discuss the following recent cases:= Guardian News and Media Ltd -v- AB & CD =Court of Appeal: Criminal Division (Gross LJ, Simon & Burnett JJ)12 June 2014Whether a terrorism trial could be held with the public and press entirely excluded from proceedings, and the identity of the accused withheld.www.tinyurl.com/terrorism-trial= R -v- Crawley =Court of Appeal: Criminal Division (President of the Queen's Bench Division (Leveson), Davis & Treacy LJJ)21 May 2014[2014] EWCA Crim 1028Whether a complex fraud trial should be stopped in view of difficulties in obtaining counsel willing to appear for the accused.www.tinyurl.com/CoA-legal-aid= Bruce Smith -v- Procurator Fiscal, Aberdeen =High Court of Justiciary (Lady Smith, Lady Clark of Calton, Lord Philip)10 April 2014[2014] HJAC 25Whether accused who possessed a souvenir knuckle-duster and baton bought abroad on holiday had a reasonable excuse for its possession in transit to his home.www.tinyurl.com/souvenir-weapons== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced. You can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes