Archive for April, 2007

A busy day

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 30 April 2007
in whatever
. 0 Comments

So noted in passing:

Everybody’s favourite still wet behind the ears barrister, Tom Brennan, has had the full day of argument on the validity of his claim and the matter has apparently been adjourned.  Of course, the BBC don’t tell us whether Mr Brennan was successful in arguing for the validity of his claim and the matter adjourned for the hearing of its substance, or whether the Court adjourned to give its ruling later. Ho hum.

The House of Lords has begun hearing YL (by her litigation friend the Official Receiver) (FC) v. Birmingham City Council and others, the care home case, which could have significant repercussions on what counts as a public body or a body exercising a public function for the purposes of the Human Rights Act (and perhaps also Judicial Review).

The Guardian also notes the judgment in Stack v Dowden and the issues it raises for property rights for cohabiting couples. By complete co-incidence, I am working on a post on relationship breakdown and joint tenancies, hopefully to appear here soon and also hopefully as a complement to Family Lore on the topic.

It speaks…

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 28 April 2007
in law blogs and blogging and tech
. 4 Comments

I have just had the great pleasure of doing a podcast with Charon QC, talking about mature entry to the law, the LPC and recruitment, and legal aid. I also made a faltering attempt to explain the tolerated tresspasser issue. The podcast is now up on his blog.

I enjoyed myself thoroughly. Your mileage may vary (although Charon is superb as ever).

Please, No. It’s just wrong.

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 25 April 2007
in tech and whatever
. 6 Comments

My jaw dropped at this post from Lo-fi librarian. You must see the post for lo-fi’s screenshots. Also in the Times Online.

Field Fisher Waterhouse have opened an office in Second Life.

This is just wrong in so many ways.

The media hype about ‘real world’ businesses and politicians setting up in Second Life has faded after the first rush about 6 months ago, so the publicity value is low - I didn’t see mention of it before yesterday in the mainstream media and that a minor one - so it becomes a classic too-late jump on the bandwagon by a law firm.

And then, in a virtual world where architectural feats of imagination far beyond the dreams of those bound by gravity and engineering are possible, Field Fisher Waterhouse appear to have built (or had built for them) a generic late modern corporate office building (with roof garden for entertaining clients, naturally). Thusly, the message is ‘Lawyers - they’re not too far behind the times but wherever they go they spread corporate greyness’.

Thirdly, as SQMLaw points out, Second Life as a virtual realm, rather than as a company property, is not subject to the laws of any jurisdiction - that is more or less the point - except for the rules set down and policed by Linden, who own and run it (despite vociferous objections from the inhabitants at times). However, given that the currency of Second Life - Lindens - is convertible into dollars, it is probably only a matter of time before questions of jurisdiction emerge.

Lastly - to the suggestion that this could be a virtual meeting place for the firm - do they want their trainees turning up as Daleks, purple baboons and winged dominatrixes? Or to have a crucial meeting gatecrashed by a group of furries? (As I understand it, privacy is a only matter of consent or obscurity in Second Life, but I could be wrong).

I mean what the hell is the point of a virtual world that is exactly like the physical world, complete with Gap, Nike, accountants and lawyers, only with less gravity?

Although less gravity would be nice.

Unified Contract Judicial Review goes ahead

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 24 April 2007
in Legal Aid
. 0 Comments

Issued on 20th April - sorry to be a bit slow.

Lots of PDFs on the Law Society page here. So we are back to wait and see.

But even if the contract has to be reformulated, it won’t change the really damaging stuff that the LSC proposes to introduce within the framework of the contract. At the risk of sounding like Sian Lloyd, the long term outlook remains cloudy and cold. Wrap up warm…

Curse this anonymity thing.

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 24 April 2007
in job and whatever
. 0 Comments

There are times, such as this, that the requirements of anonymity are a bit annoying. Much though I enjoy the dark powers conferred by my mask of mystery, being the Fantômas of housing law, it does mean that some things can’t be posted about at the time or at all because they are too much of a damn obvious give away.

So, when I’m involved in a very interesting case, which may turn out to be a test case for certain propositions, I have to bite my tongue. I take consolation in the fact that as the matter is in process, I couldn’t post about it anyway.

The matter will either be ongoing for some time or over very quickly indeed (unless we appeal - oh the temptation), so it could be that my agony is removed soon. But this is far from the first time I’ve had to forcibly keep my trap shut or do some extensive timeshifting and irrelevant fact invention.

Glittering Prizes

Published
by
Nearly Legal
on 23 April 2007
in law blogs and blogging and whatever
. 0 Comments

Not that I am at all obsessive about such things, at least not since I forced myself to keep checking down to once a month or so, but out of the allegedly 71 million blogs tracked by Technorati (surely less than half of which are active), Nearly Legal has crashed - or perhaps tiptoed - into the top 100,000. In fact it currently stands at 96,524. Definitely in the relegation zone compared to the premiership giants like the Barrister Blog, Binary Law and of course Charon QC, but blimey, nonetheless.

If I could only summon up the strength to squash my scruples (ooh err missus), I could no doubt retire on the google-ad revenue, but the ads are not going to happen.

For a niche blawg even within the niche of blawgs, I’m chuffed to be in the top 1.428 percent. Still, by the time anybody reading this checks, the blog will no doubt be placed at 105,367 or something.