Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore and critique the conceptual and terminological shift – particularly from “vulnerability” to “adult at risk” – in adult safeguarding under the Care Act 2014 and the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014.

The paper compares the notion of the vulnerable adult in safeguarding, with the notion of an adult at risk under the Care Act 2014 and the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and questions to what extent such a shift addresses existing criticisms of “vulnerability”.

The paper criticises the notion of the “vulnerable adult” for perpetuating the stigma associated with an impairment or disability, and for the types of legal and policy responses deemed appropriate under such an understanding of vulnerability. While efforts to replace the term “vulnerable adult” with “adult at risk” are, to some extent, to be welcomed, “adult at risk” under the legislation relies on the same characteristics for which the “vulnerable adult” has been criticised. Nevertheless, the safeguarding provisions under the two Acts have made some strides forward in comparison to their legal and policy predecessors and the notion of the “vulnerable adult”.

This paper’s originality and value lie in its scrutiny of the notion of “vulnerability” in adult safeguarding, in comparison to the newer terminology of an “adult at risk”, whilst also suggesting that in important respects – in relation to the interventions deemed appropriate where an adult is perceived to be at risk – the two pieces of legislation are a marked improvement on their predecessors. It also offers some thoughts as to how criticisms of the new legislation may be overcome.

The Committee has considered the present state of English civil law in relation to remedies available to victims of money laundering. We summarise here the relevant rules and principles of English law. See ‘Summary of the current legal position’ below.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Law Commission's recommendations concerning the power of removal contained in section 47 of the National Assistance Act 1948. That provision applies to certain people who are seriously ill, living in squalor, or not receiving proper care and it enables them to be taken to hospital or a care home and detained there.

The Law Commission's final report on adult social care law was considered and compared with earlier Commission publications that addressed this issue, and also with other sources (such as a paper published by the Department of Health in 2000).

The Law Commission calls for the repeal of section 47, because it is hard to interpret, difficult to implement and seems to breach the European Convention on Human Rights. The Commission says other provisions, such as those in environmental health legislation, the Mental Health Act 1983, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, provide a more appropriate means of caring for people in distress and that more information is needed before a decision can be taken as to what, if anything, should replace section 47. Some of these criticisms, and also the call for more information, were made by the Department of Health.

The Law Commission's findings and recommendations concerning section 47 have not otherwise been widely reported, nor has much been done to analyse their development or antecedence. The paper also offers a modest critique of this aspect of the Commission's report.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

The purpose of this paper is to articulate that ill-defined global prohibition regimes such as anti-money laundering (AML) could potentially cause more harm than good. The author has carried out a scoping review of some anti-money laundering regimes such as the USA PATRIOT Act to demonstrate how they have been harnessed in some jurisdictions. It deconstructs the broad scope in which money laundering offences are conceptualized and applied by different jurisdictions and its inherent challenges. It has scoped a wide range of issues, often articulating the inherent controversies in some engendered AML regimes such as the USA PATRIOT Act (2001) and its revised Know Your Customer (KYC) model.

This paper was undertaken by straddling a wide range of issues in relation to the shortcomings that are inherent in AML regulatory regimes and their application in practice. However, the analysis focuses on the failures of some AML regimes concentrating largely on the UK and US jurisdictions and, occasionally, drawing examples from African countries. It uses examples from a small sample of countries and then hypothesized that if a regulatory regime is broadly defined, it could cause confusion in its application, let alone being counterproductive to the purpose it was adopted to achieve. It might, therefore, not be very helpful in streamlining how desired norms should be harnessed in practice.

The findings of this paper have correlated that broadly and ill-defined regulatory regimes are bound to cause confusion and controversies, let alone being counterproductive to the purpose they were adopted to achieve. The USA PATRIOT Act and KYC are some of the few examples, whereby ill-defined regulatory regimes have provided a recipe for controversies and tensions between regulatory domains and citizens. For instance, the surveillance mandate to US regulatory authorities under the USA PATRIOT Act has generated tensions between citizens and banks. Cases have been filed against banks for over-exercising their powers and interfering with the individual freedoms of US citizens.

The paper was written largely based on analysis of secondary data on AML regimes and the controversies their application often generates in some countries. For instance, the USA PATRIOT Act has generated tensions between the USA and foreign states, banks and citizens, because of excessive use of its surveillance mandate on the privacy of individuals. Bearing this challenge in mind, it would have been better for the analysis to focus on many countries and, probably, interview bankers and internalize their views accordingly.

The paper is informative. It could be used for making desired policy changes and enhancing research on global regulatory regimes and how they are evolved and applied in practice. It has practical relevance for banks, researchers, students, policy/oversight institutions and governments and it is therefore a worthy read.

The regulation of money laundering crimes is imperative, because, if left unchecked, it can undermine economies, governments and people and erode the fabric of society. However, as much as it is imperative to enact the desired rules to curtail the threat of money laundering and its predicate offences or even forestall it, regimes should be evolved with caution not to alienate the very purpose they were adopted to achieve. For instance, if the application of engendered rules generates tensions between citizens and regulatory authorities, it cannot reflect well not only on the government’s image but can also be counterproductive.

The paper was written using primary and secondary data sources but evaluated using empirical evidence drawn from different jurisdictions. It is therefore original because it is written and evaluated in its unique way to extend the parameters of knowledge on evolution and conceptualization of money laundering regimes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine two specific circumstances where UK courts may stay the execution of a judgment to enforce a statutory adjudication decision; where a final decision is sought on a discrete point; and where the winning party is insolvent. In this context, there is consideration of what a “binding” decision means for the purposes of Part II of the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.

A black letter, doctrinal approach is adopted, using two High Court decisions as a focus for wider critical reflection.

The cases where a final determination on part of an adjudication decision is successful are rare and will depend on the facts. Despite some unorthodox recent decisions, the likelihood remains that parties will struggle to challenge part only of an adjudication decision. The leading case authorities support the underlying principle of the Construction Act insofar as adjudication decisions are binding and should be enforced or else the Court will impose punitive statutory interest on the debt. This principle applies even in cases where the adjudication decision is successfully challenged in such cases.

This paper also addresses two decisions given by Edwards‐Stuart J. in the High Court, both of which adopt a novel approach to the relevant issues, and hence this discussion of those approaches demonstrates originality.

Pre-colonization, Tribes lived in ways that were well-adapted to natural hazards and stewarded the environment respectfully. Colonization and the federal reservation system have stuck Tribes in static, often hazard-prone, areas; removing their foundational capabilities for avoiding disaster and environmental hazard impacts. The premise of ceded lands and the reservation system was a trust responsibility of the federal government to provide resources for continuing self-governance of Tribal Nations. Fulfillment of the federal government’s trust responsibility to Tribal Nations in the realm of climate change and disasters is predicated on the provision of sufficient resources for the Tribal Nation itself to properly govern. The trust responsibility is not fulfilled through the federal government allowing applications to program-dictated grant opportunities or even consistent, yet insufficient, recurring funding for disaster management. Nor is the trust responsibility fulfilled through the preparation and resourcing of outside entities – local, state, and up to the federal government itself – to enact disaster management actions on sovereign lands. The ability of a nation to develop and administer governmental programs and services independent of outside interference is the very foundation of sovereignty and self-determination. The fulfillment of the trust responsibility for disaster management hinges, therefore, on the allocation of sufficient resources and legal space for self-governance for Tribal Nations to return to pre-colonization levels of capability and sovereignty for disaster management for their citizens and residents.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the common and statutory law governing children's capacity or competence to consent to and to refuse medical treatment is unsatisfactory and to suggest solutions.

Critical legal analysis of the law on assessing minors’ decision-making capacity in relation to legal recognition of their consent to and refusal of medical treatment.

Without legal mechanisms which protect both children and their rights, all children and young people are effectively disabled from exercising age and capacity-related autonomy and participation in decisions affecting their lives. Yet in English law, inconsistencies between legal and clinical measures of decision-making capacity, situations where compulsory medical or mental health treatment is lawful, and tensions between rights and duties associated with human rights, autonomy, best interests and protections for the vulnerable create difficulties for clinicians, lawyers and patients.

As the paper acknowledges in its recommendations, the views of stakeholders are needed to enrich and inform legal reforms in this area.

The paper makes suggestions to amend the law and clinical practice which are original and far reaching. The paper suggests that in order to observe children's rights while protecting them appropriately, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivations of Liberty Safeguards should be applied to minors. The paper recommends the establishment of Mental Capacity Tribunals, similar in nature and purpose to Mental Health Tribunals, to provide legal safeguards and mechanisms to foster the supported decision-making envisaged in recent United Nations Conventions.

To illuminate a new field of legal study – offshore financial law, especially the offshore trust and how it impacts on financial crime.

Analytical approach to case law and legislation relevant to the topic.

Offshore financial law and offshore trusts are innovative, dynamic vehicles for trust and tax planning internationally but have to address avenues for financial crime.

Original and pioneering research into a new area of law. Practitioners in finance law, trusts and tax, academics, legal regulators, accountants and other finance practitioners will find it particularly helpful.

The purpose of this paper is to determine how the professionalization of school and academic librarianship contributed to the establishment of information literacy as a form of legitimation.

Historical analysis via Abbott.

The need to obtain and maintain professional status did place school and academic librarians in a vulnerable position during a time of change that forced them to seek a new jurisdiciton of expertise.

Important for the profession to examine the context of the emergence of a current and important framework.