The Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919 ended the prohibition on female jurors. This did not mean that English and Welsh juries became representative institutions overnight, however: the property qualifications ensured that juries were still drawn from the top few per cent of the local population; and the 1919 Act expressly permitted trial judges to order single-sex juries where the nature of the evidence required it. The continued existence of peremptory challenges allowed defendants in felony trials to exclude women from their juries whenever they preferred to be tried only by men. Finally, some judges permitted female jurors to excuse themselves from particular trials if they so desired. This paper explores the effects these factors had on the practical enjoyment of the female jury franchise after the passing of the 1919 Act. It finds that the picture is remarkably localised: rates of women serving on juries were very different for the five assize circuits for which adequate records exist (Midland, Oxford, South Eastern, South Wales and Western). By exploring these issues, this paper reveals how flexible the female jury franchise was in its early years, and shows how important local differences were in keeping women off the jury.

How can the incapacity defence in contract law coexist with the concept of universal legal capacity advanced by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)? In the absence of clear guidance from the CRPD on the link between legal capacity and mental capacity, and given the silence of this Convention on the concept of contractual capacity, this article stresses the need to redefine contractual capacity in a manner that responds not only to economic interests (eg upholding the security of transactions) but also to social interests (including the protection of values such as dignity). The discussion insists that incapacity and disability must never be conceptually equated and calls for a definition of contractual incapacity that moves beyond the medical condition of individuals (whether this is known by or apparent to the other contracting party) and which considers the circumstances of the transaction. These arguments are explored in the context of English contract law, focusing on the question of contractual validity when a party lacked the mental capacity to understand the transaction and the other party was unaware of the incapacity and acted in good faith.

This paper aims to lay the foundations for a more critical approach to the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate law. Limitations on legislative approaches including directors’ duties, disclosure of information, sustainable decisions, direct promotion and corporate internal management structure are critically analysed, trying to find well thought-out and effectively implemented adjudication that provides meaningful instruction for regulating CSR. The paper explores the manner in which corporate law may contribute to accommodating CSR principles within corporate strategies, in order to establish a transformative legal regulatory framework within corporate law by using the authoritative legal mode to promote corporate regulatory mechanisms. The paper critically studies a few legislative measures supported by the relevant legislative experiences from various jurisdictions as examples of currently enforced CSR laws at national level, in order to offer comprehensive and potentially effective legislative suggestions for accommodating CSR elements. However, a ‘one size fits all’ approach is clearly not desirable, and these suggestions should be interpreted and implemented in a locally relevant manner, according to path dependence theory.

International surrogacy agreements involve a child born to a surrogate mother who is of a different nationality to the commissioning parent(s) in a state other than that of which the commissioning parent(s) are nationals or reside. Many of these arrangements lead to children being born stateless, which deprives that child of many rights that are directly linked to one's nationality as well as causing significant practical problems, such as difficulty in obtaining a passport. In undertaking the first Public International Law analysis of nationality and international surrogacy agreements, we map out how various provisions can be used to guarantee protections against statelessness. Accordingly, we argue that the drafting of a proposed new convention is not the ideal solution in this respect, and should not be to the detriment of the ratification and implementation of the relevant conventions that we identify; in particular, the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child. We argue that these protections offer the most meaningful protection in the short term and should be used to inform any future protections under the proposed Convention. We conclude by encouraging the advancement of Public International Law arguments when petitioning in a domestic context on behalf of stateless international surrogate children.

This paper examines the cross fertilisation of ideas about interactive teaching from law to physics and back again. In particular it considers the origin, legacy and merits of Langdell's teaching model and the way it has been used by a physics professor, Eric Mazur, to support arguments for what is commonly known as the ‘flipped classroom’. It examines the similarities and differences between Langdell's and Mazur's approaches and the adoption by some law teachers of Mazur's model. It also considers how this phenomenon bares out a thesis advanced by educationalist Lee Shulman that when it comes to teaching, both professional and liberal disciplines are pursuing many of the same ends. Finally it considers the implications of adopting Mazur's approach for the discipline of law and issues some words of caution.

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (the CRoW Act) serves as an example of the way in which ideology can frequently become a casualty of realpolitik. Wider access to the countryside was a pillar of Labour Party general election manifestos from the 1950s until the introduction of the CRoW Act. This article examines the antecedents and emergence of this statute to determine whether the eventual form of the rights of access under the CRoW Act represent a missed opportunity to grant public rights over private land.

This paper attends to writing practices by way of examining how a professional regulator engages with research activities conducted by doctors. In order to explore regulatory responses to alleged research misconduct, I use a specific calligraphic practice shared by researchers and regulators. The paper shows that taking this calligraphic practice as an analytical focus can offer surprising dividends to the study of regulation across fields. Via the practice of strikethrough, the General Medical Council effectuates three gestures as it engages with research activities: display, authentication and isolation. Understanding them requires asking what literal and metaphorical meanings travel in the strikethrough.

There is an ongoing debate amongst hate crime scholars about the categories of victims that should be included within hate crime legislation. Some commentators argue that affording protection to groups based on predefined characteristics results in many victims being excluded from the legislation. They would prefer a more inclusive approach that would offer protection to a potentially limitless number of groups. This paper considers the question from a doctrinal perspective, and argues that a principled way of deciding the characteristics of hate crime is required. It will conclude that the core concern of hate crime legislation is with the furthering of the broader equality agenda and, as such, the victims of hate crime should form an exclusive group based on those characteristics protected under equality legislation. This approach can help provide a theoretical framework for hate crime legislation that can be more easily accommodated within criminal law principles.

The concept of a right to the truth is increasingly utilised in different settings to empower victims and societies to find out about past abuses linked to conflict or authoritarianism. Since the last comprehensive study of this topic in 2006, there has been little attempt to draw together the advancements of fragmented practices. Recent developments in European human rights call for a fresh analysis of the right to the truth as a freestanding principle linked to, but separate from, the state duty to investigate. This paper takes stock of the more recent evolutions of the right to the truth and contributes to its independent conceptualisation. The first part investigates whether there is growing consistency between the Inter-American and European human rights systems around the contours of the right to the truth, as linked to survivors’ right to know the past and to access justice (make claims) as an individual and collective matter. The second part broadens the discussion to the status of the right to the truth under international law in light of the ECHR jurisprudence, and considers whether the available legal categories are suited to its formalisation.

This paper reveals some of the tactics that lawyers may use when conducting personal injury litigation. The research is empirically based by being drawn from structured interviews with a cross-section of practitioners. This qualitative evidence helps to place the rules of tort in a wider context and suggests that tactical considerations may affect the outcome of individual cases irrespective of their legal merits. A range of strategies are considered here to illustrate how they may be used at different points during the litigation. In addition, the paper updates our understanding of the compensation system by considering the practitioners' responses in the light of the major changes made to this area of practice in recent years. It reveals how negotiation tactics have developed since research in this area was last carried out. Overall, the paper adds to a very limited literature dealing with negotiation and settlement of personal injury claims in the UK.

Contemporary state authorities in the United Kingdom and elsewhere have increasingly sought to regulate the use of public space. This paper explores through a doctrinal and socio-legal analysis how recently introduced Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) are being used in England and Wales to enforce majoritarian sensibilities at the expense of due process and civil liberties. PSPOs were introduced in October 2014. These orders grant considerable discretion to local authorities to use the threat of criminal sanction to regulate activities in public spaces that they regard as being detrimental to the quality of life of residents. This paper provides the first comprehensive critique of how these orders are used to target minority and vulnerable groups, while curtailing fundamental freedoms. The paper includes suggestions for reforms to make the PSPO function in a manner that is more compatible with a rights-based approach.

This paper focuses on the potential impact of the statutory authority defence on HS2 once the line is put into operation. The defence was forged in the heat of the railway revolution. It protects operators from liability in nuisance in respect of certain harms resulting from exercising the statutory powers under which the scheme is authorised. However, the nineteenth century case-law established that the defence would only operate in respect of harms that are the inevitable consequence of using those powers. In common with its Victorian forebears, the HS2 project has been authorised by way of an Act of Parliament. Arguably, the HS2 Act is one of the longest, most detailed and highly scrutinised pieces of legislation in history. Nevertheless, it is argued that the scheme may cause uncompensated losses that are not inevitable. In this respect, common law actions may yet have an important role to play.

English juries do not provide reasons for their verdicts. This paper argues that transparency is a fundamental value in modern decision making, and that reform is needed to trial by jury so that verdicts are routinely accompanied by explanations. It examines the options that exist to incorporate explained verdicts in the English criminal trial and concludes that accountability and legitimacy would be enhanced through the use of a trained, independent lay facilitator to chair the deliberation process and draft an explained verdict.