I’m afraid you need to read German in order to read the recent judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court in which it has ruled unconstitutional smoking bans in Berlin and Baden-Württemberg. There is also a press release which […]

You may need to register to read this New York Times article about Barack Obama’s time as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School – but registration is free, and it’s not a bad read.

In a busy week for judgments I’ve not yet mentioned the arrest of Radovan Karadzic and his transfer to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. But I’m as pleased as anyone else about it. Of course leaders like […]

The other interesting judgment from the Lords in what Joshua Rozenberg thinks must have been a record output yesterday was in R (Baiai) v Home Secretary. This case is about section 19 of the Asylum […]

Today the Lords has given judgment bringing to an end the challenge by Corner House and the Campaign Against the Arms Trade to the SFO Director’s decision in December 2006 to discontinue the investigation into alleged corruption by BAe […]

Sarika Watkins-Singh has today won her race and religious discrimination case against her school for refusing to allow her to wear the kara, a Sikh bracelet, and for excluding her for breaching the school’s no-jewellery uniform policy.

Julie Bindel in today’s Guardian (it’s been a Guardian week for me so far) welcomes in an anticipatory way proposals that are expected from the government to reform the law of provocation as it applies to murder.

Rahila Gupta in today’s Guardian writes about the victory of Southall Black Sisters in its judicial review a couple of weeks ago: Ealing Council had wanted to cut its support for the organisation in order to fund another means […]

Charon interviewed me this morning about the Max Mosley case. We spoke about the development from old-style breach of confidence to what’s effectively a British privacy law, with the new extended right of action for breach of privacy, and […]

Eady J was keen to point out that, strictly speaking, his judgment in Max Mosley’s case does not involve any radical development of the law: