The Independent 26 September reports that three anti-fracking activists have been jailed for halting a convoy of lorries in a four-day protest outside a shale drilling site. As is so often the situation, sentencing remarks have not (yet) been published by the Judiciary and so our views are informed by media reports. ] UKSC 13 and a good article on the case by David Hart QC is at UK Human Rights Blog. Public Nuisance is both a tort and a common law offence. ] EWCA Civ 1 – Denning, Romer and Parker LJJ. A private individual can sue for the tort only if he or she suffers damage over and above the effect on the general public. Public Nuisance as an offence was also the subject of a Law Commission report published in June 2015 – Simplification of the Criminal Law: Public Nuisance and outraging Public Decency. The Commission recommended that Public Nuisance be made a statutory offence covering any conduct which endangers the life, health, property or comfort of a section of the public. Or obstructs them in the exercise of their rights.
Unlike most crimes of comparable seriousness, public nuisance contains no requirement that the defendant intended or was reckless about whether his conduct caused the relevant kind of harm. The fault requirement is the same in the crime as in the tort: namely, that the defendant ought reasonably to have foreseen the consequences of the act or omission. The Law Commission recommended reform so that nuisance offence would require that the defendant either intended or was reckless in the act. The underground existence of extensive shale gas has been known for several years. Hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’, involves the extraction of natural gas from shale formations deep underground using vertical and horizontal drilling technologies and vast quantities of chemically treated water injected into the wells under high pressure. Although commercial fracking has been underway in the USA since the 1990s, the industry is in its infancy elsewhere in the world. In July and September 2018, Cuadrilla received hydraulic fracturing consents from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) for horizontal shale exploration well at its Preston New Road site in Lancashire.
See Government – Cuadrilla. A considerable number of Cuadrilla companies exist. It is Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd which manages the site at Preston New Road, Lancashire. It is beyond dispute that fracking is capable of environmental damage. This August 2013 Enviroment Agency Risk assessment considered various possibilities for environmental harm which could arise from fracking. The Petroleum Act 1998 defined the word “petroleum” to include any mineral oil or relative hydrocarbon and natural gas existing in its natural condition in strata. Rights in petroleum (as so defined) are vested in Her Majesty – (in effect, the government) – and licences are required to search and bore for and get petroleum. The Infrastructure Act 2015 made significant changes to the law relating to petroleum and geothermal energy – see Explanatory Notes. Changes included the introduction of a statutory right to carry out works at such depths that it would not affect a landowner’s use of the land. Also, the Act provided for certain safeguards for Onshore hydraulic fracturing.
The European Commission has been concerned with Shale Gas extraction and also see EU Commission: Environment. It is against the above complex background that some have decided to protest against fracking and the potential for environmental damage. The European Convention on Human Rights does not give a specific right to protest but there is Article 10 (Freedom of Expression). In England and Wales there is neither a statutory right to protest nor a common law right. Nevertheless, PROTEST has a lengthy history. So far as English common law was concerned, a person was permitted to do that which was not prohibited by law. Thus, in common law, peaceful protest is a sort of negative right – we may do it because it is not prohibited. Protest is restricted by numerous legal considerations. The reign of Charles I saw use of an armed force aimed at the destruction of all brothels and in Henry VIII’s time there was an insurrection for the purposes of fixing a wage rate. In 1839, a “Special Commission” comprising Chief Justice Tindal, Baron Parke and Williams J was set up to try alleged offences committed during disturbances at Monmouth.
Protest – often in the face of vested interests imbued with immense wealth and power – has frequently been a way by which legislators have been forced to eventually bring about beneficial changes. The essential facts of the 48 hours protest are set out by The Guardian 26 September. Counsel for the prosecution said the police argued that the demonstration resulted in significant travel disruption, causing the road to be closed initially until a contraflow was established. Police said local residents had had their lives disrupted and local businesses suffered a loss of trade. Lorry drivers had been told to stay with their cabs and were unable to return home. He said the protest had cost the police £12,000 and Cuadrilla approximately £50,000. In the period 2003-15, around 15 defendants each year were tried for public nuisance and 22 were tried in the Crown Court – (see para 3.7 HERE). One defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment. Yes – LIFE is the maximum sentence. Technically, as a common law offence, the sentence is “at large” so that the judge can impose whatever sentence is deemed appropriate. A sentence of imprisonment is appropriate if neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified (Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.152). Any such sentence must be for the shortest term that in the opinion of the court is commensurate with the seriousness of the offence(CJA 2003 s.153). Having determined those points there is the question of whether the sentence can be suspended – (CJA 2003 s.189). A fourth man, Julian Brock (47), was given a 12-month suspended sentence after pleading guilty to the same charge. These sentences of 16 months appear to be imposed purely for punishment and / or deterrent purposes. To me they seem excessive and bordering on the oppressive.
The Court mandated that all outstanding responses be filed within the next four weeks. Chief Justice Dipak Misra, as well as Justices DY Chandrachud and AM Khanwilkar, presided over today’s hearing. Lead counsel for the IAMAI, Gopal Subramaniam, during the hearing said that the RBI’s ban would set India back in the emerging global cryptocurrency landscape. Since the ban took effect, traders have been forced to depend on P2P exchange platforms. Meanwhile, there have been reports suggesting that state officials and the RBI aren’t exactly on the same page. Earlier in the month, news emerged that the government was seriously considering classifying cryptocurrencies as commodities. All attention now turns to the outcome of the hearing on September 11. Apart from delivering a final verdict on the RBI ban, the hearing will also clarify the government’s position concerning virtual currencies. Should the Supreme Court overturn the RBI ban? Keep the conversation going in the comment section below.
The Calguns Foundation sent out an update on their appeal for certiorari to the US Supreme Court regarding California’s 10-day waiting period on Friday. Silvester et al v. Becerra challenges the 10-day waiting period for those individual who either holds a California issued carry permit or is an existing gun owner who holds a California certificate of eligibility. This case was a win at the District Court level but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision. They bizarrely held that even existing firearms owners need a 10-day cooling off period. Last month, the respondent California Attorney General Xavier Becerra waived his right to reply to the petition. In a brief authored by preeminent constitutional scholars Ilya Shapiro and Trevor Burrus, the Washington, D.C.-based think tank Cato Institute presented a strong case for the Court to grant certiorari. “We are pleased that other groups have recognized the serious flaws in the Ninth Circuit’s approach,” explained Erik S. Jaffe, the petitioners’ Supreme Court counsel. “The results-driven analysis in the opinion below not only does violence to the Second Amendment, but does violence to the rule of law and respect for the courts. In 2014, Federal District Court Judge Anthony W. Ishii—nominated to the bench by then-President Clinton—held that California’s waiting period laws were unconstitutional as applied to three categories of gun purchasers after undertaking significant discovery, depositions, and a three-day bench trial.
Clair Counties in downstate Illinois have been recipients of this dubious honor in prior years. This year’s report has again attracted national attention; here is a link to a December 24 article in the New York Times article about the report. ATRA; the use of the terms was licensed to ATRF by ATRA for its attack on Cook County and the other jurisdictions slammed in the current report. So: What does ATRF offer in support of its contention that Cook County “judges systematically apply laws and court procedures in an unfair and unbalanced manner, generally against defendants in civil lawsuits?” ATRF cites three reasons (pp. The first charge refers to an amendment passed this year to the Wrongful Death Act, 740 ILCS 180/1 et seq. One might construct a reasoned argument that this amendment will have adverse consequences for Illinois businesses. One might even ask why the legislature found itself able to meddle with the Wrongful Death Act when it could not pass a budget and still can not pass mass transit relief.
But even accepting that many of the sponsors of the amendment were from Cook County, how can this legislative action be used to besmirch the reputation of the hundreds of judges sitting in Cook County? When last I heard, trial judges have an obligation to apply the laws of this State as written, whether the laws are wise or foolish, so long as the laws are constitutional. Is ATRF against this? Illinois Supreme Court. Surely ATRF would expect judges to follow precedent in reaching decisions, right? The last and final reason why ATRF says Cook County is a “Judicial Hellhole” is that there were some very large verdicts in Cook County this past year. Some anecdotes are shared. Why the verdicts in the particular cases were large is largely not addressed. ATRF asks what makes a “Judicial Hellhole” — and answers its own question this way (p. This is an extraordinary charge. But the gaudy charges against the Cook County judiciary are unsubstantiated by the ATRF report. If the ATRF report were a lawsuit, it might be sneered at as frivolous litigation.
America’s business productivity soared in the second quarter of 2003 and new claims for unemployment benefits dropped to a six-month low last week, a double dose of good news as the economy tries to get back to full throttle. Dean’s campaign is a remorseless assault on George W. Bush, far exceeding his opponents’. Humorless and unsmiling, the country doctor with upper-class roots pummels the president. He has tapped into pure hatred by rank-and-file Democrats of the reigning Republican that I have never seen in 44 years of campaign watching. Not Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan or even Bill Clinton generated such animosity. Dean, who believes that extremism in denunciation of George W. Bush and all his works is no vice, has made himself the vehicle for venting by Democratic activists. They comprise the big bleeding liberal heart of the party’s nominating electorate, whose detestation of Bush is a witch’s brew of hatred and condescension. Its three main ingredients are lingering resentment about Florida (they believe the U.S. Bush policies from tax cuts to war and, most important, a visceral, almost aesthetic recoil from Bush’s persona — his Texasness, the way he walks, the way he talks. They would not like the way he wears his hat or sips his tea, if he did such things.
•You can ask other legal representatives who are able to propose you best bankruptcy attorney Woodland Hills. Nevertheless a bankruptcy proceeding is specialty particular world, legal representatives a variety of segments come across other lawyers and distribute their scenario education in courtroom. Hence, colleagues doing in other fields often know any other’s variety. •Consult your bookkeeper or tax counselor. Occupations who help other types with taxes and finances also know Bankruptcy Attorney Ventura who undoubtedly aided their customers someplace. •Online of NACBA or Federal Connection of Potential customer Personal bankruptcy Lawyers, you can easily carry out an on-line find localized a bankruptcy proceeding legal professionals. NACBA is known as a countrywide fed government firm which displays certified and reputed bankruptcy legal professionals. NACBA is planned to secure the appropriate proper rights of people and companies which are bankrupt. They supply a storage system that has refreshed info about the recent decisions and opinions from the legal court of supreme and appeals courts in all of the states. •Utilize the recommendation program about the attorney. On ABA or United states Club Relationship web, you can get the details about nearest a bankruptcy proceeding attorney at law combined with contact number locally.
This website has everything on the attorney at law. For a very small amount, you can even get assessment for around 30 minutes. •Locally, you can easily simply call the bankruptcy trustee. You could possibly look for the leaders of attorneys who happen in the court commonly. You could find the a bankruptcy proceeding trustee on the room. For this, you have to speak with the clerk of a bankruptcy proceeding the courtroom. To make the clerk’s workplace, you might get the telephone total inside the nearby telephone index in federal government segment. You may also look up it online in your localized federal government blog. Interview a lot of bankruptcy lawyers, before deciding any attorney. You could possibly you can ask their profile throughout the pertaining to discipline. You could feel at ease with this spot on lawyer or attorney in order to get useful, clean strategies to your complete questions.
All over the world, being a lawyer is considered to be one of the most highly paid professions and trust us when we say that Indian lawyers are no exception here. Here, Shiksha brings for you a list of famous Indian lawyers and we will also be mentioning from where these famous lawyers are known to have received their knowledge, acumen as well as court craft. After pursuing law from the Government Law College in Mumbai, Soli Sorabjee was admitted to the bar in 1953. At his law school, Sorabjee was awarded the Kinloch Forbes Gold Medal in Roman Law and Jurisprudence. High profile cases fought by him include the infamous Bhopal gas tragedy, Golak Nath, SP Gupta, TMA Pai Foundation and the likes. A man of many odds, Ram Jethmalani, received his LLB degree at the age of 17 from the Government Law College at Mumbai. A special resolution was passed so that he could earn this degree because at that time the minimum age to become a lawyer was 21 years. He later earned his LLM degree from SC Shahani Law College, Karachi.
He has served as India’s Union Law Minister and as Chairman of Bar Council of India. In 2010, he was elected as the President of Supreme Court Bar Association. Known for his quick wit and sharpness to handle any situation with calm, Ram Jethmalani has fought many high profile as well controversial cases such as KM Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra case, Jessica Lall murder case, defended Rajiv Gandhi and Indira Gandhi’s killers, underworld don Haji Mastan’s case, Afzal Guru’s case, Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, Spectrum 2G case and many more. Having completed his law education from University of Mumbai, Mukul Rohtagi who is the 14th as well as current Attorney General of India started practicing under Yogesh Kumar Sabharwal who went on to become the 36th chief justice of India. Rohtagi started working with Sabharwal in high court but later on started his own legal practice. Ashok Desai was the Attorney General for India and served this office from 1996-1998. He has also served as the Solicitor General of India for the tenure between 1989 -1990.
On June 10, 1846, a wagon train pulled out from Charlotte County, Virginia for the long arduous journey to the free state of Ohio. While filled with the joy of being free and being able to make their own choices and decisions, they also realized that their future was going to be fraught with challenges. Because, although Ohio was a free state, the prejudice towards people of a different color was still rife within its borders. The following is an account of the struggles and travails of a group of African-Americans known in history as the Randolph slaves. In 1833, politician and statesman John Randolph of Roanoke(Plantation), Charlotte County, Virginia, died, leaving behind a substantial estate, including a vast plantation and the 400 slaves it took to take care of it. In his will, he had left his land and wealth to family and close friends, but to his slaves, he left their freedom.
Randolph wrote three wills during his lifetime; in 1819, 1821, and 1832. The first two were similar, and specified that his slaves were to be manumitted(freed). The third, which he wrote while in ill health–physically and mentally– expressed the desire to have all of his slaves sold. But on his deathbed, he recanted his last will in front of witnesses. Claiming Randolph was not in his right mind at his death, his brother contested the will, dragging it through the courts for 13 long years. In the end, the courts decided against the brother, and thus began the next chapter in the lives of the now 383 freed men, women and children of the Randolph plantation. Randolph’s close friend and cousin, William Leigh, was appointed the task of purchasing land and making all of the necessary arrangements for the freed Randolph slaves. 6,000. While there, he contracted with an attorney named Joseph Plunkett to arrange for the building of shelter and the procuring of provisions needed for the settlements of the Randolph slaves once they arrived.
Subsequently, the now freed slaves, filled with trepidation for what may lie ahead, but also with jubilation at the thought of being free after waiting 13 long years, set off on their pilgrimage to Ohio. The first 500 miles were formidable, as the wagon train had to travel through Virginia and West Virginia, crossing the Lynchburg and Greenbriar Rivers, Sewel Mountain, and then go around the Kanawha Falls. After following the Kanawha River to Charleston, West Virginia, they boarded a steamer, taking it to the Ohio River and down to Cincinnati, Ohio. For the next leg of their journey, the Randolph slaves had to walk through Cincinnati, right up Main Street, treating all of the locals to a spectacular sight. Race IssuesThe Melungeons Black-White People Who Live In Appalachia, What! Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account. 0 of 8192 characters usedPost CommentNo HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites. One of my favorite Hubs. So much of history seems to be distorted by opinion and often politicized by people with self serving agendas.
It is nearly impossible to get to the heart of every truth but a good writer can lay out the basics of a true story and let the reader discern each part for themselves. You did that here very well. I am proud of you. I took a summer course.on local Ohio History at Wright State Branch Campus in Mercer County back in the 80’s with Merit Woods being the instructor. We studied the Randolph Slaves through the museum at the Relic Chapel at Maria Stein and also on location at Carthagena. There is a graveyard along State Route 127 at Carthagena where some of the Randolph Slaves were buried. Turns out that when the road was built and widened it got “into” the black portion of the graveyard and some of the graves had to be moved. Also through erosion certain fragments of their coffins could be found along the embankment leading from the graveyard to the road.