What are cookies?
Cookies are small pieces of information that are stored on your computer to allow the British Institute of International and Comparative Law to recognise it when you visit our site. They can remember your preferences by gathering and storing information. They do not identify you as an individual user, just the computer used. Cookies cannot be used to run programs or compromise your security. Cookies do not give the British Institute of International and Comparative Law access to your computer.
What types of essential cookies does BIICL use?
We may use cookies to store information about your membership on our site, or to enable you to log in to online resources. This might include registering for our events, making online purchases or accessing member-only content. The information is stored, as cookies, to enable you to use these resources, and to remember your log in details between sessions. If you clear your cookies, you may need to login to these parts of the website each time you visit.
We also use some third party cookies to help us improve your user experience.
If you don't want to use third party cookies.
If you would prefer not to use third party cookies while browsing our site, you can set your browser so that it will not download cookies onto your computer. Doing so will still allow you to navigate through the majority of our site but possibly not all of it. If you wish to access the password protected areas of our website you will need to allow "per-session" cookies. These are temporarily used while you are visiting the site but deleted when you close your browser or log out.
Reimagining the Law 29 June 2020
1. Better trials
We should stop trying to avoid hearing cases - especially civil and family - and start trying to do them better. What can best be done on paper, what remotely and what face to face? How best to find the truth? Think flexibly and put the judge in charge!
Baroness Hale of Richmond DBE PC FBA
2. The shape of the law: its accessibility to the user
I. Legislation should not only produce the desired legal effect but also be drafted so as to communicate with the user.
II. On this count the Insolvency Act 1986, as prospectively amended by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill now before Parliament which includes several temporary provisions, has in form become the most horrendous piece of legislation on the statute book. Entire new Parts have been inserted, with their own chapter numbers and schedules, so that 30 pages separate section 2 from section 1 and it is impossible to find one's way around the paper version. 14 Schedules have been added, with bizarre numbering such as Schedule ZA1, while detailed textual amendments have been made to existing Schedules in a Bill some 233 pages long.
III. The Insolvency Act should now be recast, with proper sequential numbering and a redistribution between the Act, which contains many procedural provisions that should be in the rules, and the rules, which contain a number of substantive law provisions that should be in the Act.
Sir Roy Goode QC
3. UK - the new model mixed legal system
Let's embrace our mixed legal system - with common law underpinnings with civil law/EU overtones. The new system/parameters/norms should be recorded or codified - through Select Committees/Bingham Centre-BIICL (cf American Law Institute work). In this way, we return to our historical role of inventing universal norms in economic and property norms (contract, tort, and patents, copyright).
Professor Dr. Uma Suthersanen
4. Section 4.12 of The Mayson Report
In-house legal departments should be separate regulated business units; IHLs may need express conditions in employment contracts; direct reporting to the Board and beyond to one Regulator. Corporate failures are a societal risk. In house lawyers "have to be able to sound alarm bells without the chilling effect of potential reprisal". Who knew?
Ciaran Fenton
5. Time for a holistic approach to dispute resolution
In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional constructs of dispute resolution that are no longer fit for purpose must be reviewed. We need a holistic approach of resolving as well as preventing disputes. Cost and time savings can no longer be a topic for conference-goers, but must be seen as core key performance indicators for dispute resolution mechanisms, institutions and adjudicators alike. The goal must be to resolve the dispute, not fit the dispute into a factory-setting procedure.
Chiann Bao
Related Entries
Reimagining the law video presentations Michael Olatokun
28th January 2021
Read More
Reimagining the law video presentations Jeremy Gilley
27th January 2021
Read More
Reimagining the law video presentations Andrew Wells
26th January 2021
Read More