Justice Matters

Litigation over the will of His late Royal Highness Prince Philip raised questions of transparency, accusations of ‘secret courts’ and provided an opportunity to delve into some royal history, writes Paul Magrath

In the second part of her series on what makes a good judge, Lady Rose assesses how the ‘good character’ requirement fits with the modern zeitgeist on judicial bullying, the strengths and maturity of judgment brought by diversity, and how to judge with compassion

These notes* by a juror in a lengthy fraud trial offer food for thought for prosecuting and defence counsel – and not just those in fraud trials – on how the process (and their performance) is perceived from the jury box

Participating differently, advocating differently - in the second of his two-part series, Dr Tom Smith looks at how barristers can take the lead in ‘good lawyering’ for neurodivergent clients

Naomi Ryan looks at two cases of paranormal legal history and their impact on law today

Thinking differently, engaging differently: the first of this two-part series by Dr Tom Smith looks at the experience of neurodivergent individuals in the criminal justice system and how barristers can mitigate/aggravate the challenges

Defence lawyers are concerned that charging is frequently not in the public interest and that defendants with severe mental health problems and/or who are neurodivergent are being pointlessly swept into the criminal justice system, warns Penelope Gibbs

You might have expected such a bonfire of liberties to be fiercely debated in Parliament before becoming law. But it was not debated at all, writes Adam Wagner

Do good barristers make good judges? In the first of a two-part series, Lady Rose explores the essential qualities and particular kind of intellectual ability required

Connor Stuart outlines some of the Online Safety Bill's proposed communications offences and how they might work in practice