Close
Search
Filters

Challenges for Independent Law Reformers from Changing External Priorities and Shorter Timescales

Law reform includes law reform commissions taking a long-term view when keeping the law under review and making proposals to modernise it, such bodies and single-issue inquiries dealing with legal “crises”, and the incremental development of common law by the courts. This talk will address the fundamentals of the methods used by law reform commissions in identifying topics needing reform which are suitable for such bodies to undertake, preparing reports and collaborating with government and other stakeholders to implement them.

 

It will consider the challenges that result from changing external priorities during the life of a project and whether these can be addressed by shorter time-scales, and the fact that there can be two or more models which are principled and possible in a purely doctrinal and technical sense.


The illustrations used will include illegality, an area in which, despite two reports by the Law Commission of England and Wales recommending legislation, change ultimately came from the decision of the UK Supreme Court in Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42, and which, as the decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Ochroid Trading Ltd v Chua Siok Lui [2018] SGCA 5 shows, there can be more than one view of the way to deal with an area.


Reference will also be made to the recent decision of the UK Supreme Court in Rock Advertising v MWB Business Exchange Centres [2018] UKSC 24 on “no oral modification” clauses and the differences in approaches to implied terms and construction taken by courts in Singapore and England and Wales.

 

 

  The Rt Hon Sir Jack Beatson FBA

The Rt Hon Sir Jack Beatson FBA was educated at Brasenose College, Oxford (BA 1970, BCL 1972, MA 1973), and called to the bar from Inner Temple (1972), and was appointed an honorary bencher thereof in 1993. He was a member of the Faculty of Law at the University of Oxford (1973–1994), on leave as a member of the Law Commission of England and Wales between 1989 and 1994, and then Rouse Ball Professor of English Law at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of St John’s College, Cambridge, between 1994 and 2003. He was also a recorder during the latter period.


In 1998 Sir Jack was appointed Queen's Counsel, and served as a deputy High Court judge from 2000 to 2003. He was a judge of the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice from 2003 to 2013, and a Lord Justice of Appeal from 2013 until this year. He is currently practising as an arbitrator with Essex Court Chambers, and is also a part-time judge of the Astana International Financial Centre’s Court in Kazakhstan.


His publications include The Use and Abuse of Unjust Enrichment: Essays on the Law of Restitution (author, 1991), Good Faith and Fault in Contract Law (author and co joint editor, 1995), Administrative Law: Cases and Materials (2nd ed, with M Matthews, 1989), Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Information (author and co-editor, 2000), Human Rights: Judicial Protection in the UK (co-author, 2008) and Anson’s Law of Contract (co-author, 30th ed, 2016).


Sir Jack is a fellow of the British Academy of Humanities and Social Sciences, and holds an honorary DCL from the University of Oxford and an LLD from the University of Cambridge, and honorary fellowships at Brasenose College, Oxford; Merton College, Oxford; and St John’s College, Cambridge.

Registration is confirmed upon confirmation from SAL.

 

For enquiries, you may email us at  [email protected].

CPD Points: 1

Venue:

Supreme Court Auditorium
1 Supreme Court Lane, B2
Singapore 178879

Course Dates: 23 July 2018 (5.30pm - 7.30pm)

THIS EVENT IS FULLY SUBSCRIBED.

$0.00

Law reform includes law reform commissions taking a long-term view when keeping the law under review and making proposals to modernise it, such bodies and single-issue inquiries dealing with legal “crises”, and the incremental development of common law by the courts. This talk will address the fundamentals of the methods used by law reform commissions in identifying topics needing reform which are suitable for such bodies to undertake, preparing reports and collaborating with government and other stakeholders to implement them.

 

It will consider the challenges that result from changing external priorities during the life of a project and whether these can be addressed by shorter time-scales, and the fact that there can be two or more models which are principled and possible in a purely doctrinal and technical sense.


The illustrations used will include illegality, an area in which, despite two reports by the Law Commission of England and Wales recommending legislation, change ultimately came from the decision of the UK Supreme Court in Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42, and which, as the decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Ochroid Trading Ltd v Chua Siok Lui [2018] SGCA 5 shows, there can be more than one view of the way to deal with an area.


Reference will also be made to the recent decision of the UK Supreme Court in Rock Advertising v MWB Business Exchange Centres [2018] UKSC 24 on “no oral modification” clauses and the differences in approaches to implied terms and construction taken by courts in Singapore and England and Wales.

 

test
Customers who bought this item also bought