Podcast
The Law Show
Hosted by BBC Radio 4 · EN
Weekly conversation that will give you an in-depth understanding of the law stories making news and the legal decisions that could have a bearing on everyone in the UK. Whether it's unpicking a landmark legal ruling, explaining how laws are made or seeking clarity for you on a legal issue, The Law Show will be your guide.
14episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
The Renters Rights Act - In Detail
1w ago00:28:04Tap to summarizeThe Renter’s Rights Act came into force at the start of May, and it marked the biggest change to how private rentals work in England in a generation. There are a host of new protections and legal entitlements for renters, and many potential pitfalls for landlords to consider. Assured shorthold tenancies have been abolished, and have automatically been converted into rolling tenancies - sometimes known as ‘assured periodic tenancies’. It means that the tenancy has no automatic end date. Section 21 notices - also known as "no fault" evictions have been abolished, and Landlords are not allowed to ask for more than 1 months' rent as a deposit. Bidding wars for rental properties are now forbidden, and there are measures to limit rent increases. But it doesn't apply to all renters in all properties.What about students? They all rent, but only some students are covered by the Act. And if landlords don't follow the new laws carefully, they could face fines of thousands of pounds. So what are the details that property owners and their tenants need to know?Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Damon Rose Contributors: Siobhan Taylor-Ward, a Housing Solicitor at Lawstop on the Wirral Nermin Suleman, an associate solicitor at Prosperity Law in Manchester Tim Wrigley a partner at Wrigley’s Solicitors in Leeds
Transcribe →How tough are the UK's asylum laws?
Mar 2500:28:20Tap to summarizeThe Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s Restoring Order and Control policy is underway. It's based - in part - on measures carried out in Denmark which cut asylum claims there to a 40 year low. From now on in the UK, people granted asylum - refugees - will face a review every two and a half years. If their country of origin is regarded as safe, they may be encouraged, or even forced, to go back. There are lots of other changes. If someone is refused asylum, they’ll only be allowed a single appeal. If an asylum seeker breaks the law, works illegally or can financially support themselves, they’ll lose their benefits or accommodation. Alongside the asylum reforms, there are also major changes to settlement in the UK, affecting both refugees and people on work and study visas. From now on, they will have to wait at least 10 years before they can obtain indefinite leave to remain, which means they can settle in the UK without restrictions. You may be forgiven for thinking -"these are pretty big changes, I don’t recall there being a big debate in parliament or any votes?" And you’d be correct. This was all done through secondary legislation, meaning that it’s a change to existing rules. But what are the possible legal battles for the government as it tries to introduce some of the toughest asylum laws in Europe? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Contributors: Dr Peter Walsh, Senior Researcher and lead on asylum at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Law at the University of Cambridge Baroness Levitt, Family Justice Minister
Transcribe →When is it legal to go to war?
Mar 1800:28:12Tap to summarizeUnder international law, when can a country declare war on another?Was it legal for Israel and the United States to have carried out "pre-emptive" airstrikes across most of Iran’s provinces, which started the war? The USA says the attacks were justfied, because of an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear programme, and Israel claims it acted in self-defence. The Israeli President went further - telling the BBC that focusing on the legality of the war instead of regional security is "mind-boggling" to him. And what of Iran's response? Was it reasonable under international law? In the last few weeks, practically all its Gulf-state neighbours have been targeted, as well as its drones or missiles landing in Syria, Cyprus, Turkey and Azerbajan. So does the Iranian retalliation justify the American and Israeli attacks under international law? And if any country breaks international laws - are there any real consequences? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Susan Breau, Professor of International law at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London Christian Henderson, Professor of International Law, University of Sussex Éamon Chawke, intellectual property, data protection and commercial law solicitor, Briffa Legal
Transcribe →Is it legal for police to use live facial recognition technology?
Mar 1100:27:37Tap to summarizeThe Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood says she makes “no apology” for announcing the roll-out of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) to all the police services in England and Wales. Under a government white paper on policing, the number of Live Facial Recognition vans will increase from 10 to 50. Police say it’s groundbreaking technology in the fight against crime, but civil liberties groups say it’s authoritarian and a step towards a "surveillance state".Facial recognition cameras are already used in shops; the difference with LFR is that the software used by police tracks faces against a watchlist - a specific database of faces - from a live video feed. But the legal framework regulating the use of the technology is a patchwork of common law, human rights legislation and police guidelines, which has been challenged in the High Court. There is also concern about a lack of oversight over how police watchlists are compiled, and why the number of people on the list now stretches into the thousands. So is LFR legal? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sonja Jessup, BBC London’s home affairs correspondent Professor Karen Yeung, Interdisciplinary Professorial Fellow in Law, Ethics and Informatics, Birmingham Law School Dr Asress Gikay, Senior Lecturer in AI, Disruptive Innovation and Law, Brunel, University of London Richard Ryan a barrister from Blakiston’s, specialising in drone and unmanned aviation law
Transcribe →The plans to limit jury trials in England and Wales
Mar 400:27:33Tap to summarizeThe courts system in England and Wales is in an unprecedented crisis. The backlog has reached 80,000 cases, and some defendants are being told they won't be able to have a criminal trial until 2030. The government has introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which contains a raft of measures to tackle delays and bring down the backlog; but the Justice Secretary David Lammy has admitted that things are going to get even worse before they get better. The most controversial change is a plan to restrict the number of jury trials. The right to judgement by your peers has existed for more than 800 years, but for some offences, that's going to end. Defendants will lose the right to choose between a jury trial or a magistrate's hearing in so-called "either-way" offences. Magistrates will get increased sentencing powers - up from 12 months to 18 months. More serious criminal cases, with likely sentences of up to three years will now be heard by a single judge - and no jury. And only the most serious "indictable" offences, like murder, manslaughter and rape and any other offence with a sentence of longer than three years will be heard by a jury.But will the reforms make a difference? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sarah Sackman KC, courts and legal services minister Chris Kinch, KC, who until 2024 was a senior judge at Woolwich Crown Court in south London David Ford, national chair of the Magistrates Association
Transcribe →What is Misconduct in Public Office?
Feb 2500:27:27Tap to summarizeThe former US ambassador Peter Mandelson is on bail after being arrested on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office. Police have been investigating claims that when he was Business secretary, he shared market-sensitive government information with the financier Jeffrey Epstein. His arrest comes a few days after police arrested Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, also on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office, when he was a trade envoy. He is suspected of sharing confidential government documents with Epstein. The arrests come after the release of a large number of files by the US Department of Justice. These relate to the activities of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a convicted sex offender. He died in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of the sex-trafficking of underage girls. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was friends with Epstein. So was Lord Mandelson. The BBC has approached Andrew Mountbatten Windsor for a response to these claims. He has always rejected any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein and denied any personal gain from his role as trade envoy. Lord Mandelson has not publicly commented in recent weeks on the Epstein files, but the BBC understands his position is he has not acted in any way criminally and that he was not motivated by financial gain.But what exactly is Misconduct in Public Office? It's a common law offence, with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but the Law Commission of England and Wales describes it as "ill-defined ". So how did it evolve, who does it apply to, how does it work in practice? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Senior Producer: Ravi Naik Producer: Charlotte RowlesContributors: Gareth Roberts, Barrister, Exchange chambers Kate Bex KC, Red Lion chambers Jeremy Horder, Professor of Criminal Law, the London School of Economics Dr Hayleigh Bosher, a Reader in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel, University of London.
Transcribe →The law under fire
Nov 1900:27:36Tap to summarizePolitically motivated attacks on the legal profession in the UK have led to barristers, solicitors, advocates and judges being subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. This is according to the The Bar Council of England and Wales, the Law Society of England and Wales, the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates, the Bar of Northern Ireland and the Law Society of Northern Ireland. These organisations represent a quarter of a million lawyers across the UK, and they have come together to warn about an increasing climate of hostility against legal professionals. They say that law firms have been targeted by protesters, and they point out that lawyers are not their clients. So how bad has the situation become, and is it threatening justice or even democracy?Also on the programme: The Scottish Parliament has passed the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill after 3 days of debates and almost 400 amendments lodged - so why is the bill so controversial? And using a dodgy "jailbroken-Firestick" to watch illegally-streamed TV may seem like a victimless crime - but is it? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Charlie Sherrard KC, criminal barrister with 2BR Chambers Mark Evans, President of the Law Society James Cook, BBC Scotland Editor Éamon Chawke, a solicitor who specialises in intellectual property law at Briffa legal
Transcribe →The court delays crisis
Nov 1200:27:35Tap to summarizeWhen the Labour government came to power in 2024, it faced a crisis in the criminal courts, with ever-longer delays and a growing backlog of cases. The Ministry of Justice's budget is now one third higher in real terms than in 2019, but according to the latest figures, crown court cases that are yet to be heard reached a record high of 78,329. In October, the Justice Secretary David Lammy promised extra funding to increase the number of days that English and Welsh courts will sit next year. But is throwing money at the problem enough? How can the courts service be improved, and should jury trials be limited to help clear the backlog?Also in the programme: Protests in support of the banned group Palestine Action could result in trials for as many as 2100 people - so how do courts deal with a sudden influx of cases? And are UK laws fair to football fans? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte RowlesContributors: Claire Waxman, Victims Commissioner designate, Riel Karmy-Jones KC, Chair of the Criminal Bar Association of England and Wales, Dr Steven Cammiss, Associate Professor in Law at the University of Birmingham, Professor Geoff Pearson, Professor of Law, University of Manchester.
Transcribe →Immigration and the law - who stays? Who goes?
Nov 500:28:29Tap to summarizeImmigration has dominated headlines for months, but what UK laws cover this most emotive of issues? When someone arrives here, what are the legal routes they have to take if they want to stay in the UK? What's the legal difference between an asylum seeker and a refugee? What does "indefinite leave to remain" mean? And what's the difference between being deported, being removed and being extradited? How do immigration hearings work? Are our immigration laws fit for purpose, and do they enable us to remove people when required? Also on the programme: How will the government's digital ID plans help curb illegal immigration? and wigs in court; as the bar council updates dress advice for its members, we ask two barristers if wigs have had their day. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte RowlesContributors Madeleine Sumption, Director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Paul Gulbenkian, solicitor at OTS solicitors and former immigration Judge Morgan Wild, Chief Policy Adviser, Labour Together Jennifer Devans-Tamakloe, barrister at 23 Essex Street chambers Benet Brandreth KC, barrister at 11 South Square chambers
Transcribe →How can avoidable deaths be prevented?
Jun 1100:27:49Tap to summarizeThe phrase “State related deaths” might mean little to the average person, but it's an umbrella term referring to a death in custody or a mental health setting. It also applies to situations when people have taken their own lives while in the armed forces or even to disasters like Grenfell or Hillsborough. What all these have in common is that they are followed by inquests or public inquiries, where investigators or coroners try to work out what caused the deaths. Public inquiries are set up to draw conclusions and release their findings, and coroners are required to write a "Prevention of Future Deaths" report when there are lessons to be learned. Hundreds of these PFD reports are released in England and Wales each year - yet there is no system in place to ensure preventative changes are made. In Scotland, the equivalent is a Fatal Accident Inquiry. It's held by a procurator fiscal - and not a coroner - in front of a sheriff, and has a wider remit than an inquest. It too, can flag up systemic failures that led to a death, and precautions that should be made in future. So should the UK have a body that ensures these warnings are heeded?Also on the programme: The government has welcomed Law Commission reforms to Wills - which includes new protections against so-called "predatory marriages". And the Supreme Court case which could change the rules for all divorces in England and Wales. Presenter: Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Deborah Coles, Director of the charity Inquest Kate Stone, barrister at Garden Court North chambers Alexander Learmonth KC, barrister at New Square chambers Tracey Moloney, Moloney Family solicitors
Transcribe →