155 article(s) found matching ""
December 12, 2022
James Wolffe KC has joined The Legal Education Foundation board as a Trustee. James qualified as an advocate at the Scottish bar in 1992 and took silk in 2007. He was Dean of the Faculty of Advocates (the elected leader of the Scottish bar) 2014-16 and Lord Advocate (the senior Scottish Law Officer) 2016-21. He has been instructed as an advocate in numerous high profile and complex cases and has argued significant appeals, including in the UK Supreme Court. James is also a member of the bar of England & Wales and a Bencher of Middle Temple. He practices as an advocate and barrister through Axiom Advocates, Edinburgh and Brick Court Chambers, London, sits as a part-time judge in the Courts of Appeal of Guernsey and Jersey and is an Honorary Professor of Edinburgh University Law School.
Matthew Smerdon, TLEF CEO, says: ‘We are extremely fortunate to have James join the board of the Foundation. He brings deep experience of the justice system at its most senior levels across the UK, as well as a longstanding commitment to access to justice and legal education.†.
James says: “I am delighted to be joining the Board of The Legal Education Foundation. The Foundation does impressive work which helps to address unmet legal need, improve access to justice and support the sound development and administration of the law. I look forward to contributing, as a member of the Board, to the Foundation’s work.â€
November 17, 2022
August 11, 2022
July 20, 2022
“Improving the quality and availability of data has the real potential to increase innovation and deliver a wide range of benefits for the justice system, not least helping to support disadvantaged users and cutting delays and backlogs. “Yet we know from attempts to share NHS patient data or the reaction to the school exam results algorithm in 2020 that realising the benefits of data requires investing in building a public mandate for its use. “This research gives us an invaluable insight into the public’s views and concerns about the use of justice data, and should act as a wake-up call to those of us designing effective arrangements to oversee how data is accessed and shared in the future.â€In his foreword to the report, Sir Bob Neill MP, Chair of the Commons Justice Committee, said
“The brave new world of the digital age offers huge potential to improve outcomes, harnessing and extrapolating data to increase transparency and accountability, promote understanding, drive efficiency, and devise new pathways to strengthen access to justice… “… [The] Government will have to juggle a difficult balancing act between, on the one hand, delivering the significant and undeniable public good of digitalising court data, while on the other, avoiding the pitfalls of over-commercialisation and automation, both of which have the potential to undermine public confidence, and worse, hinder justice. “Ensuring they do not will require the setting of clear parameters, rigorously, continuously and independently monitored, on what data can be used, by whom and for what purpose. To maintain trust, this cannot be an esoteric exercise, but one in which the public are actively and genuinely consulted on, and invested in. It is why this report, the first of its kind globally, is so important.â€Reema Patel from Ipsos, and co-author of the report, said:
“This research demonstrates the public’s concern at how court records are used and particularly given the development of algorithms and predictive analytics. The public’s faith and trust in the justice system is already low and allowing commercial organisations unrestricted access to such data risks undermining this even further.â€Jennifer Gisborne of Ipsos, and co-author of the report, said:
“There was some fear that the use of court data to predict case outcomes and urge people on lower incomes to pursue other forms of resolution could “bake in†current disadvantages and prevent people from low incomes accessing their legal rights. Indeed, it was striking that while two-thirds (65%) of people earning more than £55,000 a year were comfortable with court data being used to develop low cost alternatives to litigation that figure dropped to less than half (44%) for those earning less than £20,000 a year.â€The report is being launched at a Databites event hosted by the Institute for Government (IfG) at 6pm on Wednesday 20th July. Dr Natalie Byrom, Jennifer Gisborne and Reema Patel will be joined by Daniel Flury, Director of Access to Justice at the MoJ, Daniel Hoadley, Head of Litigation Data at Mishcon de Reya, and Imogen Parker, Associate Director at the Ada Lovelace Institute. The event will be chaired by Gavin Freeguard, of the IfG and is open to the public to attend. To attend the IfG Databites event on Wednesday 20th July at 6pm register here Download the report here.
April 28, 2022
February 16, 2022
January 14, 2022
December 21, 2021
December 7, 2021
“It is positive to see the recognition by HMCTS of the critical importance of data in delivering a courts and tribunals system that works better for everyone. HMCTS has embraced an ambitious vision for data– now is the time to accelerate action to deliver this vision. Improving the data infrastructure is essential to effectively tackle the key challenges facing the justice system such as the current courts backlog. Collecting data to understand and evaluate the efficacy of different approaches to tackling case backlogs is critical to ensuring public money is being spent effectively. Work to improve the information we have on the experience of individuals who rely on the courts system is critical to building back fairer. Action to ensure that data collection and sharing practices do not move beyond public acceptability is vital to maintain public trust in the courts. The Treasury has just provided MoJ with a generous financial settlement in the recent Spending Review. I urge HMCTS to use this opportunity and additional funding to set out a clear plan with measurable objectives to tackle the current data deficit across our justice system.â€
November 8, 2021
“TLEF's previous work has demonstrated that appropriate reforms to data protection law could help to ensure that the UK’s data protection framework reinforces and promotes the principle of non-discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. Such reforms would enhance public trust, prevent harm and ensure that new technologies are deployed lawfully and effectively. However, reform is not without risk- it is vital that new regulation is developed soundly in a manner that is consistent with established equalities and human rights frameworks.†Dr. Natalie Byrom, TLEF Director of ResearchTo support organisations and individuals submitting responses to the consultation, TLEF has instructed leading equality law experts Robin Allen QC and Dee Masters to analyse the impact of proposed reforms on discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. Their public joint opinion: “The impact of proposals within: “Data: A New Direction†on discrimination under the Equality Act 2010â€, published today, raises concerns that proposals in the consultation document conflate: “outcome fairness†with “non-discrimination†in a manner that is: “simply wrong in lawâ€. The opinion states:
“…urgent action is required to address this legal fallacy and to stop it becoming accepted. If not, both public and private organisations will be lulled into a false belief that they are acting lawfully when in fact they are breaching the Equality Act 2010. Money and time will be wasted as a result; many will be adversely affected. Sooner or later, this will come back to undermine whatever development has taken place, with untold legal and social consequences.†Robin Allen QC and Dee MastersAllen and Masters identify six key refinements to the existing data protection linked to the government proposals. These include:
“Discriminatory decision making isn’t just problematic for the individuals involved; it exposes organisations to legal risk. This is both a burden on business and a distraction from its development for the common good. Indeed, the helpful adoption of technology is inhibited if the public stops trusting organisations for fear of discrimination. So we are clear that the DCMS, through reform of the UK's data protection framework, has an opportunity to fix the problems that are preventing the principle of non-discrimination from being fully realised in the field of data processing.†Robin Allen QC and Dee MastersThe full opinion is available to download here. The consultation closes on the 19th November at 11.45pm. Further details and instructions on how to respond are available here.
© 2013 - 2024 The Legal Education Foundation
Registered charity 271297 (England/Wales)