Latest legal news from around the world

Tesco, Sainsbury and Morrison LLP

23rd May 2008

Seemingly spurred on as much by China’s activities as by its own national interest, the Japanese government has passed a new space law. Aimed at expanding the country’s scope for space utilization and developing strategic policies, the law could bring the country out of its earthly hinterland and into the murky depths of a galaxy fraught with unknown science, ambiguous international treaties and confusing stances on exploiting the heavens for military purposes. Commenting on Japan’s previous position on limiting space-related projects to academic purposes, a spokesman admitted that “the nation was unable to see the big picture”. Perhaps their telescope was out of focus. Not that we should mock their legislative rigour, of course; Britain has had its own equivalent statute for over 20 years – see the Outer Space Act 1986 c. 38.

In no less scientifically divisive a move but on decidedly more terrestrial a footing, America’s Endangered Species Act was tested last week. In recognition by the US Department for the Interior that the ice caps are melting due to greenhouse-gas emissions, the polar bear has been added to an official list of endangered species. The article’s author highlights numerous ramifications of the decision and suggests that it will “go down in history as the turning point in the global-warming debate”. As sound as his argument might be, discussions on climate change in recent years seem to have taken more turning points than even the most fastidious policymaker could keep up with. Let’s hope this one sets the world’s course in the right direction.

From one “big issue” to the next: global terrorism; and in the Pakistani North West Frontier Province the national government has struck a deal with the Taliban in neighbouring Afghanistan to end suicide bombings in return for the introduction of Sharia law to the region. The UN and NATO don’t seem to be entirely behind the initiative. We’ll offer our thoughts on some issues but others are perhaps best left hanging in the air.

The fence, however, is the last place we’d sit in relation to reports of the British solicitor stung to the tune of £4,900 for using her mobile phone to watch the BBC’s The Apprentice while holidaying on the French Riviera. We can categorically say that it’s, well, a lot of money indeed. Her taste in viewing material, on the other hand, is dividing opinion in the office, with those in the “wrong” camp saying it’s great, while those in the “right” camp say it’s dreadful.

Meanwhile, the Scottish government was yesterday urged to abandon any thoughts of extending “right to buy” legislation for tenant farmers in order to encourage landowners to offer more farms for let. Amusing or arch comments we can offer none. But it’s an important development, affecting a significant proportion of the Scottish population, hence the duty we feel in flagging it up. Oh, and we do hold some relevant legislation on Justis: the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 asp 11.

Implementing such legislation north of the border could well be opened up to fierce competition from none other than supermarkets. According to this report, The Law Society of Scotland overwhelmingly backed a motion to break the monopoly of solicitors over the ownership of legal firms in Scotland. How might small-time market traders offering knocked-off divorce papers along with cut-price jeans and broken clock radios react to news of this threat, we wonder. Here’s the most recent relevant statute: Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007 asp 5.

 Previous issue     Next issue 

Top