Board Determination Research Articles

Expert psychiatric reports for the Parole Board for England and Wales

SUMMARY The Parole Board for England and Wales advises on the release, recall and licence conditions of a small subgroup of prisoners serving determinate sentences and the majority of those serving indeterminate sentences. Since the establishment of the Parole Board in 1968, the parole process has been shaped and clarified by further legislation and case law. In certain scenarios, psychiatric expert evidence may be sought to inform the Board's determination of whether a prisoner can be safely released into the community. Psychiatrists preparing expert reports for the Parole Board should be familiar with the current operationalisation of parole. This involves an understanding not only of the functioning of the Parole Board, but also of the criminal justice context in which prisoners subject to parole are managed. Having set the scene, by describing the role of the Parole Board and the wider context, this article examines how to undertake assessments and complete psychiatric reports for the Board.

Understand implications of NLRB's move to categorize certain student‐athletes as employees

The National Labor Relations Board's determination that student‐athletes are employees may result in significant changes in college athletics departments nationwide. On Sept. 29, 2021, Jennifer Abruzzo, General Counsel for the NLRB, issued GC Memorandum 21‐08 announcing that scholarship student‐athletes at private colleges and universities playing football in the Division I Football Bowl Subdivision qualify as employees under the National Labor Relations Act.

NLRB categorizes student‐athletes as employees

The National Labor Relations Board's determination that student‐athletes are employees may result in significant changes in college athletics departments nationwide.

Trustees of Columbia Univ. in City of New York v. Illumina, Inc. United States Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, 2021 No. 2019-2302, 2021 WL 317661 (nonprecedential)

Trustees of Columbia Univ. in City of New York v. Illumina, Inc. United States Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, 2021 No. 2019-2302, 2021 WL 317661 (nonprecedential)

Circulation: Clinical Summaries

<i>Circulation:</i> Clinical Summaries

The Interface between Federal and Provincial Jurisdiction over Pipelines: Recent Developments, Current Issues and a Suggested Mechanism for Reducing Turbulence in the Buffer Zone

In two recent decisions of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Court overruled the National Energy Board's determination of the extent of the Board's constitutional jurisdiction with respect to interprovincial pipelines and certain associated facilities. A necessary conclusion to be drawn from these, and earlier, cases is that, in the absence of a final judicial ruling on specific facilities, the jurisdictional status of many facilities will always be in some doubt. This article examines the possibility of employing mechanisms that are well-established within the framework of the Constitution Act, 1867 to mitigate the consequences of this uncertainty. This is the first time that the viability of using such mechanisms in this context has been analyzed in detail.