UK Legal System Research Articles

Piercing the corporate veil in Mauritius: a comparative study with the United Kingdom

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to bring clarity to the concept of piercing the veil of incorporation in Mauritius. This will allow students, researchers, academics and practitioners to engage further in research on the topic of incorporation of companies. Design/methodology/approach To conduct the study, the doctrinal legal research approach will be used. The inquiry will examine the numerous laws and case laws that permit the lifting of the corporate veil, so exposing the agents of the corporation to accountability on both a criminal and civil level. A comparison of Mauritius and the UK legal systems will be conducted to assess the efficacy of the former. Findings There are significant loopholes in the legislative framework of Mauritius regarding various corporate offences that are highly encouraged because of the limited circumstances under which courts may lift the corporate veil. There is a need for specific legislation to be enacted by Parliament to address these specific offences. Inspiration should be drawn from the UK’s robust legislative framework on the matter. Originality/value Literature on the subject in Mauritius deals mostly with factual information on the doctrine of separate legal personality and the various exceptions under which the veil of incorporation may be lifted. However, there is a scarcity of research on the various fraudulent activities and their implications on the company that go unnoticed and unpunished because of loopholes in the legal framework. This paper attempts to fill this important gap.

LEGAL AND POLITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS IN POST-BREXIT BRITAIN: AN ANALYSIS

This article explores laws related to the protection of, and challenges to, consumer rights in the UK after its peoples’ decision to withdraw from the European Union (EU, henceforth) in 2016. Consumer protection laws are formulated and enacted to safeguard consumers from illegal and deceitful behavior of traders and salesmen, etc., and provide buyers with a range of legal guarantees and protections. These laws deal with a number of issues such as the safety of the products used by citizens, criminalize not only false advertising, but also excessive pricing, and breach of contract terms. In the UK, the main piece of consumer protection legislation is the Consumer Rights Act 2015. However, despite the existence of consumer protection laws and regulations, problems still occur, and consumers can still fall victim to fraudulent or unethical business practices. Therefore, it is important for consumers to be informed about their rights and to be vigilant in protecting themselves from scams and other forms of consumer fraud. Additionally, consumer protection is an issue that is constantly evolving as new technologies and business models emerge. For example, the rise of e-commerce and online marketplaces has created new challenges for consumer protection, as consumers may not always know who they are buying from or how to resolve disputes with online sellers. Keywords: Consumer Rights, UNO Guided Principles for consumer protection, Consumer rights and UK Legal System.

Zero or 18

Zero or 18

Legal Basis for UK Sanctions Policy

The article analyzes the formation and development of the legal foundations of the UK sanctions policy. Based on the principles of Realpolitik, the concept of “Sanctions Policy” is studied not as an academic construction but as a real political and legal tool for the implementation of the external functions of the English state. The article proposes a brief historical and legal review of the sanctions legislation evolution, starting with the Royal Decree of 1621, the Navigation Act (1651), the Stamp Act (1765), the Townshend Acts (1767) and ending with the sanctions legislation of the EU, where the UK was a member before Brexit. The focus is on a detailed analysis of the Law on Sanctions and Combating Money Laundering of 2018, as well as statutory instruments, including the Regulations on Sanctions for Chemical Weapons (2019) and the Regulations on Sanctions for Violations of Human Rights (2020).Since the UK legal system belongs to the system of case law, the authors attempted to analyze the most important court decisions in this area, including: the case of HM Treasury v. Ahmed (2010) and Vekselberg, better known as Lamesa Investments Limited v. Cynergy Bank Limited (2019).It is concluded that the UK’s sanctions policy is primarily aimed at the achievement of its geopolitical objectives.

Brexit and social safeguards for EU citizens in the UK: the Agreements’ rules and perspectives

The purpose is to give a first analysis of the new framework for the protection of EU citizens and workers in the United Kingdom, following Brexit. Against the background of the UK’s anti-European resentments on social matter, this paper will analyse the protection legal system for EU citizens by examining the rules in the Withdrawal and the Brexit Agreements. Secondly, it will probe the prospects post-Brexit for preserving the EU social heritage in the UK legal system.

Liability and Insurance in Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship (MASS) under the UK Legal System - The impact of new technologies and the interpretation thereof -

Emergence of new technologies in relation to a navigation of a vessel, from manned to unmanned status, will bring about fundamental changes to the traditional legal paradigm, which was established based on the presumption of human existence on board of a vessel. Similar changes are witnessed regarding motor vehicles and aircraft, but the unique nature of maritime affairs requires an independent analysis. This paper takes a particular interest in AI and cyber security in MASS and how the new technologies will likely be impacting the liability and marine insurance regime under the UK legal system. After a brief analysis of how UK laws and courts look at autonomous motor vehicles and aircrafts as a comparison, the introduction for Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, a new legislation to regulate the UK motor insurance for automated vehicles, will follow. Liability issues in relation to AI under the UK legal system is addressed based on the analysis of the legal status of AI, with suggestions to bridge the gaps during the transitional period of this paradigm shift. Finally, as marine insurance is often times the name of the game in maritime affairs and marine casualties, the interpretation of current marine insurance law to be applicable to AI and cyber security is suggested. In short, the purpose of this paper was to comprehensively address the areas where the new technology would potentially have an impact on the MASS and what the issues would likely be from the UK legal perspective.

‘An impossible dream’? Non-binary people’s perceptions of legal gender status and reform in the UK

ABSTRACT The meaning and significance of gender is currently a focus of heated and, often, polarised debate in the UK and elsewhere. This article provides a new perspective in the gender debate through focused exploration of UK-based non-binary people’s perceptions of legal gender status and reform. Binary gender/sex systems, such as the legal gender system in the UK, are underpinned by cisgenderism and are challenged by those whose identity falls outside of the binary of woman and man. In contrast to most lay participants in the Future of Legal Gender (FLaG) project, the majority of non-binary participants reported support for reform (85.5% (n = 165) in favour) to the current UK legal gender system. Over half (57%, n = 110) were in favour of abolishing legal gender (i.e. the state would no longer assign a legal gender status), although this was constructed as ‘an impossible dream’. Situating non-binary people’s perspectives at the heart of the debate about the certification of gender offers novel insight which could have significant ramifications for how societal structures could support undoing gender in the future.

The value of English common law for new “special zones”: a case study of two contrasting examples

Abstract The UK legal system, and in particular the legal method of the common law, is in use in numerous countries around the world. (The Scots law approach, which is uncodified, is in many ways similar to that of the common law, but has been used less internationally.) The UK's approach contrasts with the code-based civil law method, the other major legal technique, in use in most other countries and which derives from the codifications in Europe of the nineteenth century. In recent years, various countries have sought to benefit from the UK’s methods, particularly in commercial matters, by setting up free zones in which new laws can apply. Dubai and Abu Dhabi, two of the United Arab Emirates, are prominent examples. However, they have chosen different means by which to adopt elements of the UK’s legal system. This article explores what each has done, and some of the distinctions between their two approaches.

The Effects of BREXIT on the UK's Economic, Social and Legal System

BREXIT is the term used to refer to the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The effects of Brexit on the UK economy have been felt since the referendum on June 23rd, 2016, when the majority of the UK’s population voted to leave the European Union. In the years since the referendum and after the official withdrawal from the EU (as of 31st January 2020 and during the transition period which ended on 31st December 2020), the UK economy has experienced a variety of both positive and negative effects, all affecting the British economic, social and legal system. Some critics say that in the end, it resulted a very particular idea of sovereignty over economic good sense. Others say that the UK's decision to leave the European Union is an act of economic self-harm. The truth is inevitably somewhere in between.

Parliamentary Sovereignty before and beyond Brexit

Abstract This article assesses the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty against the background that, at the time of UK’s withdrawal from the EU, UK parliament proclaimed it to be preserved despite the continuing domestic legal effect accorded, under 2018 and 2020 Acts, to pertinent EU law provisions in the UK legal system. The relevant evidence is analysed to show whether that position is one to which English law subscribes.

Impact of PSD2 on The Payment Services Market – General Objectives and Evidence from Polish and UK Legal Systems

Abstract Payment Service Directive 2 came into force on 13th January 2018. It has replaced the prior directive and introduces new tools allowing to provide more advanced payment services. New legislation aims to increase competition and allow new entrants into the market. The thesis leads through the different aspects of the Directive, emphasizing an influence the legislation has on the companies providing modern solutions in the payment services market. The legal changes are analysed and assessed following the differences resulting from Payment Service Directive 2. For better understanding the impact of Directive, recent technological accomplishments are briefly described and explained. The overall results of the analysis are concluded on the basis of British and Polish payment services markets. The outcome reveals a contrast between these two countries in a number of new payment services providers as well as they origins. Research shows that the Polish payment services market is less accessible for non-bank financial companies.

Cross-Border Data Protection After Brexit

This paper reconstructs how the UK data protection framework has evolved in the last four years, from the time of the Brexit referendum to the introduction of the TCA. It assesses to what extent the new UK data protection regime reflects the Brexit desiderata, and analyses the challenges of the future relationship between the UK and the EU in light of the solutions envisioned by the TCA. It argues that, even when an adequacy decision will be in place, the UK will neither achieve the desired level of regulatory emancipation advocated by the Brexit supporters nor will it offer a stable and reliable mechanism for data transfers. Indeed, the adequacy mechanism will subject the UK legal system to regular monitoring by the EU which will restrict the UK’s ability to freely develop its own data protection framework for fear of losing the EU adequacy status. Moreover, in light of the recent CJEU case law on data transfers and data retention, a UK adequacy decision will naturally be exposed to the risk of being invalidated due to the non-conformity of the UK national security regime with EU law.

The Conceptual Analysis of the Doctrine of Proportionality and, its Role in Democratic Constitutionalism; A Case Study of UK

For the last few decades, the doctrine of proportionality has demonstrated and corroborated that it is the most effective legal standard used around Europe for the adjudication of constitutional rights. From its German origins, proportionality has migrated across jurisdictions and areas of law and has become one of the most successful legal transplants. However, there is some confusion as to whether there is any justification for the intervention of this in the UK's legal system, as the UK's legal system is based on common law, and did not welcome this doctrine very much. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the basic principles of this doctrine and check its compatibility with the common law system, which is based on democratic norms. To test the similarity, this article would also reflect on the underlying characteristics of the theory of proportionality and equate it with the standards of a democratic society. To begin with, this article first endeavors to analyze the legal sources of the doctrine of proportionality and then examines its affinity with the democratic norms of the common law system to investigate the compatibility level with each other in protecting the constitutional rights of the people.

WHY CIVIL CLAIMS ARE A NECESSARY PART OF THE ARSENAL TO ADDRESS MILITARY EXCESSES : Assessing the UK Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill

This paper focuses on civil claims for personal injury and/or death and claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of overseas operations. The Bill sets out several rationales for the introduction of the reforms to civil and human rights claims, and we saw value in scrutinising these justifications in some depth, given the significance of the proposed reforms and the limited attention they have received to date. As we will explain, the civil claim longstop would have the effect of shielding the Ministry of Defence from public scrutiny and legal accountability and would take away crucial means by which to ensure transparency and to promote institutional lessons learned. To make this assessment, we have carried out a review of civil and human rights judgments pertaining to overseas operations, issued within the last twenty years. These have mainly concerned claims against the Ministry of Defence, though our sample has also included claims involving overseas engagements by the security services and other parts of government to the extent relevant. Some might assume that that introducing time limits and related restrictions to civil claims or claims under the Human Rights Act in relation to overseas operations is a relatively minor access to justice intrusion. There is somewhat more acceptability of limitation periods in respect of civil claims for damages than with criminal investigations and prosecutions. Our research has led us to see these issues differently. We argue that: i) Considering the checks and balances within the UK legal system and how it operates as a whole, impeding access to civil and human rights claims ignores the vital role such claims play in ensuring that criminal investigations and prosecutions and related accountability processes are not shut down prematurely. A crucial means of oversight will be lost; ii) Victims’ access to reparation is an important value worthy of protection and a fundamental and obligatory aspect of UK human rights obligations. This is especially the case for claims involving wrongful death, torture, and ill-treatment; and iii) The introduction of limitation periods for civil and human rights claims without a possibility for judges to be able to use their discretion to extend them where the exigencies of the circumstances so require, is a significant and unjustifiable limitation of claimants’ access to reparation.

Constructing Rules on Exclusions (Debarment) Under a Post-Brexit Regime on Public Procurement: A Preliminary Analysis

This current initiative to reform public procurement after Brexit raises the question of how to deal with exclusions (debarment) in the UK legal system. This area has received little attention in the past but Brexit offers both more legal flexibility and a political opportunity to address the topic. Against this background and to inform and stimulate the reform debate this paper identifies the key issues and make some preliminary recommendations for the post-Brexit exclusion regime. The paper argues, first and foremost, that there is a strong argument for a more centralised approach. Such an approach, if properly operated and resourced, can potentially have many benefits in addressing corruption and other policy problems, in improving performance of public contracts and in providing better protection for suppliers. More specifically the paper, first, argues that there should be centrally-administered mandatory exclusions for integrity breaches, which should cover wider grounds than current mandatory exclusions and should not be limited to cases where the supplier has a criminal conviction or other formal judgment against it. The paper also considers certain issues relating to the detail of such exclusions, including the role of the central agency, and coordination with the criminal justice system. The paper also discusses the potential role of centralisation in relation to exclusions for poor past performance, arguing that centralisation also has an important role in this area, too, as well as in helping individual procuring entities to assess suppliers’ technical competence. The paper also proposes setting up a general framework for mandatory exclusions in other policy areas that might be considered suitable for mandatory exclusions in future. Finally, it examines the extent to which discretionary exclusions for individual entities should be retained or added to the legal regime against the background of the paper’s proposals for mandatory exclusions.

How preclinical studies have influenced novel psychoactive substance legislation in the UK and Europe.

Novel psychoactive substances (NPS) are new drugs of abuse. Over the last 10 years 50-100 new NPS have been detected for the first time each year. This has led to numerous deaths and challenges to healthcare providers and law-makers worldwide. We review preclinical studies of NPS and discuss how these studies have influenced legislative decisions. We focus on the UK legal system but include experiences from Europe. We reviewed manuscripts from 2008-2019 and have summarised the in vitro and in vivo data on NPS, highlighting how these studies define pharmacological mechanisms and how they might predict harm in humans. We found that only a small percentage of NPS have been examined in preclinical studies. Most preclinical studies of NPS focus on basic pharmacological mechanisms (46% of studies reviewed) and/or addictive liability (32%) rather than toxicity and harm (24%). Very few preclinical studies into NPS include data from chronic dosing schedules (9%) or female rodents (4%). We conclude that preclinical studies can predict harm to humans, but most of the predictions are based on basic pharmacology rather than demonstrated toxicity. Some of these studies have been used to make changes to the law in the UK and Europe and perhaps, because of the paucity of toxicology data, most NPS have been placed in the highly dangerous schedule 1 or Class A category in the UK. We suggest that in silico studies and high throughput toxicology screens might be the most economical way forward to rapidly screen the health harms of NPS.

Comparative characteristics of intellectual property judges: Ukraine, United Kingdom, USA

The article deals with the comparative characterization of specialized courts for the protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine and developed foreign countries, such as Great Britain and the USA. The article deals with the historical background of the creation of a specialized court on intellectual property in Ukraine, as well as the legal systems in the field of protection of intellectual property rights of Great Britain and the USA, the analysis and consideration of the current judicial systems – in the consideration of civil and criminal cases in the field of intellectual property. property, litigation of the patent authorities of England and Wales, types of specialized courts and their unique procedural features. The nuances and practice of law enforcement activities of judges in the United States, the types and levels of penalties in civil and criminal cases, as well as the divergence of lawsuits and pre-trial procedural arrangements are outlined. The article reveals the similarity of the UK and US legal systems with those currently in force in Ukraine in dealing with intellectual property cases. The identified deficiencies relate to territorial inaccessibility, instances of inconsistency, and imperfection of the judicial system, as well as the defects of the national intellectual property and legal frameworks in place in comparison with the United Kingdom and the United States of America in the field of intellectual property. After researching and analyzing the intellectual property rights protection systems of leading countries in the world, such as England and the United States of America, the conclusions were clearly drawn as to the advisability of setting up a specialized court on intellectual property in Ukraine and the risks involved.

UK Legal System for Cultural Property Protection under a Conceptual Framework of the Cultural Constitution

UK Legal System for Cultural Property Protection under a Conceptual Framework of the Cultural Constitution

Reflecting on the Experiences of Bereaved Military Families in the Coroner’s Court

The practice of repatriating UK personnel killed during military operations means that the death of service personnel falls within the jurisdiction of the UK legal system, which requires that an inquest be conducted. The coroner’s inquiry is a potential source of stress and trauma for bereaved families. However, recent scholarship has highlighted that the inquest process may have a positive effect on families’ wellbeing and assist with the process of meaning-making following traumatic loss. Nicola Lester highlights the importance of understanding the experiences of bereaved military families, and the need to learn lessons and establish recommendations for future practice in this area.

Constitutional Pluralism After Brexit

This contribution will examine the usefulness and relevance of the idea of constitutional pluralism with respect to the relationship between the EU and UK legal systems as well as the role of constitutional pluralism as a guiding principle of future institutional reform at the EU level. To the extent to which the UK’s decision to withdraw from the European Union can be interpreted as a reassertion of the classic ideas of Westphalian sovereign statehood, it seems to question the utility of constitutional pluralism which is a resolutely ‘post-sovereign’ model of relations between state administrations and their supranational counterparts. The paper looks at the various features and relationships affected by the Brexit process analysing the relevance of constitutional pluralism to each relationship pre- and post- Brexit, namely: the relationship between the UK constitution and EU law pre- and post-Brexit and relatedly, the relationship between UK courts and EU courts pre- and post-Brexit; as well as future institutional reform in an EU of 27 member states. The paper concludes that, whereas Brexit clearly affects the different relationships involved, constitutional pluralism can and will remain relevant to EU/UK relations as well as within the EU, well into the future. This finding, in turn, raises broader questions as to the extent to which such classic understandings of sovereignty which were influential in the movement for Brexit, have any relevance in an increasingly interdependent world.