Can traditional harvesting methods for cockles be accommodated in a Special Area of Conservation?

The European Natura 2000 project attempts to balance conservation and exploitation by permitting activities that do not affect the conservation status of designated sites. Given the scale of Natura 2000, guidelines are needed to facilitate the drafting of simple site management plans. This need is particularly acute for traditional harvesting methods for which there is usually strong local opposition to the imposition of controls. These issues were examined in Strangford Lough, a special area of conservation where cockles have traditionally been harvested by hand-raking. Raking was found not to affect the ability of cockles to rebury. There were significant reductions in Zostera biomass when raking was carried out within eelgrass beds (a 90% reduction in biomass available to winter migrant birds from summer raking). Traditional harvesting methods could therefore be accepted in Strangford as long as Zostera beds are avoided. A relatively low intensity of harvesting activity in Strangford Lough probably reflects low cockle densities (average 91.8 m(-2)), with the most economically valuable individuals at some distance from points of access to the shore. An economically feasible management plan could sanction traditional harvesting and result in the implementation of more resource-intensive management only if increases in cockle stocks and market prices stimulate large increases in harvesting activity.

Redundancy and Workplace Occupation: The Case of the Republic of Ireland

Purpose – This paper aims to examine the antecedent influences and merits of workplace occupations as a tactical response to employer redundancy initiatives.

Design/methodology/approach – The data are based on analysis of secondary documentary material reporting on three workplace occupations in the Republic of Ireland during 2009.

Findings – Perceptions of both procedural (e.g. employer unilateral action) and substantive (e.g. pay and entitlements) justice appear pivotal influences. Spillover effects from other known occupations may also be influential. Workplace occupations were found to produce some modest substantive gains, such as enhancing redundancy payments. The tactic of workplace occupation was also found to transform unilateral employer action into scenarios based upon negotiated settlement supported by third-party mediation. However the tactic of workplace occupation in response to redundancy runs the risks of potential judicial injunction and sanction.

Research limitations/implications – Although operationally difficult, future studies should strive to collect primary data workplace occupations as they occur.

Originality/value – The paper identifies conditions conducive to the genesis of workplace occupations and the extent to which the tactic may be of benefit in particular circumstances to workers facing redundancy. It also contextualises the tactic in relation to both collective mobilisation and bargaining theories in employment relations.

Sexual offences against children: An exploration of attrition in the Northern Ireland criminal justice system

Objective: This paper uses data provided by the Police Service for Northern Ireland (PSNI) to compare the characteristics and outcomes of reported sexual offences involving child and adult victims and explore the factors associated with case outcomes.
Method: PSNI provided data on 8,789 sexual offences recorded between April 2001 and March 2006. Case outcomes were based on whether a case was recorded by police as having sufficient evidence to summons, charge, or caution an offender (detected). Where an offender was summonsed, charged, or cautioned, this is classified as detection with a formal sanction. A case can also be classified as "detected" without a formal sanction. The analysis focused on two key categories of detection without formal sanction: cases in which the police deem there to be sufficient evidence to charge an offender but took no further action because the victim did not wish to prosecute, or because the police or the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) decided that no useful purpose would be served by proceeding.
Results: The analysis confirmed that the characteristics of recorded sexual offences involving adult and child victims vary significantly according to gender, offence type, the timing of report and victim-offender relationship. Almost half of child sex abuse cases are not detected by police and a quarter do not proceed through the criminal justice system because either the victim declines to prosecute or the Police/PPS decide not to proceed. Only one in five child cases involved detection with a formal sanction. Child groups with lower detection with formal sanction rates included children under 5, teenagers, those who do not report when the abuse occurs but disclose at a later date; and those who experience abuse at the hands of peers and adults known to them but not related. The analysis also highlighted variation in formal sanction rates depending on where the offence was reported.
Conclusions: Consideration needs to be given to improving the criminal justice response to specific child groups as well as monitoring detection rates in different police areas in order to address potential practice variation.
Practice implications: Consideration needs to be given to improving the professional response in relation to with particularly lower detection with formal sanction rates. There is also a need to monitor case outcomes to ensure that child victims in different areas receive a similar service.

Sporting Justice: An Arbitrator's Perspective

Drawing on my experience of a number of sports dispute resolution tribunals in the UK and Ireland (such as Sports Resolutions UK; Just Sport Ireland; the Football Association of Ireland’s Disciplinary Panel and the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Dispute Resolution Authority) I intend to use this paper to review the legal arguments typically made in sports-related arbitrations. These points of interest can be summarised as a series of three questions: the fairness question; the liability question; the penalty question.

In answer to the fairness question, the aim is to give a brief outline on best practice in establishing a "fair" sports disciplinary tribunal. The answer, I believe, is always twofold in nature: first, and to paraphrase Lord Steyn in R v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26 at [28] "in law, context is everything" – translated into the present matter, this means that in sports disciplinary cases, the more serious the charges against the individual (in terms of reputational damage, economic impact and/or length of sanction); the more tightly wrapped the procedural safeguards surrounding any subsequent disciplinary hearing must be. A fair disciplinary system will be discussed in the context of the principles laid down in Article 8 of the World Anti-Doping Code which, in effect, acts as sport’s Article 6 of the ECHR on a right to a fair trial.

Following on from the above, in the 60 or so sports arbitrations that I have heard, there are two further points of interest. First, the claim before the arbitral panel will often be framed in an argument that, for various reasons of substantive and procedural irregularity, the sanction imposed on the appellant should be quashed ("the liability"). Second, and in alternative, that the sanction imposed was wholly disproportionate ("the penalty").

The liability issue usually breaks down into two further questions. First, what is the nature of the legal duty upon a sports body in exercising its disciplinary remit? Second, to what extent does a de novo hearing on appeal cure any apparent defects in a hearing of first instance? The first issue often results in an arbitral panel debating the contra preferentum approach to the interpretation of a contested rule i.e., the sports body’s rules in question are so ambiguous that they should be interpreted in a manner to the detriment of the rule maker and in favour of the appellant. On the second matter, it now appears to be a general principle of sports law, administrative law and even human rights law that even if a violation of the principles of natural justice takes place at the first instance stage of a disciplinary process, they may be cured on de novo appeal. Authority for this approach can be found at the Court of Arbitration for Sport and in particular in CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski v UEFA at para 87.

The question on proportionality asks what, aside from precedent found within the decisions of the sports body in question, are the general legal principles against which a sanction by a sports disciplinary body can be benchmarked in order to ascertain whether it is disproportionate in length or even irrational in nature?

On the matter of (dis)proportionality of sanction, the debate is usually guided by the authority in Bradley v the Jockey Club [2004] EWHC 2164 (QB) and affirmed at [2005] EWCA Civ 1056. The Bradley principles on proportionality of sports-specific sanctions, recently cited with approval at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will be examined in this presentation.

Finally, an interesting application of many of the above principles (and others such as the appropriate standard of proof in sports disciplinary procedures) can be made to recent match-fixing or corruption related hearings held by the British Horse Racing Authority, the integrity units of snooker and tennis, and at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.