Non-English-speaking defendants in the magistrates court:a comparative study of face-to-face and prison video link interpreter-mediated hearings in England

This study compares interpreter-mediated face-to-face Magistrates Court hearings with those conducted through prison video link in which interpreters are located in court and non- English-speaking defendants in prison. It seeks to examine the impact that the presence of video link has on court actors in terms of interaction and behaviour. The data comprises 11 audio-recordings of face-to-face hearings, 10 recordings of prison video link hearings, semistructured interviews with 27 court actors, and ethnographic observation of hearings as viewed by defendants in Wormwood Scrubs prison in London. The over-arching theme is the pervasive influence of the ecology of the courtroom upon all court actors in interpretermediated hearings and thus on the communication process. Close analysis of the court transcripts shows that their relative proximity to one another can be a determinant of status, interpreting role, mode and volume. The very few legal protocols which apply to interpretermediated cases (acknowledging and ratifying the interpreter, for example), are often forgotten or dispensed with. Court interpreters lack proper training in the specific challenges of court interpreting, whether they are co-present with the defendant or not. Other court actors often misunderstand the interpreter’s role. This has probably come about because courts have adjusted their perceptions of what they think interpreters are supposed to do based on their own experiences of working with them, and have gradually come to accept poor practice (the inability to perform simultaneous interpreting, for example) as the norm. In video link courts, mismatches of sound and image due to court clerks’ failure to adequately track current speakers, poor image and sound quality and the fact that non-English-speaking defendants in pre-and post-court consultations can see and hear interpreters but not their defence advocates are just some of the additional layers of disadvantage and confusion already suffered by non- English-speaking defendants. These factors make it less likely that justice will be done.

Redefining 'media' using a 'media-as-a-constitutional-component' concept:an evaluation of the need for the European Court of Human Rights to alter its understanding of 'media' within a new media landscape

This paper considers the impact of new media on freedom of expression and media freedom within the context of the European Convention on Human Rights and European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. Through comparative analysis of US jurisprudence and scholarship, this paper deals with the following three issues. First, it explores the traditional purpose of the media, and how media freedom, as opposed to freedom of expression, has been subject to privileged protection, within an ECHR context at least. Secondly, it considers the emergence of new media, and how it can be differentiated from the traditional media. Finally, it analyses the philosophical justifications for freedom of expression, and how they enable a workable definition of the media based upon the concept of the media-as-a-constitutional-component.

Co-ownership and severance after Stack

Considers if and how a beneficial joint tenancy arising under the presumption of joint beneficial entitlement following the Supreme Court rulings in Stack v Dowden and Jones v Kernott can come to be severed.

Case Comment : Jones v Kernott:which road to Rome?

Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53 (SC) Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17; [2007] 2 A.C. 432 (HL). Casenote explores the implications of the ruling in Jones v Kernott by the Supreme Court and assesses its implications for English Property Law. Building on the commonwealth experience the casenote calls for the intorduction of a statutory scheme so as to allow courts to reallocate property rights to unmarried cohabitants in the event of relationship breakdown.

Why does tax have to be so taxing? The Court revisits the Franked Investment Income litigation

Examines the European Court of Justice ruling in Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v Inland Revenue Commissioners (C-35/11) on whether the differential tax treatment of domestic and foreign-sourced dividends in the UK was compatible with the freedom of establishment and free movement of capital principles. Outlines its guidance on how to assess this compatibility. Considers the ruling's implications for the UK tax system, the relationship between tax sovereignty and the internal market and the third-country dimension of the free movement of capital principle.