dissertation law uk

Edinburgh Research Archive

•   ERA Home
• Law, School of

Law thesis and dissertation collection

By Issue Date Authors Titles Subjects Publication Type Sponsor Supervisors

Search within this Collection:

Presented here is a selection of theses and dissertations from the School of Law. Please note that this is not a complete record of all degrees awarded by the School.

This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.

Recent Submissions

Out of place and out of time: older prisoners in chile , mind the gap: an empirical study of terrorism offences, law-making, and discretion , challenges and limitations of granting legal personality to distributed/decentralized autonomous organizations , development of international shipping standards under the auspices of the imo and their implementation in practice: a case study of thailand , adequacy of the ex post armed attack framework of the jus ad bellum in relation to the evolving means and methods of warfare , governing disputed maritime areas , what we say when we criminalise: a metanormative inquiry , testamentary law in england, c. 1450-1540 , sovereign immunity from execution of foreign arbitral awards in the 21st century , conceptualizations of addiction in harm reduction strategies for effective and ethical uk drug policy , liminality and the lived experience of law in medicine: the legal consciousness of physicians in encounters with people living as undocumented migrants , contested citizenship and statelessness in question: an anlysis of cases of overseas taiwanese people and tibetan exiles in taiwan , eternity and the constitution: the promise and limits of eternity clauses , hate speech in the british press: a theoretical and practical assessment of the case for broader regulation , liberty versus security under illiberal constitutionalism: the legality of criminalising humanitarian assistance in hungary and greece , operationalising ‘publicness’ in data-intensive health research regulation: an examination of the public interest as a regulatory device , worldmaking powers of law and performance: queer politics beyond/against neoliberal legalism , development of law of the sea by unclos dispute settlement procedures: towards a coherent jurisprudence , evaluating the european union's response to online misinformation and disinformation: how to address harm while maximising freedom of expression , reconciling reverse burdens of proof with the presumption of innocence: a new approach .

AllAboutLaw

What are you looking for? Submit

• Speak to an expert Ask about postgrad courses CHAT NOW
• SQE: Need to prep? Find out all about the SQE LEARN NOW
• Selection & Assessment Week Tues 6th - Thurs 9th Feb Reserve your Spot

Sep 20, 2019

Written By Billy Sexton

LLB Law Dissertation

So, you've picked your final modules, consolidated your favourite library seat, and are finally feeling like a big fish in the university pond. But you've got one more challenge on the horizon—the dissertation... 

The final year of your LLB is here, which means it’s time to put together a lovely 10,000 or so word law dissertation.

Gone are the days of first year where a casual 2,000-word essay would be enough to secure 50% of your module marks. Even the tougher second-year essays, where word counts were raised up to 3,500 words, now seem like a walk in the park when faced with the mammoth dissertation.

Many law students before you have faced this, so don’t worry. If they do it, you can too!

A dissertation is a marathon, not a sprint (so no last minute late nights) and working on your dissertation should be treated like eating salami (bear with us on this). You wouldn’t eat a whole salami at once as it’s much tastier in thinner slices.

Therefore, you shouldn’t do your whole dissertation at once. Put it together bit-by-bit, and it will be a much stronger piece of work!

Law dissertation ideas

What you base your law dissertation on is entirely your choice… to a certain extent. You will need to find a supervisor for your dissertation so you won’t be able to do a dissertation on a specific issue if there’s no lecturer at your university who specialises in that topic!

However, presuming there is a lecturer to guide you along the long and bumpy dissertation path, you have free choice over what you’d like to study. Usually, first class dissertations carry originality and research depth.

If you’re stuck for ideas or broad topic areas, let us help you out. We can’t cover every individual area of law  but here are ideas for some of the core areas:

Contract Law – The influence of the EU on contract law, including anti-discrimination directives, a comparison of contract law in different jurisdictions or penalty clauses in contracts.

Criminal Law – Philosophical issues surrounding criminal law, human rights in criminal procedure or social dimensions of crime.

EU Law – Immigration and the law, the law of the European Convention for Human Rights and how this affects human rights within national borders or the impact of the EU on environmental legislation.

Public Law – Public understanding or law and education, state responsibility or historical developments in public law.

These are just a handful of suggestion and may or may not tickle your fancy. It’s best to talk to a range of potential supervisors to get a feel for how they could help you. Start looking early though, as supervisors get snapped up pretty quickly!

Law dissertation structure

Your university should tell you how to structure your dissertation, but usually an introduction highlighting the objectives of the dissertation should also put forward any issues or knowledge the reader will need to be aware of in order when they progress.

Next up is your methodology and literature review. This basically means pointing out what you’re going to research and how and summarising the key arguments already out there.

Then comes the juicy bit—the evidence. This should be what you discovered from your research and a detailed analysis of this.

Finally, the conclusion should outline what you discovered and your conclusion of this.

Writing a law dissertation can be stressful and it’s highly likely you might lose a bit of sleep over it. But at the same time it’s a great opportunity to stick your teeth into a subject you’re really passionate about and gain some good marks that will contribute significantly toward your overall degree mark. 

Next article:  Post LLB: applying for the LPC vs a training contract

If you're currently on the hunt for a  Training Contract  or  Vacation Scheme , head over to our  Law Jobs section.

Advertisement

LLB Final Years

• Commercial awareness in final year
• Coping with stress in the final year
• LLB final year: what you should be doing
• Overcoming problem areas in academic qualifications
• Post-LLB: applying for the LPC vs a training contract

• Cambridge Libraries

Resources for My Subject

Law: theses & dissertations.

• UK Legislation
• UK Case Law
• Parliamentary Proceedings
• Parliamentary Papers
• Crown Dependents
• Caribbean countries
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• United States
• International Law
• Legal History
• Legal Language
• Referencing Guide
• Theses & Dissertations
• Criminology This link opens in a new window

Access to theses and dissertations from other institutions and from the University of Cambridge

This guide provides information on searching for theses of Cambridge PhDs and for theses of UK universities and universities abroad. 

For information and guidance on depositing your thesis as a cambridge phd, visit the cambridge office of scholarly communication pages on theses here ., this guide gives essential information on how to obtain theses using the british library's ethos service. .

On the last weekend of October, the British Library became the victim of a major cyber-attack. Essential digital services including the BL catalogue, website and online learning resources went dark, with research services like the EThOS collection of more than 600,000 doctoral theses suddenly unavailable. The BL state that they anticipate restoring more services in the next few weeks, but disruption to certain services is now expected to persist for several months. For the latest news on the attack and information on the restoration of services, please follow the BL blog here:  Knowledge Matters blog  and access the LibGuide page here:  British Library Outage Update - Electronic Legal Deposit - LibGuides at University of Cambridge Subject Libraries

A full list of resources for searching theses online is provided by the Cambridge A-Z, available here .

University of Cambridge theses

Finding a cambridge phd thesis online via the institutional repository.

The University's institutional repository, Apollo , holds full-text digital versions of over 11,000 Cambridge PhD theses and is a rapidly growing collection deposited by Cambridge Ph.D. graduates. Theses in Apollo can be browsed via this link . More information on how to access theses by University of Cambridge students can be found on the access to Cambridge theses webpage.   The requirement for impending PhD graduates to deposit a digital version in order to graduate means the repository will be increasing at a rate of approximately 1,000 per year from this source.   About 200 theses are added annually through requests to make theses Open Access or via requests to digitize a thesis in printed format.

Locating and obtaining a copy of a Cambridge PhD thesis (not yet available via the repository)

Theses can be searched in iDiscover .  Guidance on searching for theses in iDiscover can be found here .   Requests for consultation of printed theses, not available online, should be made at the Manuscripts Reading Room (Email:  [email protected] Telephone: +44 (0)1223 333143).   Further information on the University Library's theses, dissertations and prize essays collections can be consulted at this link .

Researchers can order a copy of an unpublished thesis which was deposited in print form either through the Library’s  Digital Content Unit via the image request form , or, if the thesis has been digitised, it may be available in the Apollo repository. Copies of theses may be provided to researchers in accordance with the  law  and in a manner that is common across UK libraries.  The law allows us to provide whole copies of unpublished theses to individuals as long as they sign a declaration saying that it is for non-commercial research or private study.

How to make your thesis available online through Cambridge's institutional repository

Are you a Cambridge alumni and wish to make your Ph.D. thesis available online? You can do this by depositing it in Apollo the University's institutional repository. Click here for further information on how to proceed.    Current Ph.D students at the University of Cambridge can find further information about the requirements to deposit theses on the Office of Scholarly Communication theses webpages.

UK Theses and Dissertations

Electronic copies of Ph.D. theses submitted at over 100 UK universities are obtainable from EThOS , a service set up to provide access to all theses from participating institutions. It achieves this by harvesting e-theses from Institutional Repositories and by digitising print theses as they are ordered by researchers using the system. Over 250,000 theses are already available in this way. Please note that it does not supply theses submitted at the universities of Cambridge or Oxford although they are listed on EThOS.

Registration with EThOS is not required to search for a thesis but is necessary to download or order one unless it is stored in the university repository rather than the British Library (in which case a link to the repository will be displayed). Many theses are available without charge on an Open Access basis but in all other cases, if you are requesting a thesis that has not yet been digitised you will be asked to meet the cost. Once a thesis has been digitised it is available for free download thereafter.

When you order a thesis it will either be immediately available for download or writing to hard copy or it will need to be digitised. If you order a thesis for digitisation, the system will manage the process and you will be informed when the thesis is available for download/preparation to hard copy.

See the Search results section of the  help page for full information on interpreting search results in EThOS.

EThOS is managed by the British Library and can be found at http://ethos.bl.uk . For more information see About EThOS .

World-wide (incl. UK) theses and dissertations

Electronic versions of non-UK theses may be available from the institution at which they were submitted, sometimes on an open access basis from the institutional repository. A good starting point for discovering freely available electronic theses and dissertations beyond the UK is the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) , which facilitates searching across institutions. Information can also usually be found on the library web pages of the relevant institution.

The DART Europe etheses portal lists several thousand full-text theses from a group of European universities.

The University Library subscribes to the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses  (PQDT) database which from August 31 2023 is accessed on the Web of Science platform.  To search this index select it from the Web of Science "Search in" drop-down list of databases (available on the Documents tab on WoS home page)

PQDT includes 2.4 million dissertation and theses citations, representing 700 leading academic institutions worldwide from 1861 to the present day. The database offers full text for most of the dissertations added since 1997 and strong retrospective full text coverage for older graduate works. Each dissertation published since July 1980 includes a 350-word abstract written by the author. Master's theses published since 1988 include 150-word abstracts.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The University Library only subscribes to the abstracting & indexing version of the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database and NOT the full text version.  A fee is payable for ordering a dissertation from this source.   To obtain the full text of a dissertation as a downloadable PDF you can submit your request via the University Library Inter-Library Loans department (see contact details below). NB this service is only available to full and current members of the University of Cambridge.

Alternatively you can pay yourself for the dissertation PDF on the PQDT platform. Link from Web of Science record display of any thesis to PQDT by clicking on "View Details on ProQuest".  On the "Preview" page you will see an option "Order a copy" top right.  This will allow you to order your own copy from ProQuest directly.

Dissertations and theses submitted at non-UK universities may also be requested on Inter-Library Loan through the Inter-Library Loans department (01223 333039 or 333080, [email protected] )

• << Previous: iDiscover
• Next: Criminology >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 3:28 PM
• URL: https://libguides.cam.ac.uk/law

© Cambridge University Libraries | Accessibility | Privacy policy | Log into LibApps

University of Warwick Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research.

• Search WRAP
• Browse by Warwick Author
• Browse WRAP by Year
• Browse WRAP by Subject
• Browse WRAP by Department
• Browse WRAP by Funder
• Browse Theses by Department
• Search Publications Service
• Browse Publications service by Year
• Browse Publications service by Subject
• Browse Publications service by Department
• Browse Publications service by Funder
• Help & Advice

The Library

Law dissertations : a step-by-step guide.

Lammasniemi, Laura (2021) Law dissertations : a step-by-step guide. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780367568771

This is the latest version of this item.

Research output not available from this repository.

Request-a-Copy directly from author or use local Library Get it For Me service.

Request Changes to record. --> Request Changes to record.

Law Dissertations: A Step-by-Step Guide provides you with all the guidance and information you need to complete and succeed in your LLB, LLM or law-related dissertation. Written in a simple, clear format and with plenty of tools to help you to put the theory into practice, Laura Lammasniemi will show you how to make writing your law dissertation easy, without compromising intellectual rigour.

As well as explaining the process of research and outlining the various legal methodologies, the book also provides practical, step-by-step guidance on how to formulate a proposal, research plan, and literature review. Unlike other law research skills books, it includes a section on empirical research methodology and ethics for the benefit of students who are studying for a law-related degree.

Packed full of exercises, worked examples and tools for self-evaluation, this book is sure to become your essential guide, supporting you on every step of your journey in writing your law dissertation.

2nd edition

Request changes or add full text files to a record --> Request changes or add full text files to a record

Available Versions of this Item

• Law dissertations : a step-by-step guide. (deposited 17 Dec 2021 14:51) [Currently Displayed]

Repository staff actions (login required)

Email us: [email protected] Contact Details About Us

• My Account |
• StudentHome |
• TutorHome |
• IntranetHome |
• Contact the OU Contact the OU Contact the OU |
• Accessibility Accessibility

Postgraduate

• International
• News & media
• Business & apprenticeships
• Contact Contact Contact
• A to Z of courses
• A to Z of subjects
• Course types
• Masters degrees
• Postgraduate diplomas
• Postgraduate certificates
• Microcredentials
• Postgraduate modules
• Postgraduate distance learning
• Postgraduate qualifications
• Postgraduate entry requirements
• How will I study?
• Tutors and assessment
• Support, networking and community
• Disability support
• Fees and funding
• Postgraduate loan
• Credit or debit card
• Employer sponsorship
• Mixed payments
• Credit transfer
• OU bursaries
• Grant funding
• Study costs funding
• Carers' Bursary
• Care Experienced Bursary
• Disability financial assistance
• STEMM bursary
• Over 60s bursary
• Creative Writing Scholarship
• Hayes Postgraduate Scholarship
• Disabled Veterans' Scholarships
• How to apply
• Research degrees
• Research areas
• Degrees we offer
• Fees and studentships
• Application process
• Being an OU research student
• Student views

The law dissertation

The law dissertation is the final module in our Master of Laws (LLM). The content of the module has been designed to support you in developing and completing your own research project. This must be based on a legal topic related to one of the individual LLM law modules and linked to one of the themes (international, comparative, regulation, human rights). Alongside the time spent in conducting your own legal research, you'll learn about the role and purpose of a literature review, how to identify a suitable research method for a legal research project, how to develop research questions and how to evaluate the ethical implications of your research. Throughout the module, the complexities and challenges of the research process are explored. The writing-up process forms an important aspect of research, and guidance is provided on this process. You'll also consider sources of information, including legal databases, and explore how information is critically analysed and evaluated to draw valid and evidenced conclusions.

Vocational relevance

There is growing professional and commercial demand for highly qualified graduates who have a range of transferable skills. In particular, skills gained from postgraduate legal study are highly valued for their relevance and application. This module is particularly useful preparation for environments in which research and the ability to develop persuasive arguments form a significant part of the work It will also be helpful for any profession that requires skilled graduates who have a demonstrable ability in developing and managing an independent research project.

Universities are keen to admit doctoral research students who have completed most of their research training, finding them better prepared to begin and better able to complete their theses in the required time. This module provides some of that training in research methods and skills.

Qualifications

In certain circumstances, this module can count towards F64, which is no longer available to new students.

• Credits measure the student workload required for the successful completion of a module or qualification.
• One credit represents about 10 hours of study over the duration of the course.
• You are awarded credits after you have successfully completed a module.
• For example, if you study a 60-credit module and successfully pass it, you will be awarded 60 credits.

Find out more about entry requirements .

What you will study

The module builds on the work undertaken in your previous LLM modules and equips you to undertake a significant piece of independent legal research. You'll learn how to:

• conduct a literature review
• select an appropriate research method
• define a clear purpose for your research project
• plan, organise, manage and carry out an extended independent research project
• develop written communication skills suitable for masters level
• write clearly and imaginatively, and with a sense of authority
• create a persuasive argument drawing on evidence and an analysis of a range of primary and secondary legal sources
• consider the ethical implications of your planned research and how to manage these
• use an appropriate referencing system with consistency and accuracy.

The module materials are specifically designed to support you in six key areas: developing your research proposal, undertaking your literature review, choosing an appropriate research method(s), undertaking and analysing your research to form your own conclusions and the process of writing up your research.

Your choice of legal research topic will depend on your interests. The only stipulation regarding the research topic you choose for your law dissertation is that it must be related to one of the LLM law modules you have studied at the OU and be linked to one (or more) of the themes of the LLM (international, comparative, regulation, human rights). Your tutor will help you to decide what is feasible for a legal research project and will provide feedback on your draft research proposal.

Your studies and research will require the use of online sources, including the OU library legal databases. Your work on this module requires an exploration of relevant existing literature and law in your chosen topic area. You're expected to be as up to date as far as possible with recent literature, law, commentary and developments in your chosen research topic. You are expected to make effective use of OU library legal databases and other appropriate resources as you plan and conduct your research. Your law dissertation must include primary and secondary sources of law.

A tutor will support you throughout your studies. They will provide advice on the appropriateness of your research plans, choice of method, literature review and support you through the writing-up process. Your tutor's comments on your written work form a key part of the teaching on the module and provide a way of monitoring your progress.

During the module, you are required to produce four pieces of assessed written work before submitting the law dissertation itself. Each of these is designed to support you as you work towards writing up your law dissertation. The first piece of assessed written work is a draft of your initial research proposal, on which you will receive feedback from your tutor. The second enables you to explore different research methods and identify one which meets the needs of your own research project. Again, you receive feedback from your tutor. The third is your final research proposal which must be approved by the W800 Board. The fourth piece of work is a draft chapter of your dissertation. The fifth and final piece of work is your law dissertation itself. This is marked by two tutors, and their recommendations will help to determine the result awarded by the Examination and Assessment Board.

The work you produce for your law dissertation is not expected to be entirely original (originality is a requirement for a PhD). The work you submit for your law dissertation should include an analysis of the existing literature and law in the topic area covered by your dissertation.

Teaching and assessment

Support from your tutor.

You will have a tutor, who you can contact by email or telephone, who will help you with the study material and mark and comment on three of the five pieces of assessed work, and whom you can ask for advice and guidance. Your tutor will also run online tutorials that you are encouraged, but not obliged, to take part in.

Contact us  if you want to know more about study with The Open University before you register.

The assessment details for this module can be found in the facts box.

Course work includes

Future availability.

The law dissertation  starts once a year – in November. This page describes the module that will start in November 2024. We expect it to start for the last time in November 2026.

Regulations

Entry requirements.

As the final module in the LLM, you must have completed 120 credits towards this qualification to register on W800 (or have completed 90 credits and be awaiting the results from the fourth and final 30-credit module).

The module is taught in English, and your spoken and written English must be of an adequate standard for postgraduate study. If English is not your first language, we recommend that you seek assessment under the International English Language Testing System (IELTS). Please see their website for details.

If you have any doubt about the suitability of the module, please speak to an  adviser .

Additional costs

Study costs.

There may be extra costs on top of the tuition fee, such as set books, a computer and internet access.

Ways to pay for this module

We know there’s a lot to think about when choosing to study, not least how much it’s going to cost and how you can pay.

That’s why we keep our fees as low as possible and offer a range of flexible payment and funding options, including a postgraduate loan, if you study this module as part of an eligible qualification. To find out more, see Fees and funding .

Study materials

What's included.

You will have access to a dedicated module website which includes:

• online university library access (including access to legal databases)
• specially written study materials designed exclusively for this module
• an assessment section
• audio material
• Law Postgraduate Home (which contains a range of study resources and advice)
• online tutorials and forums

Computing requirements

You’ll need broadband internet access and a desktop or laptop computer with an up-to-date version of Windows (10 or 11) or macOS Ventura or higher.

Any additional software will be provided or is generally freely available.

To join in spoken conversations in tutorials, we recommend a wired headset (headphones/earphones with a built-in microphone).

Our module websites comply with web standards, and any modern browser is suitable for most activities.

Our OU Study mobile app will operate on all current, supported versions of Android and iOS. It’s not available on Kindle.

It’s also possible to access some module materials on a mobile phone, tablet device or Chromebook. However, as you may be asked to install additional software or use certain applications, you’ll also require a desktop or laptop, as described above.

If you have a disability

Written transcripts of any audio components and Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) versions of printed material are available. Some Adobe PDF components may not be available or fully accessible using a screen reader. Other alternative formats of the module materials may be available in the future.

To find out more about what kind of support and adjustments might be available, contact us or visit our disability support pages .

Request your prospectus

Our prospectuses help you choose your course, understand what it's like to be an OU student and register for study.

Request prospectus    

The Open University

• Study with us
• Supported distance learning
• Funding your studies
• International students
• Global reputation
• Apprenticeships
• Develop your workforce
• Contact the OU

Undergraduate

• Arts and Humanities
• Art History
• Business and Management
• Combined Studies
• Computing and IT
• Counselling
• Creative Writing
• Criminology
• Early Years
• Electronic Engineering
• Engineering
• Environment
• Film and Media
• Health and Social Care
• Health and Wellbeing
• Health Sciences
• International Studies
• Mathematics
• Mental Health
• Nursing and Healthcare
• Religious Studies
• Social Sciences
• Social Work
• Software Engineering
• Sport and Fitness
• Postgraduate study
• Masters in Art History (MA)
• Masters in Computing (MSc)
• Masters in Creative Writing (MA)
• Masters degree in Education
• Masters in Engineering (MSc)
• Masters in English Literature (MA)
• Masters in History (MA)
• Master of Laws (LLM)
• Masters in Mathematics (MSc)
• Masters in Psychology (MSc)
• A to Z of Masters degrees
• Accessibility statement
• Conditions of use
• Privacy policy
• Cookie policy
• Manage cookie preferences
• Modern slavery act (pdf 149kb)

Follow us on Social media

• Student Policies and Regulations
• Student Charter
• System Status
• Contact the OU Contact the OU
• Modern Slavery Act (pdf 149kb)

© . . .

Accessibility

Library & Cultural Services

• Book a Study Space
• UK Legislation
• UK Official Publications
• EU Legislation
• International Law
• Foreign Domestic Law
• Journal Articles & Working Papers
• Encyclopaedias & Handbooks
• Theses & Dissertations
• Websites. Open Access Resources
• Support for Westlaw and Lexis
• Demonstrating Your Skills in CV
• Search Skills This link opens in a new window
• Finding the full text
• Evaluating Information
• Support For Researchers This link opens in a new window
• Reading Lists This link opens in a new window
• How to reference
• Reference management software

Theses and Dissertations

Theses and dissertations are a key source for finding the latest scholarship, additional material such as data sets, and detailed research. They can also help you find out what has been written on a topic, uncover other sources through citations, and get inspiration for your own research project. Use the resources below to search for PhD theses from universities in the UK and abroad. If you're a PhD student yourself, you can use the resources to make sure that your topic hasn't already been written about by other doctoral students.   

Essex Theses

The Library received all Ph.D. and M.Phil. theses and M.Sc. (Regulation 3.5.) theses up to 30 September 2016. Theses submitted after this date are kept in the University of Essex Research Repository . We do not normally hold dissertations and theses connected with other degrees - the exception being LL.Ms. All of our physical (print) theses are kept in Store and can only be consulted in the library - you'll need to use the online store request form or fill in a form at the library helpdesk to request them.

If you are looking for a specific thesis you can use Library Search to search for the author or title. If you want to find an Essex thesis on a particular topic/subject area, you can either add the word "thesis" to your keyword search, or limit your results to the "Essex theses" or "University of Essex Research Repository" collections.

Theses and Dissertations: Library E-resources

• EThOS Provides a single point of access for all theses produced by UK Higher Education. Many theses are free to download instantly, whilst others will only be available once digitisation has been requested. The database can be searched by anyone, but you'll need to create a free account to get access to the full text of theses.
• ProQuest dissertations and theses Includes 4 million theses and dissertations from universities in 88 different countries. Around 2 million of these are avilable in full text. more... less... Shibboleth login

Theses and Dissertations: Free Websites and Portals

• EBSCO Open Dissertations Created from a collaboration between EBSCO and BiblioLabs, EBSCO Open Dissertations is a free electronic theses and dissertations database offering access to more than 800,000 ETDs, including those previously available in American Doctoral Dissertations.
• Networked Digital Library of Theses & Dissertations (NDLTD) Portal to over 5 million digitised theses from around the world.
• Open Access Theses and Dissertations Resource for finding open access graduate theses and dissertations from universities around the world.
• OpenThesis Free repository of theses, dissertations, and other academic documents.
• Database of African Theses and Dissertations including Research (DATAD-R)
• Trove Theses
• Biblioteca Digital Brasileira de Teses e Dissertacoes (BDTD) Central catalogue and portal for dissertations from Brazilian universities, including PhDs (all subjects). An increasing number can be downloaded in full text .
• Theses Canada Portal
• DART Europe
• TEL Theses-en-ligne (PhD)
• DUMAS (Master's)
• National Archive of PhD Theses
• Hong Kong University Theses Online
• National Diet Library Doctoral Dissertations

Netherlands

Russia & CIS

• Dissertation CIS

Scandinavia

South Africa

• National ETD Portal
• TDX (Tesis Doctorales en Xarva)
• << Previous: Encyclopaedias & Handbooks
• Next: Websites. Open Access Resources >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 9:15 AM
• URL: https://library.essex.ac.uk/law

Student Handbook 2023/24

29. appendix ii dissertation, 29.2. writing the dissertation, structure and content of the dissertation.

A dissertation needs to have a central integrating argument.  The argument should be logically developed, building up a case point by point and displaying a critical and analytical approach to the subject.  The sections or chapters of the dissertation should be logically structured and help the flow of the argument, and their length should be proportionate to their relevance for the development of the main argument.

There is no specific, mandatory way to arrange the sections or chapters of the dissertation.  The nature of the problem, the way in which you decide to address it and your level of expertise on the topic are some of the factors that may influence the way you decide to structure your dissertation. There are, however, common elements that you may want to include.

The abstract is a concise, clear outline of your core argument.  It should convey your research question and research findings in not more than about 200 words.  It is the hook with which you pull in the reader.  Although the first thing to appear after the title, the abstract is usually the last thing to be written, upon a thorough reflection of the purpose, content and conclusions of the dissertation.  A good abstract can be very useful for the reader, but it is by no means essential.  Do not write an abstract if you do not feel comfortable doing so.  If you do, avoid the common mistake of using the abstract to outline the structure of your dissertation; this should go in the introductory section or chapter.

Introduction

The introduction should provide an answer to the following questions:

What is the purpose of the dissertation?   The introduction should clearly state the purpose of the dissertation and the main analytical tasks you plan to undertake.

Why is the issue relevant?   Demonstrate why the issue is being discussed in the dissertation.  If you are making comparisons with another area or legal system, you need to explain why the comparison is pertinent and your rationale for using the chosen comparator.

How is the dissertation structured?   Outline for the reader the structure and content of the dissertation so that he or she knows what to expect.  In the final paragraph of your introduction, outline the sections or chapters and briefly explain what each of them covers.

Context/Background :  It is always useful to provide some historical background to the problem you aim to examine, for instance by identifying the relevant law, regulations or cases.  You can also refer to the doctrinal debate on the topic, highlighting, wherever pertinent, areas of controversy.

While placing your topic in its wider context is mainly a descriptive action, you should make an effort to go beyond the description of a particular topic and engage in some analysis.

However, it is in the analytical section of the dissertation that you have the chance to demonstrate your ability to think independently, make an argument and engage in original analysis of your topic.  This is the opportunity to analyse legal concepts, examine the scope of their application and normative consequences and discuss how the law is applied in practice.

Conclusions

A strong dissertation will contain well-argued conclusions which are supported by preceding analysis and descriptive materials.  The conclusions should form a substantial part of the dissertation, rather than being confined to a few sentences at the end.

Bibliography

Because you are expected to include full footnotes, a bibliography is not required.  If you choose to include a bibliography, it is not included in the word count.

The dissertation must be fully referenced.  There are several approaches to citing authorities, but the standard in legal writing is footnotes or endnotes, not in-text citation.  Many UK journals use the Oxford Standard for Citation of Legal Authorities (OSCOLA).  Guides to and examples of OSCOLA and other full footnote citation systems are widely available, online and in print.  You can choose any system you like, but you must be consistent throughout the dissertation.

The purpose of citation is three-fold: to acknowledge the source of an idea, an argument, a quotation or other material; to demonstrate that you have done the research; and to make it easy for the reader to check the source, either for accuracy or to read further.  For these reasons, regardless of the referencing system used, a number of pieces of information should be included in each reference.

When citing a book, you should include:

• the full name(s) of the author(s);
• the title and edition of the work;
• the publisher and year of publication; and
• the page(s) from which the idea, information or quotation is taken.

When citing a journal, you should include:

• the title of the article;
• the title, publication year, volume and issue number of the journal; and

When citing a law or regulation, you should include:

• the full title and/or official reference;
• the publication and/or effective date; and
• the article(s) or section(s) from which the information is taken.

When citing a case, you should include:

• the full title of the case;
• the year of judgment;
• the volume number of the reporter or the case number (if there is one);
• the judge, where relevant; and
• the page(s) or section(s) from which the idea, information or quotation is taken.

When citing a report, you should include:

• the full title;
• the publication date;
• the report number;
• the author and/or institution issuing the report; and

When citing a webpage, you should include:

• the name of the author and/or organisation publishing the webpage;
• the title of the website and the page;
• the date on which the information was published (if available);
• the full web address (URL); and
• the date on which the webpage was last viewed.

In general, URLs should only be included for materials and information available only on the internet; use the general citation formats above wherever possible, as these facilitate searches across platforms.

Writing Style, Spelling and Grammar

When writing:

• use the correct tense and avoid switching from one tense to another without reason;
• make sure that nouns and verbs agree in number;
• avoid repetitious and informal language;
• remember the difference between descriptive and normative language (subjective or judgmental). When making value judgments, make sure they flow from your argument and are backed up by evidence;
• make use of all the tools and resources available for improving your spelling and grammar, including the Critical Thinking and Writing in Law Programme; and
• edit and proofread your draft.

Foreign Language Materials

You may use relevant foreign language materials, whether primary or secondary, for their dissertation; in fact, many dissertations would not be possible without foreign language materials.  However, you are responsible for the accuracy of any quotation or paraphrasing, whether you do the translation yourself or rely on an existing translation, official or unofficial.  The materials themselves must be provided in English (with inclusion of the original language text optional), even if the supervisor can read the language in question, as the postgraduate law programmes are English language programmes.

Foreign language materials should be cited in both English and the original language, using the original script, not transliterated.

The maximum word count for your dissertation depends on your specialism.  You should not exceed this word limit, +/- 10%, as supervisors will not mark any section of your dissertation that is over this word limit.

Everything except the bibliography is included in the word count.  This includes among other things the abstract, table of contents, appendixes, footnotes and endnotes and the titles of diagrams and words in graphs, tables and diagrams. Inclusion of an abstract, a table of contents or a bibliography is not mandatory but may be suggested by your supervisor.

There is no minimum word count.  However, dissertations that are considerably shorter than the maximum word count may fail to fully address the topic and will be marked accordingly.

Research Ethics Approval

Some dissertation projects may involve methodologies that require research ethics approval.  This is any methodology that ‘involves’ human subjects, even if the individuals are involved in their work capacity.  Typically for Postgraduate Law this would be conducting interviews of civil servants, legislators, businesspeople etc.

Low-risk research methodologies such as standard interviews are generally eligible for expedited approval.  Details can be found at http://www.jrmo.org.uk/performing-research/conducting-research-with-human-participants-outside-the-nhs/applications-and-approval .

The Standard Expected of the Dissertation

The dissertation is required to be either a record of original work or an ordered and critical exposition of existing knowledge in the field.  While this is not a definitive list for marking purposes, in general examiners are looking for the student:

• to have identified a relevant topic;
• to demonstrate the ability to discuss, analyse and criticise the law and literature on the relevant topic;
• to demonstrate an advanced understanding of the issues and the difficulties they present;
• to demonstrate knowledge of the relevant law and literature relating to the topic; and
• to demonstrate acceptable writing skills, including proper spelling, punctuation and grammar and the clear use of English.

The dissertation should be of publishable quality, ie broadly equivalent to the quality that would be expected by a reputable law journal with little further editing.

Originality

A key requirement for success is that your dissertation contains a high degree of originality.  The nature of originality means that it is impossible to define what constitutes it but, by way of illustration, originality may be achieved in one or more of the following ways:

• by drawing on your own professional experience;
• by drawing together for the first time diverse sources of information on a particular topic in order to present a coherent and novel treatment of the subject; and
• by relating an aspect of your topic to wider legal, political, economic or ethical considerations in a way that has not previously been done.

The key test that will be applied is whether or not the dissertation treats the chosen topic in a way not previously published.

Analytical Content

It necessarily follows from the requirement for originality that a successful dissertation will contain a high degree of analytical content.  This must be distinguished from descriptive content.  Whilst some descriptive content will be necessary, for example to explain the current or previous legal position or practice, the analytical content should provide, among other things, commentary on and critique of the current or previous legal position or practice, together with your own opinions (and recommendations, if appropriate).  Dissertations consisting mainly of descriptive content are less likely to achieve a high mark than ones with a high degree of analytical content.  However, the analytical content must not be achieved at the expense of thorough research into your topic.

Breadth versus Depth

The requirement for a high degree of analytical content means that you should consider carefully the scope of the dissertation.  The dissertation is more likely to achieve a high mark if it covers a relatively narrow area in depth, rather than a broad area superficially.

At the same time, your dissertation should involve a comprehensive treatment of your topic, meaning that all relevant aspects need to be analysed, unless the dissertation topic has been reasonably defined to exclude them.

Dissertation Presentation and Layout

The dissertation should include a title page that lists your Student ID number, full dissertation title, supervisor’s name and final word count. Your name should not appear on the title page or anywhere else in the dissertation, including the file name and the file metadata.

There is no official style guide for the dissertation.  However, we recommend you use a 12-point font in a common font style, double space the main text and use margins of at least 2 cm.  Footnotes should be no smaller than 10 point, normally in the same font as the main text.

Dissertation Submission

Your dissertation must be submitted electronically via QMplus.  Please see the Key Date section for the applicable submission deadline.  Part-time students are reminded that your deadline is the one for the academic year which coincides with your second year of study.

It is strongly recommended that you submit your dissertation well before the deadline to avoid any last minute issues with the electronic submission process.  For this reason, we will normally accept completed dissertations 7 days in advance of the deadline.  Computer problems and technical issues are not acceptable reasons for late or non-submission.  Guidance on how to submit your dissertation is available on the Postgraduate Dissertation Support Noticeboard on QMplus.

Please also note that in submitting your dissertation electronically, you consent to its submission to the Turnitin plagiarism software service.

If you cannot submit the dissertation on time, a late submission penalty may be applied.  Non-submission will automatically result in a fail.  However, extenuating circumstances may apply.  If you think you may have extenuating circumstances, please contact the PG Law Office in advance of the deadline.

Law: Theses & Dissertations

• Legislation
• Canadian Law
• Maritime and Commercial Law
• European Law
• International Law
• United States Law
• Commonwealth Law
• Skills for Success This link opens in a new window
• Theses & Dissertations
• Maritime Law Library
• Referencing

University of Southampton Theses & Dissertations

The Library holds print copies of doctorate level (e.g. PhD) theses submitted to this University and these are listed on our online catalogue Library Search. Print copies are not available and cannot be requested while the library is closed. Some theses are available in full-text on ePrints Soton. Check with your faculty for Undergraduate and Masters dissertations held in the Faculty.

Key Databases

• Proquest Dissertations & Theses Global This link opens in a new window The world's most comprehensive collection of full-text dissertations and theses. Click 'login' for on campus access. For access off campus, click 'login', enter 'University of Southampton' in the institutional field followed by your institutional username and password.
• << Previous: Skills for Success
• Next: Maritime Law Library >>
• Last Updated: May 30, 2024 11:36 AM
• URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/law

• Study and research support
• Academic skills

Dissertation examples

Listed below are some of the best examples of research projects and dissertations from undergraduate and taught postgraduate students at the University of Leeds We have not been able to gather examples from all schools. The module requirements for research projects may have changed since these examples were written. Refer to your module guidelines to make sure that you address all of the current assessment criteria. Some of the examples below are only available to access on campus.

• Undergraduate examples
• Taught Masters examples

How to Write a First Class Law Dissertation – Complete Guide

• November 18, 2010

“Protection of the Right to a Fair Trial and Civil Jurisdiction: Permitting Delay, Restricting Access and Recognising Incompatible Judgments”.

Below is my honours law dissertation together with tips and a very special video from an ex-Cambridge professor at the end. Enjoy!

And if you have any legal blog posts you’d like to share (whether after you have submitted your dissertation or before), please get in touch – our goal is to help share great legal information online to improve legal understanding and access to justice around the world.

And see also our lists of The Best Law Schools in the World and  Top 10 Law Schools in the UK that aspiring law students may find of interest.

How to write a first class legal dissertation: Content and Structure

Three tips can be suggested to get you started on the right foot:

First, research the subject in which you are most interested in writing about for your dissertation, then choose a sufficiently narrow angle to approach the subject or choose something that hasn’t been discussed much before.

Second, collect, or print out or photocopy all relevant materials which discuss that narrow subject.

Third, plan rough headings for sub-topics within the main subject. While the contents below were finalised towards the end of the writing process, the rough structure was formulated at an early point in the writing process. This is how many academics write their books: they provide themselves with lots of headings and subheadings, then chip away at the work, bit by bit until complete.

Examples contents for “Protection of the Right to a Fair Trial and Civil Jurisdiction: Permitting Delay, Restricting Access and Recognising Incompatible Judgments” are as follows:-

1. INTRODUCTION

2. ARTICLE 6: THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

2.1. Substantive Elements 2.2. Procedural Operation: Direct and Indirect Effect 2.3. The Human Rights Act 1998

3. REASONABLE TIME

3.1. Introduction 3.2. Framework under Article 6 3.3. Conflict with Lis Pendens: Erich Gasser 3.3.1. Delay in the Italian Court 3.3.2. A Clash of Treaties 3.3.3. Future Application 3.4. Conflict with Forum non Conveniens 3.4.1. General Operation 3.4.2. First Limb of Spiliada 3.4.3. Second Limb of Spiliada 3.5. Conclusions

4. ACCESS TO A COURT

4.1. Operation in Article 6 4.2. Anti-Suit Injunctions 4.3. Exclusive Jurisdiction Agreements and Waiving Convention Rights 4.4. Limitations on Jurisdiction 4.5. Conflict with Forum non Conveniens 4.6. Owusu v Jackson 4.7. Conclusions

5. RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS

5.1. Recognition of Contracting State Judgments 5.2. Recognition of Non-Contracting State Judgments 5.2.1. European Court of Human Rights 5.2.2. House of Lords 5.4. Conclusions

6. CONCLUSIONS

7. BIBILIOGRAPHY

7.1. Table of Cases 7.2. Table of Legislation 7.3. Table of Conventions 7.4. Textbooks 7.5. Articles

Writing your introduction

Together with the conclusion, the introduction is one of the most significant pieces of a dissertation that you have to get right. A well-written introduction can make all the difference between a first class and an upper second.

If you take just one thing away from this series of posts, it is this. You can develop a better stream of communication with your reader, forming a better relationship, if you tell them what you are going to say (introduction), say it (main body), then tell them what you have said (conclusion).

So, to the introduction, set the scene as fast as possible then tell the reader what you are going to say, but don’t be so amateurish as to write “I am going to discuss X, Y and Z”. Be more indirect. Suggest, for instance, that there are problems with the law that need to be resolved.

1. INTRODUCTION Long since inevitable initial encounters, human rights concerns, particularly regarding the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), have been accelerating in today’s civil jurisdiction and judgments arena in the United Kingdom, a notable consequence of the passing of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998. More than six years from the Act’s coming into force, it is now imperative to reach conclusions which reflect the “importance attaching in today’s world and in current international thinking and jurisprudence to the recognition and effective enforcement of individual human rights,” as Mance LJ (as he then was) has noted. This necessity is reflected in the recent extensive consideration of the right to a fair trial in key works of some of the most authoritative conflict lawyers in the United Kingdom, including Sir Lawrence Collins, Professor Adrian Briggs and, most significantly, Professor James Fawcett. Methods of protecting the right to a fair trial and thus of avoiding a breach of Article 6 are irrelevant to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR); the Court is not concerned with reviewing under the Convention in abstracto the law complained of, but rather the application of that law. There is therefore a large amount of discretion afforded to the courts regarding techniques to avoid infringement of the Convention. In the context of civil jurisdiction and judgments, various methods of avoiding infringement, or indeed enabling protection, of the right to a fair trial exist. However, the extent to which these have been used in practice, both by the UK courts and the ECJ, has been limited, a result of various factors, the most striking of which being the wrongful application of the ECHR and even the conscious decision to ignore it. Before analysing specific fair trial concerns in detail, it is necessary to examine the general structure and operation of Article 6 as it applies to civil jurisdiction and judgments.

Chapter 1: Setting the scene

Depending on the nature of your dissertation, you may need to set the scene further. In a legal dissertation, by “scene” is meant the bits of law that are relevant to set up key arguments in the main body of the dissertation. With this example dissertation, the target readership was, for various reasons, international private law experts. Because human rights law was a key part of the debate, the relevant law had to be set out in such detail that the chapters following it could discuss, for instance, the right to a fair trial and the doctrines of direct and indirect effect without any need for constant repetitive explanation.

2. ARTICLE 6: THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL 2.1. Substantive Elements Article 6(1) ECHR provides inter alia that “[i]n the determination of his civil rights and obligations…everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law….” The ECtHR has reverberated that “the right to a fair administration of justice holds such a prominent place” that Article 6 should not be interpreted restrictively. Instead, the seemingly distinct provisions of Article 6 are not discrete, but are “rights which are distinct but stem from the same basic idea and which, taken together, make up a single right not specifically defined in the narrower sense of the term.” This single right is the title of Article 6: the “right to a fair trial.” This right comprises two particularly significant elements important in the context of civil jurisdiction and judgments. First, the right to a trial within a reasonable time. Expressly stated in Article 6(1), this right may be pertinent where proceedings are stayed in favour of a foreign court. Second, access to a court, an inherent element of Article 6(1). This may have relevance where access is denied to the UK courts through, for example, staying proceedings, or restraining foreign proceedings. 2.2 Procedural Operation: Direct and Indirect Effect Article 6 can operate through a number of mechanisms in the civil jurisdiction and judgments context, which must be distinguished for analytical purposes. First, through direct effect, where there is direct protection of a party’s right to a fair trial in the domestic courts themselves. Such protection is strong and somewhat easier to obtain because there is no test for the seriousness of the breach. Such infringement may occur through a refusal of access to the UK courts, which refusal may emanate from, inter alia, an exclusion of jurisdiction or stay of proceedings. Second, through indirect effect, where a person is transferred to another country where his right to a fair trial may be infringed in that country. In Soering v United Kingdom the ECtHR emphasised that it was for Member States to secure Convention rights of persons within their jurisdiction, but that this obligation did not extend to non-Contracting States, nor should it seek to impose ECHR standards on such States. Thus, for example, in respect of deportation of a person to the United States of America from England, there may be an indirect breach of Article 6, but only where the transfer creates or risks creating a flagrant breach of the claimant’s right to a fair trial in that other country. In presenting an argument for the creation of such risk, it is axiomatic that a strong compilation of evidence is essential, with reference to the circumstances of both the case and proceedings of the court in question. The difficulty with such an argument in the civil jurisdiction sphere is that stays of proceedings concern transfers of actions abroad, not persons. Notwithstanding, arguments for the application of the indirect effect doctrine in this context are still applicable because the situations are “essentially the same.” Indeed, it could be argued that staying proceedings amounts to a transfer of persons through effective compulsion. Nevertheless, no authority exists for this argument and indeed the indirect effect doctrine itself has not been successfully relied upon in an Article 6 context before the (former) Commission or ECtHR. Third, through indirect effect where enforcement in a Contracting State of a judgment from a foreign State, whether Contracting or non-Contracting, would breach Article 6 because that judgment itself breached Article 6 standards. It has been stated that such a breach by the foreign court must also be a flagrant one. However, the reasoning underlying this proposition is unclear and, as with many matters in the civil jurisdiction and judgments sphere, there are concerns as to the extent to which the right to a fair trial can be upheld in this respect. 2.3 The Human Rights Act 1998 The Convention rights, including Article 6, now have the force of law in the United Kingdom under the HRA 1998. The Act places two initial express duties on the UK courts: first, the duty to read and give effect to primary and subordinate legislation in a way compatible with the Convention rights, if possible; second, the duty to take into account inter alia any previous judgment of the ECtHR in determining proceedings which have a Convention right element, insofar as it has relevance to those proceedings. Moreover, under Section 6(1) of the HRA 1998, it is unlawful for a public authority, including a court, to act in a way incompatible with a Convention right. This is a significant duty on the courts, which indeed sparked considerable academic debate as to the Act’s impact on private commercial disputes. Thus, the courts have a duty to interpret and apply the common law or any exercise of discretion compatibly with the right to a fair trial under Article 6. Ultimately, this may amount to a positive duty to develop the common law, extending beyond mere interpretation of the common law to conform to the Convention principles. Notwithstanding this rather stringent theoretical framework for the courts upholding the right to a fair trial, there has been a lack of consistency in its practical impact in the field of civil jurisdiction and judgments. Endnotes *Converting c300 footnotes on a Microsoft Word document to a WordPress post is not feasible for this blawgger. They are, therefore, pasted below as endnotes. The full dissertation is available in the Juridical Review, vol 1 of 2008 pp15-31 Delcourt v Belgium (1979-80) 1 EHRR 355, at [25]; indeed, the principles of due process and the rule of law are fundamental to the protection of human rights (Clayton and Tomlinson: 2000, p550,) just as a fair trial is a fundamental element of the rule of law (Ovey and White: 2002, p139.) Golder v. United Kingdom [1975] ECHR 1, at [28]. Ibid., at [36]. Such cases can be labelled “domestic” ones: Government of the United States of America v Montgomery (No 2) [2004] UKHL 37, at [15], per Lord Bingham. R (Razgar) v Special Adjudicator [2004] AC 368, at [42]. Soering v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439. Ibid., at [113]; this test has been followed subsequently: e.g. Einhorn v France (no.71555/01, 16 October 2001) at [32], Tomic v United Kingdom (no.17837/03, 14 October 2003) at [3]. Fawcett; 2007, p4. Ibid. Montgomery (n12); Drozd and Janousek v France and Spain (1992) 14 EHRR 745, p795; cf. Pellegrini v Italy [2001] ECHR 480. HRA 1998, s3(1). Ibid., s2(1)(a); such previous decisions are not binding; notwithstanding, as Lord Slynn observed in R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment [2001] 2 WLR 1389 at [26]: “[i]n the absence of some special circumstances it seems to me that the court should follow any clear and constant jurisprudence of the [ECtHR].” Ibid., s6(3)(a). Wade: 2000; Lester and Pannick: 2000. Such discretion should be “exercised with great caution and with close regard to the overall fairness of the proceedings”: R v Jones [2003] AC 1, at [6], per Lord Bingham. HL Deb vol.583, p783 (24 November 1997); Grosz, Beatson and Duffy: 2000, para.4.56; cf.. Derbyshire CC v Times Newspapers Ltd [1992] QB 770. Grosz, Beatson and Duffy: 2000, para.4.59.

Main Body Part 1

Next follows the first main chunk discussing and debating the title of the dissertation. To maintain structure, even this sub-section of the dissertation has its own introduction, some degree of scene-setting with Art 6 in the particular context of the chapter, argument through various levels and conclusions.

3. REASONABLE TIME 3.1. Introduction It has been stated that “excessive delays in the administration of justice constitute an important danger, in particular for the respect of the rule of law” and for the legal certainty of citizens. This importance is reflected in the express protection of the reasonable time requirement in Article 6. There have been recent challenges in the civil jurisdiction context on this ground, the most significant of which being raised in Erich Gasser GmbH v Misat Srl, concerning conflict with lis pendens. A further instance, the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens has been suggested to be so incompatible, which would therefore have implications for the doctrine in its now very limited common law habitat. 3.2. Framework under Article 6 In civil cases, time starts to run when the proceedings are instituted and stops when legal uncertainty has been removed, which normally requires that the final appeal decision has been made or the time for making an appeal has expired. It is generally accepted that the correct approach is to decide whether the overall delay is prima facie “unreasonable” for the type of proceedings concerned and thereafter consider whether the State is able to justify each period of delay. In assessing such justification, the limited guidelines indicate that all the circumstances will be considered, with particular regard to the complexity of the case and the conduct of the applicant and judicial authorities in addition to the behaviour of other parties to the case and what is at stake in the litigation for the applicant. Generally, where proceedings are stayed, there are three stages which must be distinguished for determining delay. First, the proceedings before the domestic court. Any unjustifiable delay at this point would amount to a direct breach of Article 6. Second, the transfer of proceedings to the foreign court. Delay at this stage would be less justifiable where, for instance, there was known to be a heavy backlog of cases. Notwithstanding, the “normal lapses of time stemming from the transfer of the cases” are not to be regarded as unjustified. Third, the proceedings before the foreign court. At the second and third stages, although any unreasonable delay by the foreign court will amount to a direct breach by that court, there could also be an indirect breach by the domestic court, but only to the extent that the party suffered, or risked suffering, a flagrant breach. Endnotes Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Resolution DH (97) 336, 11 July 1997. Fabri and Langbroek: 2003, p3. C-116/02 [2005] QB 1. Opinion of AG Léger in Owusu v Jackson C-281/02 [2005] QB 801 at [270]. A sist by the Scottish courts through forum non conveniens can be made where jurisdiction is founded on Art.4 of the Judgments Regulation or Convention: Collins et al: 2006, para.12-023. Moreover, a sist can be made on the ground that the courts of England or Northern Ireland are the forum conveniens, because intra-UK jurisdiction can be so settled: Cumming v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd, The Times, 8 June 1995; Collins: 1995. Scopelliti v Italy (1993) 17 EHRR 493, at [18]. Vocaturo v Italy [1991] ECHR 34. E.g. fewer than six years for a reparation action (Huseyin Erturk v Turkey [2005] ECHR 630.) Clayton and Tomlinson: 2000, p654; Harris, O’Boyle and Warbrick: 1995, p229. Eckle v Germany (1983) 5 EHRR 1, at [80]; an obvious consideration being delay in commencing proceedings. Buchholz v Germany [1981] ECHR 2, at [49]. Foti v Italy (1982) 5 EHRR 313, at [61]. Zimmermann and Steiner v Switzerland [1983] ECHR 9; Guincho v Portugal [1984] ECHR 9; cf. Buchholz (n36), at [61], where the backlog was not reasonably foreseeable; exceptional circumstances were taken into account in Foti (n37) as a result of troubles in Reggio Calabria, which impacted proceedings in the courts in Potenza, to which cases had been transferred. Foti (n37), at [61]. Soering (n14) at [113].

Having set the scene, it is time to delve straight into comment and opinion, drawing on relevant facts and law where required. Where possible, suggest ways in which events or decisions could have been improved and do not be afraid to say that commentators, judges or even powerful institutions, like the ECJ, got it wrong.

3.3. Conflict with Lis Pendens: Erich Gasser Erich Gasser v MISAT concerned the validity of a choice-of-court agreement in favour of the Austrian courts where one party had first seised the Italian courts by way of negative declaration. Second seised, the Austrian Court sought a reference from the ECJ on, inter alia, whether it must stay its proceedings under lis pendens where the proceedings in the court first seised generally take an unreasonably long time, such that there may be a breach of Article 6. Both the claimant and the intervening UK Government invoked the ECHR, arguing that Article 21 of the Brussels Convention should be interpreted in conformity with Article 6 ECHR to avoid excessively protracted proceedings, given that proceedings in Italy were likely to take an unreasonably long time. Through this interpretation, it was argued that Article 21 should not be applied if the court first seised had not determined its jurisdiction within a reasonable time. In a very short response, the ECJ effectively said that the ECHR did not apply because first, it is not expressly mentioned in the Brussels Convention and second, there is no room for it in a collection of mandatory rules underpinned by mutual trust between Contracting States. 3.3.1. Delay in the Italian Court However, it may be seen that the stay de facto risked at least a standard breach in the Italian court. The Italian courts have been held in breach of Article 6 a staggering number of times because of unreasonable slowness. The existence of these breaches amounted to a practice incompatible with the ECHR and produced the notoriety of the Italian legal system as “the land that time forgot.” Indeed, the practice of seising the Italian courts first by way of negative declaration has become known as instituting an “Italian torpedo,” which may succeed in delaying proceedings substantially even where the Italian courts have no jurisdiction. It has already been noted that evidence is crucial in determining a real risk of a breach of Article 6. Instead, in Gasser, human rights arguments were based upon a general breach of the reasonable time requirement in Italian courts. Moreover, no ECtHR case law was relied upon when so arguing, nor was mention made of previous breaches. Therefore, a very weak argument, if any, was laid before the ECJ in respect of a risk of a breach. In effect, the ECJ was being asked something tantamount to whether there should be an exception to Article 21 in respect of certain Member States, a question justifiably answered in the negative. However, if the arguments had been more focussed, concentrating on the present case, with evidence to show the likelihood of breach in the Tribunale civile e penale di Roma, then the ECJ may have been more persuaded by Article 6 considerations, as Fawcett suggests. Notwithstanding previous delays, efforts have been made to reduce the backlog of cases. This is somewhat owing to Article 13 ECHR, which requires Contracting States to provide persons with an effective national remedy for breach of a Convention right. Such domestic remedies assist in reducing further breaches and ultimately reduce the need for the indirect effect doctrine. Thus, the Italian “Pinto Act” was passed, providing a domestic legal remedy for excessive length-of-proceedings cases. The existence of this remedy may have gone towards justifying application of Article 21, which indeed was one of the questions referred to the ECJ by the Austrian Court, although unanswered. 3.3.2. A Clash of Treaties Nevertheless, given that the ECJ so held that Article 6 considerations were irrelevant, there may be further legal implications, particularly for the Austrian Court which was required to stay its proceedings under the Brussels Convention. If this stay created or risked creating a flagrant breach of the reasonable time requirement in the Italian Court, Austria may itself have breached Article 6 indirectly. Such an indirect breach is clearly not justifiable on the ground that Austria is party to the Brussels Convention or Regulation made under the European Treaties. Hence, the judgment may lead to a clash between the ECHR and Brussels Convention or Regulation. This in turn raises the questions of how and to what extent the Brussels Convention or Regulation could have been interpreted to give effect to Article 6. Formerly Article 57 of the Brussels Convention, Article 71 of the Brussels Regulation provides inter alia that “(1) [t]his Regulation shall not affect any conventions to which the Member States are parties and which in relation to particular matters, govern jurisdiction or the recognition of judgments.” Although the ECHR is not prima facie a Convention governing jurisdiction, all Member States are party to it and Article 6 contains the inherent right of access to a court. Thus, as Briggs and Rees argue, this may have application where a court with jurisdiction is prevented from exercising that jurisdiction in a manner compatible with the ECHR. Therefore, in Gasser Article 71 may have been applied to allow Austria to act in accordance with its obligations under the ECHR. This approach is complemented by Article 307 (ex 234) EC such that Article 21 or 27 of the Brussels Convention or Regulation respectively can be overridden by a Convention previously entered into, including the ECHR. Further, this conclusion is even more realistic in light of the jurisprudence of the ECJ, which is peppered with notions of protection for fundamental rights, and the express protection of these rights in Article 6(2) EC. Instead of even contemplating such an outcome, the ECJ showed that it was prepared to ignore a significant international convention. Perhaps, in addition to mutual trust between Contracting States, mutual recognition of international conventions should have been considered, especially due to the express provisions permitting such consideration. Endnotes Those having a duration of over three years: Gasser (n28), at [59]. At [71]-[73]. See Ferrari v Italy [1999] ECHR 64, at [21]. Ferrari (n46), at [21]; Article 6 imposes on the Contracting States the duty to organise their judicial systems in such a way that their courts can meet the requirements of the provision (Salesi v Italy [1993] ECHR 14, at [24].) Briggs and Rees: 2005, Preface to the Fourth Edition, p.v. Messier-Dowty v Sabena [2000] 1 WLR 2040. Franzosi: 1997, p384. Transporti Castelletti v Hugo Trumpy, C-159/97, [1999] ECR I-1597. Supra p4. Opinion of A.G. Léger in Gasser, at [88]. When Gasser came before the ECJ, there was already a delay in Italian proceedings of 3½ years in determining jurisdiction. Fawcett: 2007, p15. Kudla v Poland [2000] ECHR 512. Fawcett: 2007, p4. Law no.89 of 24 March 2001. However, even this has breached Article 6(1): Riccardo Pizzati v Italy [2006] ECHR 275, at [66]; Mance suggests that the Act only partially solved if not repatriated the ECtHR’s overwhelming number of claims in this respect (Mance: 2004b, p357.) Notwithstanding, since 1999, there has been a trend of continuous breach, the ECtHR having adopted more than 1,000 judgments against Italy (Riccardo Pizzati, at [66].) As Briggs and Rees note, the ECHR “might as well have been part of the law of Mars for all the impact it had.” (Briggs and Rees:2005, para.2.198.) Soering (n14), at [113]. Matthews v United Kingdom [1999] ECHR 12. Hartley: 2005b, p821 n35; the most important example of a conflict of treaties: Hartley: 2001, p26. Briggs and Rees: 2005, para.2.38. An approach recognised by both Mance (Mance: 2004a, paras.6-7) and Hartley (Hartley: 2005a, p383.) ERT v DEP C-260/89 [1991] ECR I-2925, at [41]; “Bosphorus Airways” v Ireland (2006) 42 EHRR 1,at [73]; particularly for Article 6: Philip Morris International Inc v Commission of the European Communities [2003] ECR II-1, at [121].

Tip: Suggest Improvements for the Future

It may be that, in the course of the research for your dissertation, you discover previous decisions and actions that may happen again in the future. You may want to suggest that there is such a risk in the future and that there are ways in which that risk can be guarded against. You may also want to state challenges with implementing such safeguards. For instance, in the below section, there is comment that the ECJ is, sometimes, so myopic that its stance won’t budge.

3.3.3. Future Application The ECtHR has held that a failure by a national court to make a preliminary reference to the ECJ could be a breach of Article 6 ECHR in certain circumstances. Thus, it is arguable that where similar facts to Gasser arise again, the domestic court may have to make a reference to the ECJ, and in doing so, show cogent evidence of the risk of a flagrant breach, unlike that presented to the ECJ in Gasser. In this context, the ECJ will have another chance to take human rights seriously, with the opportunity to apply Article 307 EC complementing Article 71 of the Brussels Regulation and jurisprudence both of the ECJ and ECtHR. Notwithstanding, given the ECJ’s swift dismissal of human rights concerns in Gasser in favour of the inflexible system of lis pendens, it appears unlikely that it would permit exception in the future. For the ECJ legal certainty under the Brussels regime is clearly more significant than legal certainty either through party autonomy under jurisdiction agreements or through the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time. As Merrett notes, “[t]he ECJ simply does not see questions of jurisdiction as being concerned with private rights at all,” a stance which will need to change, particularly in light of the pressing atmosphere of today’s human rights culture. Endnotes Soc Divagsa v Spain (1993) 74 DR 274. Legal certainty is perhaps more significant under the Brussels Regulation, particularly illustrated by the addition of Article 30. Cf. A.G. Léger in Gasser, at [70]. Merrett: 2006, p332. Hartley notes that this is perhaps not surprising given that the ECJ is more concerned with public law, and as such, should be expected to give more weight to State interests, rather than the interests of private parties (Hartley: 2005b, pp814-815.)

Take a proposition that has never been discussed and debate it

Another thing that truly separates a first class dissertation from a second class one is discussion of ideas and issues that have never before been discussed. The following is an example of such a proposition and discussion, all of which stemmed from one footnote in an academic article that said a certain proposition “had never been discussed before in the courts of the UK”. Finding this loophole was essential to the dissertation’s success.

3.4. Conflict with Forum non Conveniens An export of Scots law, forum non conveniens was accepted into English law in Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, becoming indistinguishable from Scots law. Under the Spiliada test, there are two stages: first, the defendant must show that there is some other available forum which is clearly more appropriate for the trial of the action, upon which a stay will ordinarily be granted; second, upon the first stage being satisfied, it is for the claimant to show, through cogent evidence, that justice requires that a stay should not be granted. Advocate General Léger has suggested explicitly that the forum non conveniens doctrine, as operating under this Spiliada test, may be incompatible with Article 6, given that the steps involved for the claimant in its application “have a cost and are likely considerably to prolong the time spent in the conduct of proceedings before the claimant finally has his case heard.” Although the UK courts have never discussed this proposition, there is a potential that forum non conveniens is indeed incompatible with the reasonable time requirement in Article 6. 3.4.1. General Operation Since the place of trial is decided through the exercise of judicial discretion, it is axiomatic that additional cost and time will be incurred in the domestic court, which may appear somewhat inappropriate in light of the parties having to “litigate in order to determine where they shall litigate.” Notwithstanding, given that the same forum will rarely be in the best interests of all parties, particularly highlighted by different choice of law rules, choice of forum is of crucial importance and rightfully so contested. In this respect alone, the time and cost involved may be justified. Moreover, it should be noted that it is the defendant who asks for a stay, thus incurring additional expenses, which expenses he might be expected to pay. Application for a stay is usually, and perhaps ought to be, made early. Procedural time-limits are set for such an application, despite the court retaining its discretionary power to stay proceedings. Notwithstanding, the longer an application is left, the greater the threat of the proceedings not being aborted as a matter of judicial reluctance. Moreover, if Lord Templeman’s view that submissions should be measured in hours not days with the rarity of appeals holds true, such time and expense should be contained to a minimum. This can be contrasted with the American experience of the doctrine, where forum non conveniens can produce forum battles that can last for years, such that the doctrine may even be labelled a “delaying tactic.” 3.4.2. First Limb of Spiliada As noted, there are various circumstances which can justify delay under Article 6. In assessing the complexity of a case, consideration is given to the number of witnesses , the need for obtaining expert evidence and the later intervention of other parties. It can be seen that these factors mirror the appropriateness factors considered under the first limb of the Spiliada test. Thus, in Lubbe v Cape Industries Plc the emergence of over 3,000 new claimants gave greater significance to the personal injury issues, the investigation of which would involve a cumbersome factual inquiry and potentially a large body of expert evidence, such that South Africa was rightfully identified as the most appropriate forum under the first limb of Spiliada. Moreover, in Spiliada, similar litigation had already taken place over another vessel, the Cambridgeshire, such that the proceedings would be more appropriate in England. Termed the “Cambridgeshire factor,” it is persuasive where advantages of “efficiency, expedition and economy” would flow naturally from the specialist knowledge gained by the lawyers, experts and judges in the related proceedings. However, successful use of this factor has been extremely rare. Although conveniens means “appropriate”, not “convenient”, considerations of convenience and expense are still relevant. Thus, in both The Lakhta and The Polessk , a stay was granted because the dispute could be resolved more appropriately in the Russian Court at far less expense and far greater convenience for those involved, in light of, inter alia, the availability of witnesses and other evidence. Further, speed of a trial itself may be decisive in balancing appropriateness factors. For example, in Irish Shipping Ltd v Commercial Union, although the courts of both England and Belgium were appropriate, the dispute could be resolved more quickly in the English court given the more complex position of the plaintiff’s title to sue under the governing law in Belgium; therefore a stay of the English proceedings was refused. Moreover, the availability of an early trial date is material in determining the most appropriate forum ; indeed, “speedy justice is usually better justice.” It can therefore be seen that the factors considered in the first limb of the Spiliada test reflect the justifications for delay under the reasonable time requirement of Article 6(1) and indeed consideration of these factors may result in an overall speedier trial. Hence, determining whether or not to apply the forum non conveniens doctrine is more than justifiable. Further, it is worth considering whether delay by the foreign court itself can be avoided. Endnotes Sim v Robinow (1892) 19 R 665. [1987] AC 460. Crawford and Carruthers: 2006, pp157-158. Spiliada (n13), pp474-477. Opinion of A.G. Léger in Owusu (n29), at [270]. Hare perceives that paragraph 42 of Owusu is “strangely reminiscent” of A.G. Léger’s suggestions: Hare: 2006, p172 n.96. Fawcett; 2007, p9. Slater: 1988, p554; Robertson: 1987, p414; Zhenjie: 2001, p157. Cf. Spiliada (n72), p464 per Lord Templeman. Crawford and Carruthers: 2006, p157. Bell: 2002, paras.2.40-2.42, 2.58. Svantesson: 2005, pp411-412. Briggs and Rees: 2002, p220. Despite potential for re-application: Owens Bank Ltd v Bracco [1992] 2 AC 433, p474. E.g. in England, CPR Part 11. Ibid., r.3.1(2)(f). Briggs and Rees: 2005, pp324-325. Spiliada (n72), p465. E.g. Lacey v Cessna Aircraft (1991) 932 F.2d 170. Green: 1956, p494. Supra p8. Andreucci v Italy [1992] ECHR 8. Wemhoff v Germany (1968) 1 EHRR 55. Manieri v Italy [1992] ECHR 26. [2000] 1 WLR 1545. [2000] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 383, p391; however, a stay was not granted because substantial justice could and would not be done in the South African forum under the second limb of Spiliada, see infra p25. Spiliada (n72), p469. Ibid., p486. Collins et al: 2006, para.12-030 n.34. The Atlantic Star [1974] AC 436, p475; Spiliada (n72), pp474-475. Hill: 2005, para.9.2.23; wastage of cost is an important consideration in granting a stay, whether under forum non conveniens or not (Carel Johannes Steven Bentinck v Lisa Bentinck [2007] EWCA Civ 175.) [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 269. [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 40. [1991] 2 QB 206. Ibid., p246. Xn Corporation Ltd v Point of Sale Ltd [2001] I.L.Pr. 35. Ibid., at [14]

Develop that new debate and get creative

As noted in the previous post, one of the most important breakthroughs in writing your dissertation can come from spotting a gap where something has not yet been discussed. Once writing to fill that gap, it may be helpful to ask yourself what other angles there are to the debate. Or think about if the matter went to an official debate or, for law dissertations, to court. Think about creative arguments that an advocate might run and try to develop them yourself. Such development can lead to your getting a first rather than a 2:1.

3.4.3. Second Limb of Spiliada Delay in the foreign forum is a fundamental consideration when determining the interests of justice at the second limb of the Spiliada test and may even be decisive if the anticipated delay is excessive. An example pertinent to justification under Article 6(1) is The Jalakrishna, where a delay of five years was anticipated if the case was tried in India, such that the claimant would be prejudiced given his need for financial assistance in light of his critical injuries in an accident. Thus, a stay was not granted, showing respect for both a potential delay itself and what was at stake for the claimant. Notwithstanding, such cases are rare. For example, in Konamaneni v Rolls-Royce Industrial Power (India) Ltd, Collins J (as he then was) recognised that the Indian legal system had made attempts to reduce its backlog of cases, such that in the absence of sufficient evidence of an anticipated delay, it would indeed be a “substantial breach of comity to stigmatise the Indian legal system in that way,” somewhat reflecting the principle that the claimant must “take [the appropriate] forum as he finds it.” Indeed, one of the major advantages of the forum non conveniens doctrine is that it offsets the judge’s tendency to grab as many cases as he can and it respects the valuable international private law principle of comity. As Lord Diplock stated in The Abidin Daver, “judicial chauvinism has been replaced by judicial comity.” However, the interests of States cannot always be reconciled with private party rights. When considering whether to stay proceedings, in light of Article 6, the interests of States should yield to the interests of private parties. Thus, if evidence is sufficient to show a real risk of a flagrant breach in the foreign forum, as was not presented in Gasser, a stay should not be permitted. Again mirroring reasonable time justifications under Article 6, additional considerations of what is at stake in the litigation may arise and authorities may have to exercise exceptional diligence in the conduct of certain cases. An ECtHR case, X v France shows that where a person sought compensation following infection with the AIDS virus, what was at stake was of crucial importance in determining the reasonableness of the length of proceedings. What is at stake will be relevant and probably decisive following a stay of proceedings under forum non conveniens, as The Jalakrishna shows. Notably, in Owusu v Jackson, where forum non conveniens was not permitted, what was at stake for Owusu was significant as he was rendered tetraplegic through his accident. It can therefore be seen that forum non conveniens takes a pragmatic approach to preventing foreseeable unreasonable delays under the second limb of Spiliada. Not only does this further justify operation of the doctrine under Article 6(1) through direct effect, it also greatly restricts, if not eliminates, the possibility of an indirect breach by the domestic court, given that the risk of a flagrant breach of the right to a fair trial is a fundamental factor of the interests of justice. Notwithstanding, herein there are still concerns in light of Professor Fawcett’s suggestion that a hybrid human rights/international private law approach should be taken such that Article 6 concerns should be identified first, taking into account ECtHR jurisprudence, and thereafter it should be for the flexible second limb of Spiliada to apply to resolve these issues. Fawcett concedes that the same result will be achieved in most cases, yet suggests that there may be borderline cases where this solution would work better and human rights concerns will have been taken more seriously. However, this need for procedural restructuring of judicial reasoning is arguably not wholly convincing, particularly given that the indirect effect doctrine under Soering requires a flagrant breach of Article 6, not merely a standard breach; it is therefore difficult to imagine the existence of any “borderline” cases as such. Moreover, in the cases of potential flagrant breaches, the interests of justice principle has been shown to be flexible enough to prevent stays which may breach Article 6 indirectly, regardless of the classification of the delay as a breach of human rights or otherwise. In this respect, it is arguable that the international private law case law could be adequately relied upon. Nevertheless, initial consideration of ECtHR jurisprudence may have more importance than in providing a mere procedurally attractive measure; it may guide and influence those who fail to see the pressing importance of human rights today and will at least effect compliance with the Section 2 of the HRA 1998 which demands that such jurisprudence be considered wherever Convention rights are in issue. Endnotes The Vishva Ajay [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 558, p560; Chellaram v Chellaram [1985] 1 Ch 409, pp435-436; cf. The Nile Rhapsody [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 399,pp413-414, where Hirst J gave “minimal weight to the delay factor” upon direction by the appellate courts. [1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 628. Hill: 2005, para.9.2.38. [2002] 1 WLR 1269. Ibid., at [177]. Connelly v RTZ Corpn plc [1998] AC 854, p872. [1984] AC 398. Ibid., p411. A and others v Denmark [1996] ECHR 2, at [78]. [1992] ECHR 45. [1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep.628. (n29). Notwithstanding, the ECJ’s taking 2¾ years to produce its judgment did not go towards acknowledging the express request by the English Court of Appeal to provide reasonably quick compensation. Of course, time taken for a required preliminary reference from the ECJ is entirely justified under Article 6 (Pafitis v Greece (1999) 27 EHRR 566, at [95].) Fawcett: 2007, pp36-37. Such that length-of-proceedings cases (see supra pp.7-8) should be consulted in the context of unreasonable delay. (n14).

Put your foot in the icy water: Don’t be afraid to come to powerful conclusions

A dissertation that is written with balanced conclusions is a boring one. Reasoned opinion is important. Nothing would get done in this world if we said “X is right, but Y is equally right, so let’s just leave things the way they are”. Sitting on the fence may well get you a good upper second class award but there is little chance of it getting you a first. A certain English teacher, Sandra MacCallum, at Kyle Academy once taught that, sometimes, “you’ve got to put your foot into the icy water”. Don’t be afraid to come to powerful conclusions. Hopefully the below example, with a reasonable, opinionated attack on the ECJ’s lack of respect for the common law principles of the Scottish export doctrine forum non conveniens, illustrates the significance of this suggestion.

3.5. Conclusions It is perplexing that in Owusu Advocate General Léger, and perhaps indirectly the ECJ, suggested that applying forum non conveniens may be incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement of the right to a fair trial under Article 6(1), whereas analysis of its proper operation shows that it is compatible and may even be a useful tool in providing faster and more economic litigation. Although it is at least somewhat refreshing to see ECHR arguments being acknowledged in an international private law context without encouragement, it is nevertheless peculiar that Article 6 concerns have been identified in relation to forum non conveniens, “one of the most civilised of legal principles” as Lord Goff of Chieveley put it, when the ECJ did not properly apply or even consider Article 6 in Gasser, where the need for its recognition was much more significant. The ECHR is not an optional instrument that can be applied to justify a course of reasoning, however misguided, on the one hand and dismissed when apparently greater considerations require it on the other; careful legal analysis is required for its operation, which analysis does not appear to have been applied or even respected by the ECJ.

A fresh perspective

Separating a dissertation into manageable chunks from the initial stages of structural planning gives you freedom to start afresh to write about a different but related topic once concluding another section. Access to a court, for instance, is a separate right from the right for a trial to be heard and decided within a reasonable time. It, thus, merits a separate chapter with its own introduction, subsections and conclusions.

4. ACCESS TO A COURT 4.1. Operation in Article 6 The fair, public and expeditious characteristics of judicial proceedings expressed in Article 6 would be of no value at all if there were no judicial proceedings. Thus, referring to the rule of law and avoidance of arbitrary power, principles which underlie much of the ECHR, the ECtHR has held that the right of access to a court is an element inherent in Article 6(1). Although this right is not absolute, any limitation must not restrict access to such an extent that the very essence of the right is impaired, provided that a legitimate aim is pursued with proportionality between the limitation and that aim. The potential for this right to arise in the civil jurisdiction context is high, given the intrinsic nature of the operation of jurisdiction rules. 4.2. Anti-Suit Injunctions A denial of access to a foreign court and, therefore, a potential Article 6 violation will occur through the grant of an anti-suit injunction, which seeks to restrain foreign proceedings. This issue arose in The Kribi, where the claimants sought an anti-suit injunction to restrain Belgian proceedings brought in contravention of an exclusive jurisdiction agreement. Aikens J held that “Article 6…does not provide that a person is to have an unfettered choice of tribunal in which to pursue or defend his civil rights” . Moreover, “Article 6…does not deal at all with where the right to a [fair trial] is to be exercised by a litigant. The crucial point is that civil rights must be determined somewhere by a hearing and before a tribunal in accordance with the provisions of Article 6.” Therefore, a court granting an anti-suit injunction, in the very limited circumstances in which it can now do so, would not be in breach of Section 6 of the HRA 1988 where another available forum exists. Contrastingly, Article 6 challenges remain for the “single forum” cases, where there is only one forum of competent jurisdiction to determine the merits of the claim, despite the cases already being treated differently. In such a case, the exemplary approach of Aikens J would easily resolve such human rights issues. Ultimately, in a commercially welcome judgment, human rights arguments were made and received properly. Moreover, Aikens J “logically” dealt with the human rights points first. Hence the case is a working model for Fawcett’s hybrid approach where human rights should be considered first before international private law principles. Contrasting with stays producing concerns of unreasonable delays, in this context of access to a court there is more impetus to follow Fawcett’s model, particularly given that such denial of access can constitute a direct breach of Article 6, thus producing a more realistic threat of contravention of Section 6 of the HRA 1998. 4.3. Exclusive Jurisdiction Agreements and Waiving Convention Rights Another instance pertinent to Article 6 is where a person has no access to the courts of the UK because of the enforcement of an exclusive jurisdiction agreement. Convention rights can, in general, be waived, including the right of access to a court under Article 6, which can occur where a jurisdiction agreement or agreement to arbitrate is valid and enforceable, but not where a person entered into the agreement without voluntary consensus. Generally, rights will be waived under a jurisdiction agreement meeting the requirements of Article 23 of the Brussels Regulation. However, as Briggs and Rees note, there may be instances, somewhat unattractive, where a party is bound by such a jurisdiction agreement without voluntary consensus as such, such that his right of access to a court may not have been waived, reflecting the more prudent stance taken towards compulsory alternative dispute resolution. Notwithstanding, Article 6 will be upheld provided there is another available court. 4.4. Limitations on Jurisdiction It is axiomatic that limitations on jurisdiction may restrict access to a court. The ECtHR has held that limitation periods are generally compatible with Article 6, particularly for reasons of legal certainty, provided that they are not applied inflexibly. This compatibility should encompass a stay under forum non conveniens for a forum barred by limitation, which is granted only where the claimant was at fault by acting unreasonably in failing to commence proceedings in the foreign court within the applicable limitation period. Contrastingly, blanket limitations are a more difficult species. An example of a blanket exclusion on jurisdiction is the English common law Moçambique rule, which provides that title to foreign land should be determined only at the situs of the land. This may conflict with Article 6 because of a denial of access to an English court. Although this proposition may be unfounded, particularly where access to a court is available somewhere, the exclusion on jurisdiction may still be challenged on Article 6 grounds if disproportionate its aim. Such proportionality concerns were considered in Jones v Ministry of the Interior of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Following Al-Adsani v United Kingdom , a blanket limitation on jurisdiction was accepted because the grant of sovereign immunity, which restricted access to a court, pursued the legitimate aim of comity through compliance with international law and was proportionate. Notwithstanding, underpinning this reasoning is an inevitable tension between the interests of States and private parties, such that Mance LJ (as he then was) in the Court of Appeal produced his judgment in light of ECHR considerations, taking a more flexible approach supportive of human rights. Mark v Mark also illustrates such inflexibility and proportionality considerations. The limitation in that case prevented access to the English courts, which may have been the only available courts, through a particular rule of public policy. This rule was therefore seen by Thorpe LJ to be incompatible with Article 6 and hence the HRA 1998. Contrastingly, in the House of Lords, Baroness Hale affirmed the decision on different grounds, dismissing ECHR considerations, such that she perhaps did not take human rights concerns entirely seriously. Although access to some court will be available following most limitations, the few cases where access would be denied to the only available court under a limitation warrant special attention in light of protection of the right to a fair trial. Such attention has been properly given on occasion, as demonstrated by both Mance and Thorpe LJJ. However, this approach is not consistently followed, shown by the dangerous approach of Baroness Hale. 4.5. Interaction with Forum non Conveniens In Lubbe v Cape Industries Plc, the defendant asked for a stay of proceedings. After identifying South Africa as the natural forum, the Court was faced with the argument that the stay would breach Article 6 because the complexity of the case and lack of funding were such that the claimant could not sue in that foreign court. After applying the Spiliada principles, which provided that a stay should be refused because the claimant could not obtain justice in the foreign court, Lord Bingham then turned to the Article 6 arguments and noted simply that “I do not think article 6 supports any conclusion which is not already reached on application of Spiliada principles.” Although the right to a fair trial was acknowledged and indeed protected under the refusal to grant a stay, the procedure in reasoning lowered the importance of human rights as the Spiliada principles took precedence to application of Article 6. Thus, if the Lubbe approach was followed in the future and a stay was granted to a foreign court in which there was a risk of a flagrant breach, the court may indirectly breach Article 6 in addition to Sections 2 and 6 of the HRA 1998. Similar techniques to that employed by Lord Bingham have been used in other forum non conveniens cases. For example, in The Polessk, the extent to which evidence showed the right to a fair trial in the St. Petersberg Court was considered under the second limb of the Spiliada test. Moreover, as discussed, reasonable delay has been considered consistently, although somewhat effectively, within this second stage of Spiliada. As noted, these latter instances show a sufficient degree of reconciliation with at least the indirect effect of Article 6, regardless of the characterisation of the breach as one of Article 6 or otherwise, particularly because it is difficult to imagine “borderline” cases amounting to flagrant breaches of Article 6, as Fawcett suggests. This analysis can be applied equally to the facts of Lubbe where access to the foreign court clearly did not exist, such that a stay would unequivocally produce a flagrant breach. It may be suggested that other cases are not so easy to evaluate, such as in determining whether access to a court exists through lack of legal aid, as Santambrogio v Italy illustrates. Nevertheless, surely if the decision is a difficult one to make, then the breach cannot be flagrant and, as such, there cannot be an indirect breach of Article 6. However, as noted, a procedural shift in judicial reasoning will have undoubted procedural benefits, if at the very least it effects compliance with Section 2 of the HRA 1998. Endnotes Golder v. United Kingdom [1975] ECHR 1, at [35]. Ibid., at [34]-[35]. Ibid., at [36]; this includes the right to a determination of proceedings on the merits (Gorbachev v Russia, No. 3354/02, 15 February 2007.) Ibid., at [38]. Winterwerp v The Netherlands [1979] ECHR 4, at [60], [75]. Ashingdane v United Kingdom [1985] ECHR 8, at [57]. OT Africa Line Ltd v Hijazy (The Kribi) [2001] Lloyd’s Rep 76; now overruled on the specific point for decision (Turner v Grovit and Others [2005] AC 101). The Kribi (n131), at [42]. Ibid., at [42]. Following Turner v Grovit (n131), a court cannot grant an anti-suit injunction against a party who has commenced an action in a Brussels Convention State. British Airways v Laker Airways [1983] AC 58,at [80]. The Kribi, (n131),at [41]. Fawcett: 2007, pp36-37. Pfeiffer and Plankl v Austria (1992) 14 EHRR 692; cf. Loucaides: 2003, pp48-50. Deweer v Belgium (1979-80) 2 EHRR 439; indeed, this is a “natural consequence of [the parties’] right to regulate their mutual relations as they see fit.” (Axelsson v. Sweden, no.11960/86, 13 July 1990.) Malmstrom v Sweden (1983) 38 DR 18. Cf. under the common law (The Pioneer Container [1994] 2 AC 324); Briggs and Rees: 2005, p19. E.g. a person not party to a bill of lading bound by a jurisdiction agreement between shipper and carrier. Briggs and Rees: 2005, pp18-19. See generally Schiavetta: 2004, paras.4.2-4.21. Stubbings v United Kingdom [1996] ECHR 44, at [51]. Briggs and Rees: 2005, p20 n.101. Spiliada (n72), pp483-484. British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602; for Scotland, Hewit’s Trs v Lawson (1891) 18 R 793. Briggs and Rees: 2005, para.4.06. [2006] UKHL 26. 34 EHRR 273. Cf. Markovic v Italy [2006] ECHR 1141, which held that although there was no blanket limitation on jurisdiction through sovereign immunity and that access to a court had been afforded, access was nevertheless limited in scope, such that the applicants could not receive a decision on the merits. [2005] QB 699. [2004] EWCA Civ 168, at [40]. [2006] AC 98. Fawcett: 2007, p34. [2000] 1 WLR 1545. (n72). Lubbe (n157), p1561. Further, no relevant decisions of the ECtHR were relied upon in the judgment e.g. Airey v Ireland [1979] ECHR 3 where representation costs were “very high” and the procedure was too complex and would evoke emotions too great for the applicant to present her case. Cf. Santambrogio v Italy [2004] ECHR 430 (post-Lubbe), where legal aid was deemed unnecessary in the circumstances. Fawcett: 2007, p.11. (n102), p51. Supra pp.17-19. Supra p.19. (n160).

Get creative!

Creative argument is essential if you’re going to get a first. Perhaps only unless your tutor or professor doesn’t know the topic well can you get away rehashing old argument and ideas that have been discussed thousands of times before. Having worked with academia in trying to commercialise intellectual property rights (IP), through, for instance, spin-off companies, it is clear that innovation is crucial for the business models of universities. It goes something like this: University teaches its students; Students produce research in which they and/or the university have IP, such as copyrights or patents; Student and/or university commercialises that IP by selling or licensing it to journals or other entities, such as companies. Money, then, gets reinvested into the system or society, which gets to work with the new innovation or improvement. The below argument is example of how such creativity can light up your dissertation, add value to your University and get you a better mark overall.

4.6. Owusu v Jackson Further relevance of Article 6 can be seen in the context of the ECJ’s analysis of forum non conveniens in Owusu v Jackson. Fundamentally wrong, the ECJ believed that a defendant “would not be able…reasonably to foresee before which other court he may be sued.” However, it is the defendant who asks for a stay and thus his foreseeability of a stay in this respect is secured. Article 6 is underpinned by the principle of legal certainty. Although legal certainty has specific provision in some articles of the ECHR, it is not confined to those articles; the specific provisions require domestic law “to be compatible with the rule of law, a concept inherent in all the articles of the Convention.” Legal certainty comprises the particularly significant aspect of foreseeability. In this regard, the ECtHR has noted that: “a norm cannot be regarded as a ‘law’ unless it is formulated with sufficient precision to enable the citizen to regulate his conduct: he must be able…to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail.” It is at least arguable that this would encompass procedural certainty emanating from rules of jurisdiction. If the forum non conveniens doctrine permitted stays without the defendant’s asking, the defendant would have such little legal certainty that there may even be an arguable infringement of his right to a fair trial under Article 6, not only incompatible with the higher test of legal certainty of jurisdictional rules under the Brussels regime. This would result from the defendant’s lack of foreseeability as to where proceedings against him would take place. Contrastingly, cogent arguments can be made against forum non conveniens, inter alia, because of the uncertainty for the claimant. Notwithstanding, it could be said that his rights under Article 6(1) are upheld through his right of access to a court somewhere else. Moreover, he would have much more legal certainty than that of the defendant under the ECJ’s interpretation of forum non conveniens because stays under proper operation of forum non conveniens are granted, to some extent, within the confines of regulated and foreseeable discretion. It can therefore be seen that the ECJ had analysed something which would be incompatible not only with Scottish and English law, but also with the ECHR and HRA 1998. Although a proper analysis of forum non conveniens would probably not have altered the outcome of Owusu, it would have been much more respectable to the common law, already set to be dismantled through an inevitable course of Europeanization, not to knock down, to some extent, a “straw man.” 4.7. Conclusions It is clear that there are disparate approaches to the right of access to a court, perhaps emanating in part from varying attitudes to the importance of human rights. Most civil jurisdiction cases will involve access being denied to one court, while access to another is still available. These will generally not breach Article 6 since there is no right of preference of court under Article 6 as Aikens J held in The Kribi, a judgment fully respectable of human rights. Contrastingly, in the limited number of cases which do yield Article 6 concerns, respect for human rights has been inconsistent, a worrying position particularly in light of the recognition of new, potential Article 6 challenges, such as in the areas of exclusive jurisdiction agreements and limitations on jurisdiction. Notwithstanding, such concerns may be unfounded, given the flexibility of international private law rules, such as the demands of justice under the second limb of Spiliada, which can effectively prevent indirect breaches of Article 6. Endnotes Except in exceptional circumstances: Collins et al: 2006, para.12-006 n.20. E.g. Articles 5 and 7. Reed and Murdoch: 2001, para.3.33. Amuur v France [1996] ECHR 20, at [50]. Reed and Murdoch: 2001, para.3.36. Sunday Times (No1) v United Kingdom [1979] ECHR 1, at [49]. Harris: 2005, p939; despite a lack of express mention by the ECJ in Owusu (n29); cf. Opinion of AG Leger in Owusu, at [160]. Hartley: 2005b, pp824-828; cf. Mance: 2007. (n72).

Add Another New Topic

The following is a different slant on the fundamental theme of the dissertation.

5. RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS 5.1. Recognition of Contracting State Judgments An indirect breach of Article 6 may occur where a court recognises and thus enforces a judgment obtained in foreign proceedings contrary to the requirements of Article 6. Little challenge is presented where that judgment is obtained in a court of a State party to the ECHR; in such a case, recognition can be refused through Article 6 which is a facet of public policy under Article 27(1) of the Brussels Convention. Notably, Article 34(1) of the Brussels Regulation provides that the recognition must be “manifestly” contrary to public policy, implying a higher threshold than in Article 27(1). The difference in wording is uncertain, but it is hoped that it will not be used to “sweep mere procedural defects under the rug.” Indeed, the importance of the right to a fair trial to the rule of law cannot be underestimated and thus it is arguable that any breach of Article 6 will be manifestly contrary to public policy. Notwithstanding, if the phrases “manifestly contrary to public policy” and a “flagrant breach of the ECHR” were to be compared, it may be just as arguable that a manifest breach of Article 6, not a standard one, is required for the operation of Article 34(1) of the Brussels Regulation. However, this may not be unwarranted in the context of judgments of Contracting States, as noted. Through Krombach v Bamberski , the housing of Article 6 under public policy effectively creates a hierarchical system, whereby EC rules have precedence over human rights rules, particularly because of the ignorance of the indirect effect doctrine. However, this may not be wholly unwelcome in light of the potential existence of a common EC public policy, somewhat emanating from the harmonisation through the ECHR in 1950. Moreover, as Meidanis suggests, the ECJ appears to see the protection of human rights as the common core of the European public policy and is prepared to sacrifice the basic principle of the free movement of judgments of the Brussels Convention to ensure protection of human rights. Notwithstanding, as noted, in other contexts, the ECJ does not so respect human rights, particularly highlighted by its emphatic rejection of Article 6 in Gasser. Although the flexibility through the public policy exception does not extend to the rules relating to jurisdiction, there are other mechanisms for protecting human rights within the Brussels Convention and, especially, the Brussels Regulation. 5.2. Recognition of Non-Contracting State Judgments More difficulty arises with recognition of a judgment obtained in a non-Contracting State. 5.2.1. European Court of Human Rights Such recognition was permitted without reference to Article 6 in Drozd and Janousek. However, in Pellegrini v Italy, the ECtHR held that the Italian court could not recognise a judgment obtained in a Vatican City court in contravention of Article 6 standards. This was so despite a Concordat between Italy and the Vatican requiring such recognition. Pellegrini can be considerably demarcated from the Soering/Drozd line of cases, which requires a flagrant breach to have occurred in the non-Contracting State, the underpinning theory being the “reduced effect of public policy.” Instead, Pellegrini requires full compliance with Article 6 standards as if the foreign court were party to the ECHR, such that failure to review a judgment against which standards is a risky practice. Notwithstanding, the actual breach of Article 6 standards in Pellegrini was flagrant, despite the court’s omission of this, and therefore the judgment may not represent such a large departure from Drozd. Moreover, the “reduced effect of public policy” approach of Drozd was followed eight days prior to Pellegrini in Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v Germany. However, it is difficult to distinguish Hans-Adam II on its facts particularly given the sweeping reasoning in Pellegrini. Thus, as it stands, Pellegrini is the leading authority, prescribing the need for a review of foreign judgments against full Article 6 standards, ensuring full protection for the right to a fair trial. It is nevertheless hoped by some that the case will be revisited, perhaps with the preference of a variable standard. Further, a dictum in Pellegrini may have the effect of requiring such review only where the judgment emanates from the courts of a State not party to the Convention. Hence, as Kinsch submits, an a contrario reading may be imputed, such that review of Article 6 standards is optional where the judgment emanates from a Contracting State. However, this may not be wholly unwelcome given that the Member States of the EU are party to the ECHR in addition to the Brussels Convention and Regulation, which seek to limit the power of public policy from preventing recognition of judgments. 5.2.2. House of Lords In stark contrast to Pellegrini, the House of Lords in Montgomery required a “flagrant” breach in the United States, a non-Contracting State, for the judgment not to be recognised. Such a flagrant breach was not created in the United States and hence recognition of a judgment breaching regular Article 6 standards was permitted. In its judgment, the House of Lords attempted to distinguish Pellegrini through the existence of the Concordat between Italy and the Vatican City, which required Italy to ensure that the Vatican court’s procedure complied with the fundamental principles of Italian legal system, one being Article 6. However, this is hard, if not impossible, to understand, particularly since it assumes that the Concordat of 1929, as amended, could incorporate ECHR standards, when the Vatican City deliberately refused to subscribe to the ECHR. Further, the ECtHR in Pellegrini did not suggest in its judgment that the relationship between Italy and the Vatican was material to its decision. Therefore, Montgomery is seen to be wrong in so distinguishing Pellegrini. Briggs and Rees further suggest that the House of Lords applied the wrong test in Montgomery because of the analysis of deportation cases, such as Soering. In such a case, a prediction is required, whereas in Montgomery, or indeed in any case concerning recognition, there was no need for such a prediction as the foreign judgment could already be seen to have breached Article 6. However, Soering requires that the person “has suffered or risks suffering a flagrant denial of a fair trial (emphasis added.)” If he has already suffered a breach, there is no need for a prediction to be made; instead, the reason for the standard of flagrancy is based on the “reduced effect of public policy” theory, an approach followed in Drozd, as noted. The reasoning of Briggs and Rees in this respect is akin to that of the Court of Appeal in Montgomery where Lord Woolf CJ stated that “the reference in [Soering at [113]] to a future flagrant breach of Article 6 was no more than a dicta which should not be applied to the enforcement of a court order of a non-Contracting State.” However, Drozd, which was not cited to, or considered by, the Court of Appeal, expressly requires such a flagrant breach of Article 6 if enforcement of a court order of a non-Contracting State is to be denied, which clearly has nothing to do with making predictions. Instead, as Briggs and Rees indeed note, the reason why the House of Lords applied the wrong test in Montgomery is that Pellegrini, the leading ECtHR authority which overrides Drozd, was wrongly distinguished and therefore permitted recognition of a judgment in contravention of ECHR jurisprudence. It may be argued that this was not a case of human rights not being taken seriously, but was merely a case of wrongful interpretation of human rights law, yet this could only be accepted upon an assumption of the incompetence of the House of Lords. 5.3. Conclusions The leading authority of the ECtHR on operation of the indirect effect doctrine with respect to recognising foreign judgments, Pellegrini demands a review of full compliance with Article 6 standards of foreign judgments, perhaps limited to those emanating from non-Contracting State courts. Through this, the right to a fair trial can be fully upheld in national courts and, in the UK, breach of Section 6 of the HRA 1998 can be avoided. Notwithstanding, the House of Lords effectively got human rights wrong, thus paving the way forward for reduced protection of Article 6 in the UK. However, this area is not devoid of hope; to effect compliance with this framework, Montgomery must be overturned, which does not appear too remote a possibility given the extensive criticism of the case.

How to conclude a first class law dissertation

The conclusion to your dissertation is, arguably, the most important part and is, therefore, potentially a major differentiator between a first class dissertation and a second class one.

There are three things which you should bear in mind:-

1. A well-written dissertation, thesis, essay or, indeed, any story should have three main parts to it: an introduction; a main body; and a conclusion. It reflects any good piece of oratory: say what you’re going to say, say it, then say what you’ve said. In your conclusion, you are, thus, trying to tell the audience what you’ve said throughout your dissertation. If the word limit is 10,000 words, 800-1000 words should, ideally, be used on your conclusion;

2. Don’t be afraid to put your foot into the icy water. As stated in an earlier section you should not be afraid to come to powerful conclusions even if they challenge the views of other academics, practitioners or even the general public, provided that your views can be fairly and reasonably supported. Which brings us to the third and most important aspect of any conclusion;

3. A well drafted conclusion should refer back to your analysis throughout your dissertation to support your suggested conclusions; it should not allow you to raise new arguments or thoughts which you haven’t already considered. Think about it like a civil proof in court: you conduct an examination-in-chief in which you ask open questions to get evidence from your witness; your opponent then cross-examines your witness to test their evidence; you then get a chance to re-examine the witness but you do NOT get a chance to raise anything new that was not covered in cross.

The conclusion to my dissertation, different from my Juridical Review version, is as below. Given the recent Supreme Court criminal law decision of Cadder v HMA, for which see the ScotsLawBlog Cadder article , the final words on getting human rights right attract even greater significance.

6. CONCLUSIONS The right to a fair trial has produced much concern in the conflict of laws arena today, a particular result of the evolution of a more stringent human rights culture in the United Kingdom. In the field of civil jurisdiction, the right to a trial within reasonable time and the right of access to a court, two of the most fundamental substantive rights of Article 6 ECHR, have emerged; in the sphere of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, the indirect effect doctrine, a key procedural element of the ECHR, which protects the right to a fair trial indirectly but nevertheless just as significantly, has arisen. International private law mechanisms exist for the reconciliation of Article 6 with the sphere of civil jurisdiction and judgments. The extent to which these can be utilised to protect the right to a fair trial is undoubtedly immense. At the most extreme end of protection, Fawcett’s hybrid model could provide great procedural legal certainty, such that human rights concerns will be identified first, using ECtHR jurisprudence, following which international private law mechanisms can resolve these concerns with their inherent flexibility. This strict approach is not unwarranted, particularly where judges fail to see the function or even importance of human rights. Pertinent examples include the misapplication of human rights by the House of Lords in Montgomery , which indeed must be rectified, and other approaches not confined to the courts of the United Kingdom; for instance, the embarrassingly misguided approach of the ECJ in Gasser , where it refused to recognise human rights concerns in its myopic pursuit of the objectives of the Brussels regime, unyielding with respect for concerns of private parties, when there were measures available for reconciliation. This appears even more inadequate in light of Advocate General Léger’s later suggestions that forum non conveniens may actually be incompatible with Article 6, when the doctrine is more than justifiable as it seeks to produce faster and more economic litigation, through both the first and second limbs of Spiliada. Notwithstanding, the need for Fawcett’s model is more questionable in other situations; for instance, in those cases involving potential indirect breaches of Article 6 when transferring actions abroad, flexible international private law mechanisms appear to have been applied in a manner sufficiently compliant with the ECHR, regardless of the characterisation of the breach as one of Article 6 or simply of the demands of justice. For example, the second limb of Spiliada has effectively prevented stays where there is a real risk of a flagrant breach abroad, as is the Soering threshold for such an indirect breach, whether regarding unreasonable delay or lack of access to a court. Fawcett concedes that the overall result of many cases will remain unchanged but suggests that “borderline” cases may exist which pose as pitfalls for the courts. However, the requirement of flagrancy, as he correctly applied at the beginning of his analysis, makes the existence of such cases difficult, if not impossible, to imagine in practice. In this respect, Fawcett appears to be advocating an approach extending beyond avoiding breaching Article 6; instead, he is actively aiming at protection of a fair trial beyond the Article 6 threshold. However, this is not unwelcome; the importance of Article 6 is so great that it is worth adopting the strict approach. The consistent use of ECHR jurisprudence at the outset will, at the very least, prevent a breach of Section 2 of the HRA 1998; further, it may assist those judges who are misguided or fail to see the importance of human rights today. Ultimately, a strict approach may provide for considerable legal certainty in a fast and growing area of law which demands firm, human rights orientated answers.

New: we have published guides to some of the best personal injury lawyers , settlement agreement solicitors and best employment lawyers in the UK , in addition to helpful guidance on a range of other legal issues which may be useful if you or a friend need to point someone in the right direction.

How to write a bibliography to conclude your first-class dissertation

There are three stages for completing an abundant and competent bibliography. First, go into the footnotes on your document, select all, copy and paste to the foot of your article, then separate into different categories. Then, second, go back through the materials which you have read and add them. Finally, third, sort alphabetically using Word or Excel.

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 7.1. TABLE OF CASES A and others v Denmark [1996] ECHR 2 AG of Zambia v Meer Care and Desai [2005] EWHC 2102 (Ch), appeals dismissed [2006] EWCA Civ 390 Airbus Industrie GIE v Patel [1999] 1 AC 119 Airey v Ireland [1979] ECHR 3 Al-Bassam v Al-Bassam [2004] EWCA Civ 857 Amuur v France (1996) 22 E.H.R.R. 533 Andreucci v Italy [1992] ECHR 8 Ashingdane v United Kingdom [1985] ECHR 8 Att. Gen. v Arthur Anderson & Co [1989] ECC 224 Axelsson v. Sweden, no.11960/86, 13 July 1990 Bensaid v United Kingdom (2001) 33 EHRR 10 Berghofer v. ASA SA Case 221/84 [1985] ECR 2699 Berisford Plc v New Hampshire Insurance [1990] 2 QB 631 Bock v. Germany [1989] ECHR 3 Boddaert v Belgium (1993) 16 EHRR 242 Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi(“Bosphorus Airways“) v Ireland (2006) 42 EHRR 1 Bottazzi v. Italy [1999] ECHR 62 Brazilian Loans (PCIJ Publications, Series A, Nos. 20-21, p.122) Bristow Heliocopters v Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation [2004] 2 Ll Rep 150 British Airways v Laker Airways [1983] AC 58 British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602 Buchholz v Germany [1981] ECHR 2 Carel Johannes Steven Bentinck v Lisa Bentinck [2007] EWCA Civ 175 Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka AS v Nomura International Plc [2003] IL Pr 20 Chellaram v Chellaram [1985] 1 Ch 409 Connelly v RTZ Corpn plc [1998] AC 854 Credit Agricole Indosuez v Unicof Ltd [2004] 1 Lloyd.s Rep 196 Cumming v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd, The Times June 8, 1995 Darnell v United Kingdom (1993) 18 EHRR 205 Delcourt v Belgium (1979-80) 1 EHRR 355 Derbyshire CC v Times Newspapers Ltd [1992] QB 770 Deweer v Belgium (1979-80) 2 EHRR 439 Di Mauro v. Italy ECHR 1999-V Drozd and Janousek v France and Spain (1992) 14 EHRR 745 Eckle v Germany (1983) 5 EHRR 1 Elderslie Steamship Company v Burrell (1895) 22 R 389 Elefanten Schuh GmbH v Jacqmain (Case 150/80) [1981] ECR 1671 Erich Gasser GmbH v Misat Srl, C-116/02 [2005] QB 1 ERT v DEP C-260/89 [1991] ECR I-2925 F v Switzerland [1987] ECHR 32 Ferrari v Italy [1999] ECHR 64 Foti v Italy (1982) EHRR 313 Fritz and Nana v France, 75 DR 39 Golder v. United Kingdom [1975] ECHR 1 Gorbachev v Russia, No. 3354/02, Judgment of 15 February 2007. Government of the United States of America v Montgomery (No 2) [2004] UKHL 37 Guincho v Portugal (1984) 7 EHRR 223 H v France (1990) 12 EHRR 74 Hesperides Hotels Ltd v Aegan Turkish Holidays Ltd [1979] AC 508 Hewit’s Trs v Lawson (1891) 18 R 793. Huseyin Erturk v Turkey [2005] ECHR 630. Irish Shipping Ltd v Commercial Union [1991] 2 QB 206. Iveco Fiat v Van Hool Case 313/85 [1986] ECR 3337 Jones v Saudi Arabia [2004] EWCA Civ 1394 JP Morgan Europe Ltd v Primacom [2005] EWHC 508 Katte Klitsche de la Grange v Italy (1994) 19 EHRR 368 Klockner Holdings GmbH v Klockner Beteiligungs GmbH [2005] EWHC 1453 Konamaneni v Rolls-Royce Industrial Power (India) Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 1269 Konig v Federal Republic of Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 170 Krombach v Bamberski Case C-7/98 [2001] QB 709 Kudla v Poland [2000] ECHR 512 Lacey v Cessna Aircraft (1991) 932 F.2d 170 Ledra Fisheries Ltd v Turner [2003] EWHC 1049 Lubbe v Cape Industries Plc [2000] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 383 Malone v United Kingdom (1985) 7 EHRR 1 Malstrom v Sweden (1983) 38 Decisions and Reports 18 Manieri v Italy [1992] ECHR 26 Margareta and Roger Andersson v Sweden (1992) 14 EHRR 615. Markovic v Italy [2006] ECHR 1141 Maronier v Larmer [2003] QB 620 Matthews v United Kingdom [1999] ECHR 12. Messier-Dowty v Sabena [2000] 1 WLR 2040 Netherlands 6202/73 1975 1 DR 66 OT Africa Line Ltd v Hijazy (The Kribi) [2001] Lloyd’s Rep 76 Owens Bank Ltd v Bracco [1992] 2 AC 433 Owners of the Atlantic Star v Owners of the Bona Spes (The Atlantic Star and The Bona Spes) [1974] AC 436 Owusu v Jackson and Others C-281/02 [2005] QB 801 Pafitis v Greece (1999) 27 EHRR 566 Pfeiffer and Plankl v Austria (1992) 14 EHRR 692 Philip Morris International Inc v Commission of the European Communities [2003] ECR II-1 Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v Germany ECHR 2001-VIII. R (Razgar) v Special Adjudicator [2004] 1 AC 368 R v Jones [2003] 1 AC 1 R. (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment [2001] 2 WLR 1389 R. (on the application of Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26 Riccardo Pizzati v Italy [2006] ECHR 275 Robins v United Kingdom (1998) 26 EHRR 527 Salesi v Italy [1993] ECHR 14 Salotti v RUWA Case 23/76 [1976] ECR 1831 Santambrogio v Italy [2004] ECHR 430 Scopelliti v Italy (1993) 17 EHRR 493 Sim v Robinow (1892) 19 R 665 Soc Divagsa v Spain (1993) 74 DR 274. Soering v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439 Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Lid [1987] 1 AC 460 Standard Steamship Owners Protection and Indemnity Association v Gann [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 528 Stogmuller v Austria (1979) 2 EHRR 155 Stubbings v United Kingdom [1996] ECHR 44 Sunday Times v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 The Al Battani [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 219 The Benarty [1984] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 244 The Fehmarn [1958] 1 WLR 159 The Jalakrishna [1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 628 The Lakhta [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 269 The Nile Rhapsody [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 399 The Pioneer Container [1994] 2 AC 324 The Polessk [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 40 The Vishva Ajay [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 558 Toepfer International G.M.B.H. v. Molino Boschi Srl [1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 510 Trendex v Credit Suisse [1982] AC 679 Turner v Grovit and Others [2005] 1 AC 101 Union Alimentaria SA v Spain (1990) 12 EHRR 24 Vocaturo v Italy [1991] ECHR 34. Wemhoff v Germany (1968) 1 EHRR 55 Winterwerp v The Netherlands [1979] ECHR 4 X v France [1992] ECHR 45 Xn Corporation Ltd v Point of Sale Ltd [2001] I.L.Pr. 35 Z and Others v. United Kingdom (2002) 34 EHRR 3 Zimmermann and Steiner v Switzerland [1983] ECHR 9 7.2. TABLE OF LEGISLATION European Union EC Treaty Art 6(2) Art 307 Council Regulation 44/2001 (Brussels Regulation) Art 2 Art 4 Art 27 Art 28 Art 30 Art 34(1) Art 34(2) Art 35(3) Art 71 Italy Law no.89 of 24 March 2001 (the “Pinto Act”). United Kingdom Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 Civil Procedure Rules 1998 Part 11 r 3.1(2)(f) Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) s1(1)(a) s2(1)(a) s3(1) s6(3)(a) 7.3. TABLE OF CONVENTIONS Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Brussels Convention) Art 21 Art 22 Art 57 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Art 5 Art 6 Art 7 Art 13 7.4. TEXTBOOKS Anton, A.E., and Beaumont, P., 1995. Anton & Beaumont’s Civil Jurisdiction in Scotland: Brussels and Lugano Conventions. 2nd ed ., Edinburgh: Greens Bell, A., 2003. Forum Shopping and Venue in Transnational Litigation. Oxford: OUP Briggs, A., 2002. The Conflict of Laws, Oxford: OUP. Briggs, A., and Rees, P., 2002. Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments. 3rd ed., London: LLP Briggs, A., and Rees, P., 2005. Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments. 4rd ed., London: LLP Clarkson, C.M.V., and Hill, J., 2002. Jaffey on the Conflict of Laws. 2nd ed., Oxford: OUP Clarkson, C.M.V., and Hill, J., 2006. The Conflict of Laws. New York: OUP Clayton, R. and Tomlinson, H., 2000. The Law of Human Rights. Oxford: OUP Collier, J.C., 2001. Conflict of Laws. 3rd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Collins, L., et al (eds), 2006. Dicey Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws. 14th ed. London: Sweet and Maxwell Crawford, E.B., and Carruthers, J.M., 2006. International Private Law in Scotland. 2nd ed, Edinburgh: Greens Einhorn, T. and Siehr, K., 2004. Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law – Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh. The Hague, The Netherlands: T.M.C. Asser Press. Fawcett, J.J., 1995. Declining jurisdiction in private international law: reports to the XIVth congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law, Athens, August 1994. Oxford: Clarendon Press Fawcett, J.J., Harris, J. and Bridge, M., 2005. International Sale of Goods in the Conflict of Laws. Oxford: OUP Grosz, S., Beatson, J. and Duffy, P., 2000. Human Rights: The 1998 Act and the European Convention,.London: Sweet and Maxwell Harris, D.J., O’Boyle, M., Warbrick, C., 1995. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. London: Butterworth Hill, J., 2005. International Commercial Disputes in English Courts. 3rd ed Portland: Hart Publishing McClean, D. and Beevers, K., 2005. Morris on the Conflict of Laws. 6th ed., London: Sweet and Maxwell North, P.M. and Fawcett, J.J., 2004. Cheshire and North’s Private International Law. 13th ed. Oxford: OUP Ovey, C. and White, R., 2002. The European Convention on Human Rights. New York: OUP Raitio, J., 2003. The Principle of Legal Certainty in EC Law. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers Reed, R. and Murdoch, J., 2001. A Guide to Human Rights Law in Scotland. Edinburgh: Butterworths Scotland Starmer, K., 1999. European Human Rights Law. London: Legal Action Group 7.5. ARTICLES Baldwin, J., and Cunnington, R., 2004. “The Crisis in Enforcement of Civil Judgments in England and Wales.” 2004 PL (SUM) 305-328 Briggs, A., 2005a. “Foreign Judgments and Human Rights.” 121(APR) L.Q.R. 185-189 Briggs, A., 2005b. “The Death of Harrods: Forum non Conveniens and the European Court.” 121(OCT) L.Q.R. 535-540 Clarke, A., 2007. “The Differing Approach to Commercial Litigation in the European Court of Justice and the Courts of England and Wales” 18 E.B.L.Rev. 101-129 Collins, L., 1995. “The Brussels Convention Within the United Kingdom”, 111 LQR 541 Costa, J-P., 2002, Rivista internazionale dei diritti dell’uomo, 435, cited in Kinsch, P., 2004. “The Impact of Human Rights on the Application of Foreign Law and on the Recognition of Foreign Judgments – A Survey of the Cases Decided by the European Human Rights Institutions,” in Einhorn, T. and Siehr, K., 2004. Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law – Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh, The Hague, The Netherlands: T.M.C. Asser Press, pp197-228, p228 n100 Crawford, E.B., 2005. “The Uses of Putativity and Negativity in the Conflict of Laws.” 54 ICLQ 829-854 Crifo, C., 2005. “First Steps Towards the Harmonisation of Civil procedure: The Regulation Creating a European Enforcement Order for Uncontested Claims.” C.J.Q. 2005, 24(APR), 200-223 Eardley, A., 2006. “Libel Tourism in England: Now the Welcome is Even Warmer.” 17(1) Ent. L.R. 35-38 Fabri, M., and Langbroek, P.M., 2003. “Preliminary draft report: Delay in Judicial Proceedings: A preliminary Inquiry into the Relation Between the Demands of the Reasonable Time Requirements of Article 6(1) ECHR and Their Consequences for Judges and Judicial Administration in the Civil, Criminal and Administrative Justice Chains”, CEPEJ (2003) 20 Rev Farran, S., 2007. “Conflicts of Laws in Human Rights: Consequences for Colonies”, (2007) 1 EdinLR 121 Fawcett, J.J., 2007. “The Impact of Article 6(1) of the ECHR on Private International Law.” 56 ICLQ 1-48 Fentiman, R., 2005. “English Domicile and the Staying of Actions” [2005] 64 CLJ 303 Flannery, L., 2004. “The End of Anti-Suit Injunctions?” New Law Journal, 28 May 2004, 798 Franzosi, M., 2002. “Torpedoes are here to stay” [2002] 2 International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law 154 Franzosi, M., 1997. “Worldwide Patent Litigation and the Italian Torpedo” 19 (7) EIPR 382 Green, L., 1956. “Jury Trial and Mr. Justice Black,” 65 Yale LJ 482 Halkerston, G., 2005. “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum.” 155 NLJ 436 Hare, C., “Forum non Conveniens in Europe: Game Over or Time for ‘Reflexion’” JBL 2006, Mar, 157-179 Harris, J., 2001. “The Brussels Regulation.” 20 Civil Justice Quarterly 218 Harris, J., 2005. “Stays of Proceedings and the Brussels Convention.,” 54 ICLQ 933 Hartley, T.C., 1994. “Brussels Jurisdiction and Judgments Convention: Agreement and Lis Alibi Pendens.” 19(5) E.L.Rev 549-552 Hartley, T.C., 2001. “International Law and the Law of the European Union – A Reassessment”, 72 BYBIL 1 Hartley, T.C., 2005a. “Choice-of-court agreements, lis pendens, human rights and the realities of international business: reflection on the Gasser case” in Le droit international privé: mélanges en l’honneur de Paul Lagarde, (Dalloz, Paris, 2005), pp383-391 Hartley, T.C., 2005b. “The European Union and the Systematic Dismantling of the Common Law Conflict of Laws”, 54 ICLQ 813 Higgins, R., 2006. “A Babel of Judicial Voices? Ruminations From the Bench.” 55 ICLQ 791-804. Hogan, G., 1995. “The Brussels Convention, Forum non Conveniens and the Connecting Factors Problem.” 20(5) E.L. Rev. 471-493 Hood, K.J., 2006. “Drawing Inspiration? Reconsidering the Procedural Treatment of Foreign Law.” 2(1) JPrIL 181-193. Hunt, M., 1998. “The “Horizontal Effect” of the Human Rights Act”. 1998 Public Law 423-443 Hunter-Henin, M., 2006. “Droit des personnes et droits de l’homme: combinaison ou confrontation? (Family Law and Human Rights: Can They Go Along or Do They Exclude Each Other?),” 95(4) Revue critique de droit international privé pp743-775. Kennett, W., 1998. “Service of Documents in Europe.” 17(JUL) C.J.Q. 284-307 Kennett, W., 2001. “The Brussels I Regulation.” 50 ICLQ 725 -737 Kennett, W., 2001. “The Enforcement Review: A Progress Report.” 20(Jan) CJQ 36-57 Kennett, W., and McEleavy, P., 2002. “(Current Development): Civil and Commercial Litigation” 51 ICLQ 463 Kinsch, P., 2004. “The Impact of Human Rights on the Application of Foreign Law and on the Recognition of Foreign Judgments – A Survey of the Cases Decided by the European Human Rights Institutions,” in Einhorn, T. and Siehr, K., 2004. Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law – Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh, The Hague, The Netherlands: T.M.C. Asser Press, pp197-228. Lester, A., and Pannick, D., 2000. “The Impact of the Human Rights Act on Private Law: The Knight’s Move.” 116 LQR 380-385 Loucaides, L.G., 2003. “Questions of a Fair Trial Under the European Convention on Human Rights.” (2003) HRLR 3(1), pp27-51. Lowenfield, A.F., 2004. “Jurisdiction, Enforcement, Public Policy and Res Judicata: The Krombach Case,” in in Einhorn, T. and Siehr, K., 2004. Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law – Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh, The Hague, The Netherlands: T.M.C. Asser Press, pp229-248 Mance, J., 2004a. “Civil Jurisdiction in Europe – Choice of Court Clauses, Competing Litigation and Anti-Suit Injunctions – Erich Gasser v. Misat and Turner v. Grovit: Address to Second Conference of European Commercial Judges, (“Problems of enforcement of european law”)” Paris – 14th October 2004; http://www.courdecassation.fr/formation_br_4/2004_2034/jonathan_mance_8239.html, (Accessed 10 March 2007) Mance, J., 2004b. “Exclusive Jurisdiction Agreements and European Ideals.” 120 LQR 357 Mance, J., 2005. “The Future of Private International Law.” 1(2) JPrIL 185-195 Mance, J., 2007. “Is Europe Aiming to Civilise the Common Law?” 18 EBLRev 77-99 McLachlan, C., 2004. “International Litigation and the Reworking of the Conflict of Laws” 120(OCT) LQR 580-616 Meidanis, H.P., 2005. “Public Policy and Ordre Public in the Private International Law of the EU: Traditional Positions and Moderns Trends.” 30(1), ELRev, 95-110 Merrett, L., 2006. “The Enforcement of Jurisdiction Agreements within the Brussels Regime,” 55 ICLQ 315 Muir Watt, H., 2001. “Evidence of an Emergent European Legal Culture: Public Policy Requirements of Procedural Fairness Under the Brussels and Lugano Conventions.” 36 Tex. ILJ, p. 539. North, P., 2001. “Private International Law: Change or Decay?” 50 ICLQ 477-508 Orakhelashvili, A., 2006. “The Idea of European International Law.” 17 Eur. J. Int’l L. 315 Peel, E., 2001. “Forum non Conveniens Revisited.” 117(APR) L.Q.R. 187-194 Robertson, D.W., 1987. “Forum Non Conveniens in America and England: ‘A rather fantastic fiction’.” 103 LQR 398 Robert-Tissot, S., and Smith, D., 2005. “The Battle for Forum”, New Law Journal, 7 October 2005, p1496 Robert-Tissot, S., 2005. “The Battle for Forum.” 155 NLJ 1496 Rodger, B.J., 2006. “Forum non Conveniens: Post Owusu.” 2(1) JPrIL 71 Schiavetta, S., 2004. “The Relationship Between e-ADR and Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights pursuant to the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights.” 2004 (1) The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT). http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2004_1/schiavetta/ (Accessed 28 February 2007) Sinopoli, L., 2000. Le droit au procès équitable dans les rapports privés internationaux (doctoral dissertation, University of Paris-I, 2000) Slater, A.G., 1988. “Forum Non Conveniens: A View From the Shop Floor.” 104 LQR 554 Svantesson, D.J.B., 2005. “In Defence of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens.” (2005) HKLJ 395 Van Hoek: 2001. “Case note on Krombach v Bamberski” (2001) 38 CMLR 1011. Wade, H.W.R., 2000. “Horizons of Horizontality.” 116 LQR 217-224 Williams, J.M., 2001. “Forum non Conveniens, Lubbe v Cape and Group Josi v Universal General Insurance.” J.P.I. Law 2001, 1, 72-77 Zhenjie, H., 2001. “Forum Non Conveniens: An Unjustified Doctrine.” 48 NILR 143

All the best with your dissertation and career!

Related Posts

Linkedin: the new blogging platform for lawyers.

Or should you publish mainly on your own website or blog? In today’s digital age, LinkedIn isn’t just a professional

Exciting News: Our Guide to AI for Law Firms Just Got Better!

Hello legal professionals and legal tech enthusiasts! Alongside an exciting upcoming podcast episode on AI for law firm efficiency and

Automated page speed optimizations for fast site performance

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Why law students should consider writing a dissertation

It’s a daunting project to take on, but writing a dissertation can give you skills that will be useful in your career

Generally, writing a dissertation is not compulsory. But for law students in particular, it may be worth considering.

It was last year’s conflict in Gaza that encouraged me to write a dissertation. I wanted to find out what the law had to say about such a contentious topic. Luckily, at most law schools you can be flexible with the focus of your dissertation.

A fellow student at City Law School wrote his on the exception of parodies to copyright law. While others in my cohort wrote about humanitarian intervention against Isis, and the practice of child marriage in Bangladesh. Having the chance to explore an area of law outside the seven core modules, and become reasonably knowledgeable in it, can give you an edge in job interviews . Graduates who have completed dissertations have what many others don’t – a specialism, and potentially useful knowledge that can set them apart.

Writing a 10,000- to 15,000-word thesis also enables you to develop transferable skills that will be useful during any law career.

First, there are the obvious research skills. A lawyer’s strength is not so much his or her knowledge of the law, but their knowledge of where to find the law. Thomas Jones, an LLB and LPC graduate from City Law School, wrote his dissertation on the exception of parodies to copyright law, and has since worked as a research assistant for Professor Daniel Wilsher of City Law School.

Jones says the practical research skills he gained was one of the biggest benefits of writing a dissertation. These include the ability to locate sources efficiently, sift through case law and assess expert opinion.

In addition to research skills you learn to write well. Dissertations require succinct arguments and you learn to reduce complex pieces of information into concise sentences. This is useful when advising clients or writing skeleton arguments.

Structure and organisation are also crucial. You will have to use chapters, subsections, headings, and include a contents page. This is essential in the legal profession when compiling bundles and other files.

Rachel Tandy, a barrister at Henderson Chambers, compares the dissertation-writing process to that of preparing a case. “First, you have to gather all the facts. Next, you have to establish what everyone else is saying about them, and what it is that you want to say. Finally, you have to dismantle those facts yourself and re-assemble them in a way that supports your position.

“That process requires a creative mind, forensic attention to detail, and self-motivation – many of the qualities one might look for in a good barrister,” she says.

Although writing a dissertation is predominantly independent work, each student is assigned a supervisor – another potential benefit. The relationship you build with your supervisor, who will be an established professional and expert in your chosen area of study, can lead to further opportunities.

Junaed Khan, a City University graduate, says his supervisor for his international politics dissertation provided him with advice, contacts and invitations to topical networking events and conferences. “She still invites me to events,” he says.

Yasmin Dehghani, who is graduating from St Mary’s University with a law degree this year, also had a close relationship with her supervisor. “My supervisor really helped me to improve my CV, which helped me to get job offers and interviews,” she says.

Writing a dissertation isn’t always plain sailing though. Aram Alaaldin, who wrote his dissertation on the use of force against Isis, says he would only dedicate time to it each week once his notes for other modules were done. “I had to neglect my other modules due to the sheer workload when the deadline was nearing,” he says.

Writing what is essentially a compilation of essays requires a vast commitment of time, reading and effort. Naturally, this can result in stress, anxiety, and a rollercoaster of other emotions.

While not always pleasant, having to deal with such a large workload independently can be a rich experience in itself. It can give you a higher stress threshold, or at least allow you to practice managing it.

When entering the legal profession, a trainee or pupil will likely not have to draft a 15,000-word document from day one by researching a five-page list of books and journals in a completely new area of law.

But having coped with a dissertation, future tasks such as researching a particular case, drafting a short skeleton argument, or reading over some papers, will be comparatively minuscule.

Keep up with the latest on Guardian Students: follow us on Twitter at @GdnStudents – and become a member to receive exclusive benefits and our weekly newsletter.

• Studying law
• Guardian Students
• Law (Education)
• Higher education
• Advice for students
• sponsored features

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

10 tips for writing a first class LLB dissertation

Stuart McRobbie is currently a Diploma student at the University of Dundee. He has accepted a traineeship with Stronachs LLP to commence in September 2016 and is set to become the first lawyer in his family.

Writing a dissertation as part of my LL.B was undoubtedly the most challenging thing that I have had to do at university, but it also turned out to be the most rewarding.

Like many, I was initially quite apprehensive about writing such an extensive piece having found 3,000 word assignments difficult enough.  Universities recognise this and will provide students with detailed structural and formatting guidelines, as well as some high-level guidance with regards to being original and analytical.  However, I found that there was a lack of practical advice from those who had been through the process and so I thought it would be good to share some wisdom from my own experience and that of others.

1. Choose a topic that inspires you

Students are likely to be given a list of potential questions to aid them in their search selection process. My advice would be to generally steer clear of these. It’s unlikely that you’ll feel truly inspired by a set question, however they can be useful as a basis for tailoring or simply generating ideas. From speaking to students that achieved the highest grades for their dissertations, it’s clear that they all had a genuine interest in what they were writing about. Creating a unique question encourages original analysis and is likely to be more interesting from a marker’s perspective.

2. Start your research early

The law library can become a bit like something out of Lord of the Flies as people turn their attention to reading everything that has ever been written about their chosen topic. Ordinary library rules of borrowing and returning may appear to go up in smoke and it can feel like every person for themselves. The earlier you start your research, the less likely it is you’ll encounter any problems. Whatever forms the basis of your research, ensure that you keep track of it. A great way to do this is by completing a bibliography as you go, rather than at the very end. There is nothing worse than forgetting in which case or by which judge you read a great dictum (hint: it was probably Lady Hale or Lord Denning!).

3. Make the most of your time

It is oft said that the human brain can only focus for 30-40 minutes at a time, however students are often guilty of ignoring this in favour of cramming for hours on end. This is likely to have a negative affect on the quality of your research and writing. I found that breaking my time up into 40-minute periods, with 20-minute breaks in between, increased my productivity. I also found that setting myself achievable daily targets made the task of writing an extended piece seem less daunting: 15,000 words to be completed in 3 months suddenly becomes just 170 words a day! Leave time for reviewing your finished dissertation and make sure you beat the queue at the local printing and binding business.

4. Get in the zone

It is vital that you create and work in an environment that is conducive to productivity and creative thought.  That doesn’t mean installing soundproof walls and non-reflective surfaces à la Kanye West. Everyone is different but I found that sitting at a desk with just a pen and paper to jot down ideas, whilst Buddy Holly played in the background, was a great way to focus. Temporarily blocking certain websites might be a good idea, otherwise the temptation to binge-watch ‘Making A Murderer’ again will always be there!

5. Make the most of your supervisor

Supervisors are a great resource and can be a fantastic sounding board for ideas.  Whilst there is only so much a supervisor can do, they may be able to point you in the right direction and they are likely to be au fait with the most appropriate resources and current trends in thinking. Supervisors are also likely to be incredibly busy with teaching commitments and so you need to establish when and how to approach them.

6. Think about the bigger picture

The law doesn’t operate in isolation. Many students make the mistake of simply writing about what the law was or what the law is without necessarily considering the wider social, political or economic consequences of the legislation or case law. Consider, for instance, section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 which requires directors to act in the best interests of a company’s shareholders. Such a rule doesn’t affect just shareholders; it also has wide-ranging consequences for the rest of society in terms of the payment of corporation tax, wealth and health inequality, the growth in atypical workers and access to justice. In order to establish these links, it was necessary for me to draw upon financial textbooks, reports from charities and studies conducted by economists – not just legal resources.

7. Know the law

This goes without saying, but one of the major problems that students come up against is the evolutionary nature of the law. You will begin researching months before the submission date and there are likely to be some changes in that time. It’s therefore essential that you read relevant publications, bulletins and updates on the area of law you are writing about. Reading blogs by law firms is often a good way to keep track of any changes. Every couple of weeks I would also check on Lexis that the cases I had referred to were still good authority for the points I wanted to make.

8. Challenge authority

Lord Reed recently gave a talk at the University of Dundee in which he encouraged solicitors and advocates to challenge authority. The same holds true for students in their writings. In analysing case law and legislation, it is important to understand the historical context within which those decisions were made. Society in 2016 is vastly different to society 50 years ago. Even just one or two years can see dramatic changes in social values, technology and the economy. An excellent way to gain an understanding of the context in which certain pieces of legislation were passed is to consider any discussion papers issued prior to an Act being passed and to review Hansard.

9. Talk about it

Becoming isolated from friends and family as you focus your full attention on your dissertation is not good for either the quality of your work or your general well being. A great bit of advice I was given was to pair up with another student to allow us to talk about our projects and bounce ideas of each other. Speaking with people who aren’t law students, be they students of other subjects or even just family, will allow you to tap into the life experience of others and gain an insight from a perspective you might not have considered. Always allow time to socialise: a game of pool, watching a game of football with friends or geein it laldy on the karaoke will clear your head and allow you to refresh.

10. Finally: keep a notepad under your pillow

And another one on your person at all times! Given the amount of focus and effort that you put into your dissertation, random moments of insight are likely to arise as you carry out daily tasks. I would sometimes find myself returning home from work with something that resembled a sleeve tattoo drawn by a toddler. Better to avoid hastily scribbling notes on your arm and carry a notepad! Now and again I would also be awoken from my sleep by an idea and would have to write it down. Admittedly I would often find that the notes I had scribbled in a semi-conscious state were either illegible or just completely bonkers, but my final dissertation contained at least 3 points that came to me in my sleep.  Maybe I’m just a bit weird!

US law firms ramp up London talent war with huge junior lawyer salaries and high-profile hires

• US law firms are increasingly poaching top UK lawyers.
• Latham & Watkins has been particularly aggressive in its targeting of London-based talent.
• Latham's tactics point to a wider trend in the industry.

US law firms are pushing ahead with their bid to dominate the City of London's legal scene.

Latham & Watkins, the world's second-largest law firm by revenue, is just one such firm targeting the UK market.

Last year, Latham poached top capital markets lawyer Mark Austin from Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, a member of the "magic circle" — a term used to describe five elite UK law firms.

While he wasn't the first lawyer in the City to depart for a US company, the move for Austin, who had worked on the listings of companies like Deliveroo, was big.

"To get the guy who has the longest IPO list in the country and is now synonymous with the capital markets through his work with the government . . . was a big hire," one partner at a magic circle firm told the Financial Times .

Latham & Watkins now counts almost 500 lawyers in its London office, according to its website . It has lured at least 15 partners from rivals in the City over the last three years, the FT reported.

Related stories

The firm has also been involved in a number of high-profile deals in the capital this year, including advising UK cybersecurity company Darktrace plc on its $5.3 billion acquisition by Thoma Bravo .

Latham's aggressive plays point to a wider trend in the industry that is seeing elite UK firms forced into submission by more profitable US counterparts.

"The problem for UK firms is that there is only so much truly premium local legal work around," Scott Gibson, a director at London legal recruiting firm Edwards Gibson, told Bloomberg Law .

"As long as US private equity continues to drive the market, the rest of the UK global elite will keep trying to break the US. They have no choice if they want to stay elite," he added.

And thanks to a weakened pound post-Brexit, it has been easier than ever for US firms to attract British legal talent.

Earlier this month, US firm Quinn Emanuel raised its starting salaries for junior lawyers in the UK to £180,000, or nearly $230,000, putting pressure on others to follow suit.

The move followed news that UK firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer had increased base pay for new lawyers to £150,000, which is around $192,000.

Another blow to the magic circle came in May 2023, when another elite UK firm, Allen & Overy, merged with New York-based Shearman & Sterling, creating a huge new firm with around 3,900 lawyers and 800 Partners across 49 offices .

It remains to be seen how the rest of the magic circle will try to keep pace with the US.

Watch: How police corruption actually works in the UK

• Main content

Landmark UK Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act Becomes Law

Following introduction into the UK Parliament in 2023, the long-awaited Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCC) received Royal Assent on 24 May 2024. The legislation passed as part of the parliamentary ‘wash-up’ period triggered by a surprise announcement of a general election in the UK.

Representing a major shift in UK digital, competition and consumer protection regulation, the DMCC has three pillars:

• Introducing a new regulatory regime for large digital firms.
• Significantly widening the enforcement remit of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in consumer protection, particularly in relation to online activities.
• Giving the CMA broader powers to review mergers and in relation to conduct investigations.

The most significant elements are expected to come into force in autumn 2024, after consultation on CMA guidance.

In short, the DMCC materially strengthens the CMA’s regulatory toolbox by significantly enhancing its powers to intervene and enforce across its consumer, competition, and digital remits. In practice, this will mean that companies operating in the UK that are consumer-facing entities or have a digital presence will not be able to consider their competition law or consumer law compliance obligations in a silo; rather, it will be necessary to review commercial activities and manage risk by taking a holistic assessment of competition, consumer, and digital obligations.

Below, in the first of three updates on the DMCC, we summarise the key digital markets elements of the DMCC, the implications for businesses in the digital space, enforcement risks and next steps.

New regulatory regime for large digital firms

Under the DMCC, the CMA has the power to designate companies engaged in the provision of internet services and digital content with a significant market position in the UK as having strategic market status (SMS). Only those companies designated as having SMS will be subject to the digital markets regime, meaning additional regulation and new legal obligations, which will restrict their commercial freedom in UK markets.

SMS designations will be determined by the CMA’s Digital Markets Unit (DMU) according to whether a company:

• Engages in digital activity as a result of providing services by means of the internet or digital content.
• Is linked to the UK as a result of its digital activity having a significant number of UK users, being conducted in the UK or likely to have an effect on trade in the UK.
• Has a turnover exceeding 25 billion pounds globally or 1 billion pounds in the UK.
• Has substantial and entrenched market power in the relevant market and is forecast to have this over a period of at least five years.
• Has a position of strategic significance in the market as a result of its size or scale, or use by a significant number of other undertakings, or its position would allow it to extend its market power to other activities or allow it to influence the ways in which other undertakings conduct themselves.

As part of the regime, the CMA is required to conduct a formal evaluation process to determine which digital companies should be designated as having SMS. The CMA has stated that it will open its first designation investigations before the end of 2024, with a view toward designating the first companies in mid-2025.

The CMA has indicated that it expects to initiate three to four SMS investigations in the first year of the regime. The targets of these investigations are likely to be large digital firms which the CMA identified in previous market studies as potentially having market power in areas such as digital advertising, mobile operating systems and devices, and app distribution. Investigations into additional companies, including one or more of those designated as ‘gatekeepers’ under the European Union’s similar legislation – the Digital Markets Act (DMA) – are likely to begin in 2025.

Bespoke code of conduct for SMS firms

Each designated SMS firm will be subject to its own bespoke set of conduct requirements (CRs) in relation to the digital activity for which it has been designated. CRs are intended to guide the behaviour of SMS firms to prevent them using their market power in a way that would either exploit consumers or undermine fair competition. As such, CRs will reflect competition and consumer law requirements with new prescriptive or ex ante rules, allowing the CMA to regulate digital firms across both policy areas. The form and content of CRs is therefore likely to vary across firms and activities, and the CMA can only impose CRs where it is proportionate to achieving at least one of the three core legislative objectives:

• Fair dealing.
• Open choices.
• Trust and transparency.

A CR also must be of a ‘permitted’ type listed under the DMCC. However, the permitted CRs are expressed in very broad terms and afford the CMA a significant degree of discretion in determining what kinds of obligations to impose on each SMS firm. They may be outcome-focussed or action-focussed obligations, and they could include measures such as:

• Preventing SMS firms from preferencing their own products and services over those of competitors.
• Requiring SMS firms to allow the products and services of other firms to work with their own.
• Making SMS firms provide competitors with greater access to data and functionality.
• Mandating that SMS firms trade on fairer terms.
• Obliging SMS firms to give clear and accurate information about the digital activity to (potential) users (e.g., increasing transparency with respect to aspects of the firm’s algorithms).

We expect that the CMA will look to the obligations imposed on ‘gatekeepers’ by the European Commission under the DMA, although it may use its ability to impose bespoke codes of conduct to tailor requirements more specifically for each firm. In contrast, under the DMA, designated ‘gatekeepers’ are subject to a common set of obligations – for instance, allowing third parties to interoperate with the gatekeeper’s own services and prohibiting gatekeepers from self-preferencing their own services and products over those offered by third parties on the gatekeeper’s platform. This difference in the design of the regulation could require regulated businesses to contend with different obligations and compliance requirements between the UK and EU.

The CMA already has undertaken much of the groundwork for the implementation of the DMCC over the past few years while the enabling legislation has been developed. This has included conducting market studies into online platforms, digital advertising and mobile ecosystems. The CMA has been awaiting the coming into force of the DMCC to implement many of the recommendations in the reports to these studies and it is anticipated that the interventions identified in the reports will be covered by the initial codes of conduct. The list is lengthy but includes measures to address:

• The power balance between publishers and platforms.
• Self-preferencing in adtech and specialised search.
• Transparency in digital advertising.
• Use of choice architecture to nudge users.

The approach of using bespoke codes of conduct is a key point of distinction between the DMCC and the EU’s DMA. Whilst the CRs for each SMS firm may have in mind similar objectives, we expect that the code applicable to each SMS firm will be quite different – and will reflect the relevant market and third parties with whom each SMS is dealing. In practical terms, as well as complicated compliance for companies across both jurisdictions, the divergence of approach inevitably will provide additional opportunities for third parties to challenge the behaviour of SMS firms in Europe.

‘Pro-competitive interventions’

The CMA also will have the power to make ‘pro-competitive interventions’ (PCIs) in relation to SMS firms, designed to address any factors that the CMA identifies, after an investigation, as having an adverse effect on competition. The scope of the PCIs’ power is broad and can include orders mandating businesses to do certain things or, at the extreme, to break up businesses. The use of PCIs therefore is likely to be highly contentious.

The CMA has stated that PCIs may include giving people the power to easily transfer their data from one provider to another or requiring different products and services to work with each other. They will be designed to tackle the factors that are the source of a firm’s market power in a digital activity for which it is designated with SMS.

To make PCIs, the CMA will have to undertake an investigation within a nine-month deadline to determine whether there are any factors relating to an SMS firm’s designated digital activity that are having an adverse effect on competition.

Recent market studies show that CMA is considering PCIs in advertising, for example, to increase consumer control over data, require interoperability and mandate third-party access to data.

Enforcement, appeals and litigation risk

The new legislation includes enforcement and appeal provisions. In particular:

• The CMA will be able to impose fines of up to 10% of global turnover for breaches of the CRs or PCIs, along with daily fines of up to 5% of global turnover for continued breaches, and decisions to impose fines will be subject to a full merits review on appeal.
• Parties affected by the regulatory changes will be able to appeal designation, imposed codes of conduct and PCIs, but the right of challenge is limited to judicial review grounds only – an administrative law review which focuses on the lawfulness of the decision (and its reasonableness) – rather than a full review on the merits.

Whilst the CMA has been publicly emphasising the collaborative and iterative nature of the new regime, experience with the DMA shows that designated firms may be willing to litigate ‘red lines’. Moreover, with uncertainty surrounding the design of CRs, differences of interpretation could remain. In light of this, the limitation on challenges to judicial review grounds is unlikely to stop SMS designees challenging CMA decisions.

In addition, the DMCC provides for private enforcement rights by persons affected by breaches of CRs or PCIs. This will provide further scope for third parties to challenge the commercial actions of designated companies, as well as claim damages for losses caused by breaches.

Key implications for business with digital activities in the UK

The CMA has been waiting for some significant time for the DMCC to come into law. As a result, the CMA has been busy preparing for the new digital regime. The DMU is already up and running and well staffed, detailed draft guidance documents were issued for consultation the same day the DMCC received Royal Assent, and we anticipate that much of the preparatory work vis-à-vis SMS designations and codes of conduct has already been undertaken. In practice, this means that once the DMCC comes into force (which is expected in autumn 2024), the CMA is likely to move to a rapid implementation of the new regime.

The key focus of the new digital markets powers are those large digital firms that will be designated as having SMS. However, even nondesignated firms not directly regulated may be affected by the regulatory regime as a result of the CRs and PCIs. In regulating the conduct of certain firms, the adoption of these requirements will, for some, open up opportunities, whilst for other nondesignated albeit large market players, there may be an expectation by third parties that they too should adopt similar commercial practices allowing, for example, greater interoperability.

The CMA will want to avoid the pitfalls of the early implementation efforts of the DMA in which there have been numerous challenges launched and various accusations of circumvention not long after its operation commenced. The CMA has repeatedly stressed that it will seek to implement the regime in a ‘targeted, evidence-based and proportionate’ way. However, that does not detract from the wide-ranging powers that the CMA has been given.

In addition, the DMCC gives CMA the choice of a wider range of tools – competition and consumer law as well as the digital regulatory powers – to use in the digital space when taking forward enforcement action. This inevitably will result in greater regulatory activity in the UK. However, the choice is not necessarily binary – it is likely that the CMA could potentially enforce a mix of its competition, consumer and digital regulatory powers at the same time.

The CMA is commencing its consultations on draft guidance on various aspects of implementation, including consumer law investigations, the SMS regime and merger thresholds. Interested parties also will have the chance to comment throughout the designation process, and the CMA has encouraged an open dialogue. This presents opportunities for businesses to engage in dialogue with the CMA on critical aspects of digital regulation.

Most substantive parts of the DMCC, including the SMS regime, will come into force once the UK government passes commencement regulations. This is expected to be autumn 2024, but it is unclear to what extent timings may be impacted by the outcome of the upcoming UK election. Publication of the CMA’s final guidance is anticipated to coincide with commencement.

If you would like assistance in assessing the impact of the DMCC on your business, please contact a member of the Cooley team below.

Cooley trainee Mo Swart also contributed to this alert.

Related insights

Related services, related contacts.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only, and your access or use of the content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you or your organization and Cooley LLP, Cooley (UK) LLP, or any other affiliated practice or entity (collectively referred to as “Cooley”). By accessing this content, you agree that the information provided does not constitute legal or other professional advice. This content is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction and you should not act or refrain from acting based on this content. This content may be changed without notice. It is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up to date, and it may not reflect the most current legal developments. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Do not send any confidential information to Cooley, as we do not have any duty to keep any information you provide to us confidential. This content may be considered Attorney Advertising and is subject to our legal notices .

Blog Farming

https://defrafarming.blog.gov.uk/2024/05/23/hedgerow-regulations-now-law/

Hedgerow regulations now law

In a post published last month, I said I’d let you know when Parliament passed the new hedgerow regulations. Today, I’m doing just that.  

The Management of Hedgerows (England) Regulations 2024 puts the baseline for hedgerow management practices into law, providing a consistent approach for their p rotection across the country.  

This includes:

• a 2-metre buffer strip, measured from the centre of a hedgerow, where a green cover must be established and maintained. Also, no cultivation or the application of pesticides or fertilisers should take place within this buffer strip
• a hedgerow cutting ban from 1 March to 31 August (inclusive). 

As I mentioned in my last post, these practices are subject to exceptions which you can find in the legislation. They broadly mirror the previous approach under cross compliance. This will make it straightforward for farmers and others who are familiar with the requirements.

You can find guidance on these rules and exemptions in the buffer strip guidance and the cutting and trimming guidance  on GOV.UK.  

Many farmers and land managers are already going much further than the rules contained in the new regulations.   

This is shown through the uptake of hedgerow management actions through our environmental land management schemes. O ver 20,000 agreements contribute to the management of over 60,000 miles of hedgerows in England.  

Th e new regulations support those participating in our schemes or receiving grants by providing a basis of good hedgerow management that all must follow.   

Further details on how to get involved in hedgerow management offer can be found on the Funding for farmers, growers and land managers page on GOV.UK and through our dedicated Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) site.

The regulations will be enforced by the Rural Payments Agency (RPA), in a fair and proportionate way and they have been talking to farmers and others about the best approaches. From day one, they will take an advice-led approach, with stronger actions in only the worst cases.  

The RPA will hold a public consultation on how to implement and enforce these protections in due course.

The regulations are designed to provide an extra level of reassurance that the same management approach is used across the country. 

Follow the Rural Payments Agency blog for the latest. 

You may also be interested in:

• Subscribing to the Farming blog

Tags: England , Hedgerow Regulation , Law , Protections

Sharing and comments

Share this page, leave a comment.

Cancel reply

By submitting a comment you understand it may be published on this public website. Please read our privacy notice to see how the GOV.UK blogging platform handles your information.

Related content and links

General election 2024.

Our usual schedule of engagement (attending and hosting events, publishing and responding to comments) will resume once the pre-election period ends.

Contact the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) about the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) or visit GOV.UK for the official scheme guidance.

This blog is managed by Defra’s Farming and Countryside Programme.

On this blog, we explain the reforms to agricultural policy in England.

We share what we’re working on, what we’re learning and how you can get involved.

Find out more

Funding for farmers, growers and land managers in England

GOV.UK is the place to find official guidance and information.

Funding for farmers, growers and land managers sets out every payment on offer with links to learn more.

Get free business advice

Basic Payment recipients in England can get free business advice from independent providers.

Find an adviser

The Sustainable Farming Incentive

Find out how SFI can work for you  

Webinars in 2024

Attend upcoming webinars and watch recordings.

BPS and delinked payments

Basic Payment Scheme ( BPS ) in England will be replaced with delinked payments in 2024.

Learn how they’re calculated and who’s eligible

Sign up and manage updates

Using this blog.

Comments, moderation and feedback

• Defra e-alert
• Future Farming podcast

UK enacts emergency ban on puberty blockers for all 'trans' minors

• by: Hayden Cunningham

The UK Department of Health and Social Care has enacted an emergency ban restricting transgender -identifying children from being prescribed and supplied puberty blockers. This legislation, which addresses a loophole that allowed access to these drugs through private clinics despite their ban for National Health Service (NHS) use, will take effect from June 3 to September 3.

The new law prohibits medical professionals from prescribing hormone suppressors during this period to children under 18 who identify as the opposite sex. 

"During this period, no new patients under 18 will be prescribed these medicines for the purposes of puberty suppression in those experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence under the care of these prescribers," the new regulation stated. However, patients who were already placed on these medicines by a UK prescriber can continue to access them. 

Although the ban is set for three months, many expect it to be extended by the next government, according to a report by the Times . 

This legislative change follows the NHS issuing clinical guidelines in March, which advised against providing puberty blockers to children due to insufficient evidence of their safety. The guidelines referenced the findings of the Dr. Cass Review into gender identity services.

The Cass Review , conducted for the NHS by Dr. Hilary Cass , concluded that the clinical practice of prescribing hormone treatments to minors was based on "shaky foundations" and was not proven to be safe or effective. The report offered alternative suggestions to improve services for children, stating that they must be viewed “as a whole person and not just through the lens of their gender identity.”

"For most young people, a medical pathway will not be the best way to manage their gender-related distress," Cass stated.

This emergency measure reflects growing concerns and caution across the world regarding the irreversible procedures and treatments of children who identify as transgender.

EXCLUSIVE: Juror in Trump trial smiled at Alvin Bragg when tape was played of Bragg saying he would send Trump to prison

Thoughtcrime: the trump verdict special, glenn jacobs and kenny cody: why libertarians should vote for trump, austin petersen: trump makes libertarians an offer they shouldn't refuse, hong kong police arrest 6 dissidents for 'seditious' social media posts under new ccp-backed security laws.

Watch the latest episode of THOUGHTCRIME here:...

As Trump said when referring to the bogus indictments against him at the LPNC, "If I wasn't a liberta...

Support Donald Trump, and cover yourselves in glory this year. Or trans the kids. And get your 1 perc...

Mike Lynch Downplays ‘Disaster’ Email at His US Fraud Trial (1)

By Rachel Graf

UK tech tycoon Mike Lynch downplayed the concerns of the finance chief at his software startup as he sought to defend himself against criminal charges that he duped Hewlett Packard Co. into buying the company for $11 billion 13 years ago.

On Wednesday in San Francisco federal court, Lynch was shown messages from prior to the sale between him and Sushovan Hussain , the former chief financial officer at Autonomy Corp. who was convicted of fraud in 2018 and sentenced to five years in prison. Hussain raised various issues about the business with Lynch in the emails from 2009 to ...

Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:

Learn about bloomberg law.

AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.

Already a subscriber?

Log in to keep reading or access research tools.