The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
The Justices' Clerks' Society has hit out at Government proposals to introduce minimum and mandatory sentences, saying they may lead to a regression to a more primitive system of law.
The society said it had "grave misgivings over the use of minimum sentences, both in principle and in practice".
The Penal Affairs Consortium agreed, and said that the proposals were "the worst assault on the principles of justice this century".
Chairman Paul Cavadino said: "The Crime Bill is a desperate bid for electoral popularity at any costs, even though this means sacrificing the fundamental principles of justice."
Both organisations believe that mandatory sentences will lead to fewer guilty pleas and more plea-bargaining, leading to guilty pleas for less serious offences.
The Crime (Sentences) Bill, published last Friday, aims to introduce mandatory life sentences for twice-convicted sex or violent offenders and minimum sentences for third convictions of domestic burglary and serious drug dealing.
Home Secretary Michael Howard intends the Bill to be made law by Easter but it is unlikely to have an easy passage through the Lords.
Speaking on the Today programme last Friday, Lord Donaldson, former Master of the Rolls, said he had grave reservations about mandatory sentences, which he said could lead to gross injustice.