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 Judicial Studies Board (JSB) has published new guidelines on whether the wearing of the full veil by Muslim women in court should be allowed.
The JSB’s Equal Treatment Advisory Committee (Etac) guidance effectively leaves the decision up to the discretion of the judge.
Mrs Justice Cox, chairman of Etac, said that at the heart of the guidance was the principle that each situation should be considered individually in order to find the best solution in each case.
“We respect the right for Muslim women to choose to wear the niqab as part of their religious beliefs, although the interests of justice remain paramount,” said Cox, J.
Muslim women who are called to jury service and wish to wear the veil, known as a niqab, could find their presence on the jury challenged by the prosecution or defendant’s lawyers.
The judge, if satisfied that there is a genuine basis for a challenge, can consider excusing her, on the proviso that she may serve on another jury where no challenge is made.
For the victims, complainants, witnesses and defendants, the JSB committee believes that in the interests of justice it should be possible for evidence to be given while wearing a veil or for the woman to agree to remove it while giving evidence.
Other measures are available to the court, such as screens, video-links, clearing the public gallery can also be considered by the judge.
In relation to advocates a judge will, once again, need to consider whether the niqab interferes with the interests of justice as the lawyer’s face cannot be seen or be heard clearly.