Mike Dailly, principal solicitor at the Govan Law Centre, is travelling to Cameroon next week to provide legal assistance to a human rights project.
He will work as a legal adviser in Cameroon alongside an African Human Rights Commissioner.
Mr Dailly, who has recently expanded the Law Centre project to include the Govanhill area, has an extensive track record in assisting in social welfare reform and expanding the rights of disadvantaged individuals under the law.
Good luck and God speed, Mike!
News of an impressive brace of court victories in placing request cases for the Govan Law Centre was reported far and wide today. Thank you – you’re very kind.
Court case throws key policy on class sizes into chaos (The Herald)
Why class sizes are the new West Lothian Question (The Herald)
We felt it was unfair because we couldn’t get into the school (The Herald)
Landmark case “could jeopardise class size plans” (ATL – the education union)
Mother wins case to send child to school of choice (Scottish Legal)
Court action casts doubt on class size policy (The Journal Online)
So, three cheers for the Education Law Unit!
No, it’s not the Olympics. Scotland is celebrating another golden prize, as news reaches us from the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) that the People’s Republic of China has agreed to register “Scotch Whisky” as a trademark.
Following an SWA application, the Chinese Trade Mark Office under Administration of Industry & Commerce (AIC) has agreed to protect “Scotch Whisky” as a Geographical Indication (GI) by registering it as a “collective trade mark”. As a result, there will be nationwide official protection of
the description “Scotch Whisky” and its Chinese translation.
It is the highest level protection granted by the Chinese government to a foreign spirit drink as a Geographical Indication (GI) in China.
Scottish distillers will now be able to take more effective legal action in the Chinese courts to ensure that only whisky made in Scotland is sold as “Scotch
Whisky”.
The SWA reports that the equivalent of 17 million bottles of Scotch Whisky were shipped to China in 2007. Yet in 2006 alone, the SWA and Chinese authorities jointly investigated around 50 suspect products, with stocks subsequently seized and destroyed.
In related news, the Social Travellers Site is reporting that “In Scotland, it will be legal for adults to buy drinks for minors in 2009.”. Good news for minors with a taste for Scotch Whisky, but are we sure that this is correct? Anyone know any different?
I learn, from no lesser source than the online Belfast Telegraph that the European Court of Justice has decided in principle that the French government has a right to ban the energy drink Red Bull.
The article states that a study by the French Scientific Committee on Human Nutrition concluded Red Bull contained excessive caffeine. It also raised concerns about taurine and glucuronolactone.
It continues: “The European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Food conducted a study last year, and found that while caffeine levels in energy drinks were safe, more studies were needed to assess the dangers of taurine and glucuronolactone. While other toxicology experts had concluded that the caffeine levels in Red Bull are safe, France had a right to ban the drink on the advice of its own experts, the court said.”
“The fizzy drink has been linked to several deaths and some experts have criticised its high levels of caffeine and other stimulants.”
The advertising claim that Red Bull “gives you wings” was presumably not intended to refer to angelic wings.
Indian blawg legal cell (tagline: THIS BLOG IS FOR ALL THE LAW STUDENTS, LAW TEACHER, ADVOCATES AND LEGAL ADVISORS.) has collected an almost useful list of Constitutions of the World.
As well as apparently confusing the constitution of Great Britain for that of Eritrea (easy mistake to make), Ravi (the site’s author) is getting a little ahead of himself. Under the heading “the Constitution of Scotland” is a link to the Wikipedia page for the SNP’s Policy Paper “A Constitution for a Free Scotland” dated September 2002. Perhaps Ravi knows something the rest of us don’t?
PS. aside from these minor quibbles, it’s actually quite a useful wee list of links.
Patrick Layden QC will be appointed as Commissioner to the Scottish Law Commission, with effect from September 1, 2008. Mr Layden replaces Professor Gerry Maher, whose appointment ends on August 31, 2008.
Also, we hear news from Milne Media that one Doreen Graham of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, is to be appointed as Head of Communications with the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.
Perhaps her press releases will be drafted with a view to preventing cruelty to “legal eagles”?
Graham Spiers, writing for the Times Online, reports that Rangers Football Club may soon settle an employment law dispute with 20 former employees over redundancy packages. The case will be heard by an employment tribunal in September, and concerns the agreement that Rangers entered into in March 2006 with JJB Sports over Rangers replica strips and other merchandising, resulting in nearly 200 club employees losing their jobs.
The deal meant the closure of 18 Rangers shops and the redundancy of almost 200 employees. The case appears to turn on how much information Rangers shared with their employees – under employment law, employers are required to consult timeously with their staff about collective redundancies.
One of the staff affected described the redundancy deal offered at the time as “derisory”. The anonymous former employee is further quoted as saying:
“It was totally insulting, what happened to us. I’m a huge Rangers fan, I’d worked for the club for many years, and I was astounded by the way the JJB deal was handled by the club. Like others, I felt angry at the way Rangers treated those of us who had helped to make their retail arm such a success.”
The 20 former Rangers employees who are suing the club are represented by the GMB in Scotland.
Some interesting thoughts on a Scottish independence referendum in this post on the Little Man in a Toque blog. Describing Scotland’s membership of the United Kingdom as “conditional” rather than “integral and perpetual”, the question is posed: how many referendums (referenda?) would be required to effect independence?
Would there be a requirement for one to begin negotiations (a side issue: with whom would Scotland be negotiating, the United Kingdom? England? England, Wales & Northern Ireland?) and another on the concluded terms of those negotiations?
For what it’s worth, it seems to me that there would need to be a second plebiscite, otherwise the first would be the constitutional equivalent of signing a blank cheque.
I’m off to Aberdeen all next week, so there probably won’t be much in the way of updates here, ’til the weekend at least.
Wish me luck …
Kenneth Williamson, the owner of a neighbour nuisance cockerel, was back in Court on Friday. He admitted failing to comply with a court order, issued in November 2007, to prevent it crowing early in the morning.
The five-year-old bird, known as “Charlie” was to have been kept in a lightproof shed, but Mr. Williamson had failed to construct the new dwellings on the correct site. In so doing, he breached the breached the Civic Government (Scotland) Act. Scottish Borders Council had previously applied to Selkirk Sheriff Court for an anti-social behaviour order on the bird, but the current action was raised by neighbours.
Mr Williamson is due to be sentenced on 4th September 2008, but is unlikely to be given a custodial sentence, thereby making him a jailbird!
Absolvitor: Scots Law Online 