Log in
Professor Adrian Keane's research relates to the law of criminal evidence, that body of law which regulates the means by which facts can be proved in criminal trials. His publications on the subject have effected change and benefited the awareness, capacity, performance and understanding of the subject on the part of:
(i) the judiciary in the UK and internationally, in reaching decisions at both first instance and at appellate level; and in giving directions to juries on evidential issues that are as clear and consistent as possible
(ii) legal practitioners
(iii) law academics and students (an impact that extends significantly beyond the submitting higher education institution)
(iv) legislators in the People's Republic of China.
The most significant impact stems from participation in a project in Beijing that led directly to a revised Criminal Procedure Law that has improved the quality of the administration of Chinese criminal justice. Specifically, it has rendered criminal trials fairer to the accused and reduced the potential for miscarriages of justice, especially in relation to offences carrying the death penalty.
This research has made a sustained and continuing impact on the development and application of the substantive criminal law, including mens rea and general defences, and especially in the areas of complicity and homicide, in terms of
i) development of the law by the appellate courts;
ii) application of the law by practitioners; and
iii) government policy as to the reform of the law of murder and complicity.
In 2010 the Ministry of Justice formally accepted recommendations by the Law Commission to introduce a new non-statutory rule of disclosure for trustee exemption clauses in England and Wales. Newcastle research had a direct impact upon the development of the law on trustee exemption clauses. In 2002 Dunn successfully tendered to undertake research on trustee exemption clauses in England and Wales on behalf of the Law Commission. Dunn's research was published by the Law Commission as a separate and distinct chapter of its consultation paper on trustee exemption clauses. The research (alongside consultation responses) influenced the Law Commission's recommendation that a non-statutory rule of disclosure be introduced into the law of England and Wales. This recommendation was accepted by the Government in 2010 and has been implemented by the trust industry.
Professor Enonchong's research has had a direct and significant effect on the development of the law relating to economic duress in Singapore and the Commonwealth. Prior to the relevant impact, the law relating to lawful act duress was in a state of flux. The High Court of Singapore relied directly and exclusively on Enonchong's research to extend the scope of duress in a completely novel way, so as to encompass a threat to do an act that is lawful. The beneficiaries of the impact are all those (such as courts, arbitral tribunals, lawyers and their clients) who rely on the law of Singapore, which is influential throughout the Commonwealth, particularly as currently there is no decision on the point in other Commonwealth jurisdictions.
Two particular examples of impact on legislative change and legal practice are described: impact on the parliamentary process and impact on mental health practice and procedure. The first example describes contribution to debate during the parliamentary process for the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill and contribution to the decision to reject rushed emergency legislation. The research team's response to the consultation by the Justice 2 Committee was widely referred to by organisational representatives and individuals in the debates. The second example focuses on the impact from a key text, which has been used by both sides and judges in Sheriff Court appeals. The impact here is in its verifiable effect on the practice of law in courts and in the making of legal determinations.
Influential work on insurance law by Professor Rob Merkin led directly to the repeal of the outmoded and increasingly unpopular Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930. With its predecessor criticised for its demands on time and costs, a new Act made it simpler, faster and cheaper for a third-party claimant to recover compensation from an insurer without instituting proceedings against the insured. Merkin not only drew policymakers' attention to the old Act's defects but provided a detailed basis on which to formulate its successor, which earned Royal Assent in 2010.
A research programme led by Boyle in Edinburgh (with Birnie (LSE) and Redgwell (UCL)) pioneered the discipline of international environmental law. That work, in turn, informed the infrastructure for international environmental law in practice. Through Boyle's work as legal counsel in several high-profile international cases (2010-11), his proposed subject-paradigm has been translated from theory to legal framework. Crucially, it has been endorsed and applied by both the International Law Commission and relevant international courts, including the International Court of Justice.
Much has been written about mental condition defences such as insanity and diminished responsibility together with the cognate doctrine of unfitness to plead. However, most of this work has been doctrinal rather than empirical. This case study has developed a sustained and continuing understanding of how certain mental condition defences operate in practice, primarily through empirical analysis. R.D. Mackay's empirical studies of both the insanity defence and unfitness to plead and his studies of diminished responsibility, provocation and infanticide have been used by and have influenced law reform bodies, legislators, policy development and legal analysis.
Research conducted by Durham University on the reconciliation of free speech with rights of privacy and reputation has significantly affected contemporary law and policy around the law of privacy, media injunctions and libel reform. Specifically, it has:
(1) resulted in a substantial contribution to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) Libel Working Group and hence to the Defamation Bill 2012 which followed (now the Defamation Act 2013);
(2) strongly influenced the report of Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights on the human rights aspects of that Bill;
(3) influenced a major parliamentary inquiry on privacy;
(4) helped change Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) guidelines on prosecuting the media for privacy-related offences including phone-hacking;
(5) been used in argument by an NGO intervening in two important cases before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Professor Alldridge's research rethinking the theoretical underpinnings of the law of bribery has had a direct influence on the recent reforms of the British law of bribery. With the coming into force of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the OECD's Paris Convention on the Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in 1999, the UK government was required to reform the law of bribery. A Bill was drawn up in 2003, based on a report from the Law Commission, which included a defence of consent (this allowed defendant employers to argue that they could not be prosecuted for bribing foreign customers, where the bribery had been effected by one of their employees and the defendant employer had consented to this). The Commission saw bribery not as anti-competitive behavior, but a crime against loyalty, a conception that turned upon the existence of prior duties (to act impartially, in good faith and to be in a position of trust). Through his membership of the Law Commission Bribery Advisory Group, Alldridge was able to show in 2008 that some of these duties could only be found in contracts. As such, they could also be altered by contract, and where this occurred, it would create a defence of the consent of the principal. As a result of Alldridge's research and related membership of the Advisory group, the 2009 Bill was amended, and the Act passed in 2010 did not allow such a defence. The UK now has a reformed law of bribery, which complies with the OECD convention and has been put on rational foundations.