The Law Show

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s Restoring Order and Control policy is underway. It's based - in part - on measures carried out in Denmark which cut asylum claims there to a 40 year low. From now on in the UK, people granted asylum - refugees - will face a review every two and a half years. If their country of origin is regarded as safe, they may be encouraged, or even forced, to go back. There are lots of other changes. If someone is refused asylum, they’ll only be allowed a single appeal. If an asylum seeker breaks the law, works illegally or can financially support themselves, they’ll lose their benefits or accommodation. Alongside the asylum reforms, there are also major changes to settlement in the UK, affecting both refugees and people on work and study visas. From now on, they will have to wait at least 10 years before they can obtain indefinite leave to remain, which means they can settle in the UK without restrictions. You may be forgiven for thinking -"these are pretty big changes, I don’t recall there being a big debate in parliament or any votes?" And you’d be correct. This was all done through secondary legislation, meaning that it’s a change to existing rules. But what are the possible legal battles for the government as it tries to introduce some of the toughest asylum laws in Europe? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Contributors: Dr Peter Walsh, Senior Researcher and lead on asylum at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Law at the University of Cambridge Baroness Levitt, Family Justice Minister

Under international law, when can a country declare war on another?Was it legal for Israel and the United States to have carried out "pre-emptive" airstrikes across most of Iran’s provinces, which started the war? The USA says the attacks were justfied, because of an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear programme, and Israel claims it acted in self-defence. The Israeli President went further - telling the BBC that focusing on the legality of the war instead of regional security is "mind-boggling" to him. And what of Iran's response? Was it reasonable under international law? In the last few weeks, practically all its Gulf-state neighbours have been targeted, as well as its drones or missiles landing in Syria, Cyprus, Turkey and Azerbajan. So does the Iranian retalliation justify the American and Israeli attacks under international law? And if any country breaks international laws - are there any real consequences? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Susan Breau, Professor of International law at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London Christian Henderson, Professor of International Law, University of Sussex Éamon Chawke, intellectual property, data protection and commercial law solicitor, Briffa Legal

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood says she makes “no apology” for announcing the roll-out of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) to all the police services in England and Wales. Under a government white paper on policing, the number of Live Facial Recognition vans will increase from 10 to 50. Police say it’s groundbreaking technology in the fight against crime, but civil liberties groups say it’s authoritarian and a step towards a "surveillance state".Facial recognition cameras are already used in shops; the difference with LFR is that the software used by police tracks faces against a watchlist - a specific database of faces - from a live video feed. But the legal framework regulating the use of the technology is a patchwork of common law, human rights legislation and police guidelines, which has been challenged in the High Court. There is also concern about a lack of oversight over how police watchlists are compiled, and why the number of people on the list now stretches into the thousands. So is LFR legal? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sonja Jessup, BBC London’s home affairs correspondent Professor Karen Yeung, Interdisciplinary Professorial Fellow in Law, Ethics and Informatics, Birmingham Law School Dr Asress Gikay, Senior Lecturer in AI, Disruptive Innovation and Law, Brunel, University of London Richard Ryan a barrister from Blakiston’s, specialising in drone and unmanned aviation law

The courts system in England and Wales is in an unprecedented crisis. The backlog has reached 80,000 cases, and some defendants are being told they won't be able to have a criminal trial until 2030. The government has introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which contains a raft of measures to tackle delays and bring down the backlog; but the Justice Secretary David Lammy has admitted that things are going to get even worse before they get better. The most controversial change is a plan to restrict the number of jury trials. The right to judgement by your peers has existed for more than 800 years, but for some offences, that's going to end. Defendants will lose the right to choose between a jury trial or a magistrate's hearing in so-called "either-way" offences. Magistrates will get increased sentencing powers - up from 12 months to 18 months. More serious criminal cases, with likely sentences of up to three years will now be heard by a single judge - and no jury. And only the most serious "indictable" offences, like murder, manslaughter and rape and any other offence with a sentence of longer than three years will be heard by a jury.But will the reforms make a difference? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sarah Sackman KC, courts and legal services minister Chris Kinch, KC, who until 2024 was a senior judge at Woolwich Crown Court in south London David Ford, national chair of the Magistrates Association

The former US ambassador Peter Mandelson is on bail after being arrested on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office. Police have been investigating claims that when he was Business secretary, he shared market-sensitive government information with the financier Jeffrey Epstein. His arrest comes a few days after police arrested Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, also on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office, when he was a trade envoy. He is suspected of sharing confidential government documents with Epstein. The arrests come after the release of a large number of files by the US Department of Justice. These relate to the activities of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a convicted sex offender. He died in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of the sex-trafficking of underage girls. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was friends with Epstein. So was Lord Mandelson. The BBC has approached Andrew Mountbatten Windsor for a response to these claims. He has always rejected any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein and denied any personal gain from his role as trade envoy. Lord Mandelson has not publicly commented in recent weeks on the Epstein files, but the BBC understands his position is he has not acted in any way criminally and that he was not motivated by financial gain.But what exactly is Misconduct in Public Office? It's a common law offence, with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but the Law Commission of England and Wales describes it as "ill-defined ". So how did it evolve, who does it apply to, how does it work in practice? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Senior Producer: Ravi Naik Producer: Charlotte RowlesContributors: Gareth Roberts, Barrister, Exchange chambers Kate Bex KC, Red Lion chambers Jeremy Horder, Professor of Criminal Law, the London School of Economics Dr Hayleigh Bosher, a Reader in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel, University of London.

Politically motivated attacks on the legal profession in the UK have led to barristers, solicitors, advocates and judges being subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. This is according to the The Bar Council of England and Wales, the Law Society of England and Wales, the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates, the Bar of Northern Ireland and the Law Society of Northern Ireland. These organisations represent a quarter of a million lawyers across the UK, and they have come together to warn about an increasing climate of hostility against legal professionals. They say that law firms have been targeted by protesters, and they point out that lawyers are not their clients. So how bad has the situation become, and is it threatening justice or even democracy?Also on the programme: The Scottish Parliament has passed the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill after 3 days of debates and almost 400 amendments lodged - so why is the bill so controversial? And using a dodgy "jailbroken-Firestick" to watch illegally-streamed TV may seem like a victimless crime - but is it? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Charlie Sherrard KC, criminal barrister with 2BR Chambers Mark Evans, President of the Law Society James Cook, BBC Scotland Editor Éamon Chawke, a solicitor who specialises in intellectual property law at Briffa legal

When the Labour government came to power in 2024, it faced a crisis in the criminal courts, with ever-longer delays and a growing backlog of cases. The Ministry of Justice's budget is now one third higher in real terms than in 2019, but according to the latest figures, crown court cases that are yet to be heard reached a record high of 78,329. In October, the Justice Secretary David Lammy promised extra funding to increase the number of days that English and Welsh courts will sit next year. But is throwing money at the problem enough? How can the courts service be improved, and should jury trials be limited to help clear the backlog?Also in the programme: Protests in support of the banned group Palestine Action could result in trials for as many as 2100 people - so how do courts deal with a sudden influx of cases? And are UK laws fair to football fans? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte RowlesContributors: Claire Waxman, Victims Commissioner designate, Riel Karmy-Jones KC, Chair of the Criminal Bar Association of England and Wales, Dr Steven Cammiss, Associate Professor in Law at the University of Birmingham, Professor Geoff Pearson, Professor of Law, University of Manchester.

Immigration has dominated headlines for months, but what UK laws cover this most emotive of issues? When someone arrives here, what are the legal routes they have to take if they want to stay in the UK? What's the legal difference between an asylum seeker and a refugee? What does "indefinite leave to remain" mean? And what's the difference between being deported, being removed and being extradited? How do immigration hearings work? Are our immigration laws fit for purpose, and do they enable us to remove people when required? Also on the programme: How will the government's digital ID plans help curb illegal immigration? and wigs in court; as the bar council updates dress advice for its members, we ask two barristers if wigs have had their day. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte RowlesContributors Madeleine Sumption, Director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Paul Gulbenkian, solicitor at OTS solicitors and former immigration Judge Morgan Wild, Chief Policy Adviser, Labour Together Jennifer Devans-Tamakloe, barrister at 23 Essex Street chambers Benet Brandreth KC, barrister at 11 South Square chambers

The phrase “State related deaths” might mean little to the average person, but it's an umbrella term referring to a death in custody or a mental health setting. It also applies to situations when people have taken their own lives while in the armed forces or even to disasters like Grenfell or Hillsborough. What all these have in common is that they are followed by inquests or public inquiries, where investigators or coroners try to work out what caused the deaths. Public inquiries are set up to draw conclusions and release their findings, and coroners are required to write a "Prevention of Future Deaths" report when there are lessons to be learned. Hundreds of these PFD reports are released in England and Wales each year - yet there is no system in place to ensure preventative changes are made. In Scotland, the equivalent is a Fatal Accident Inquiry. It's held by a procurator fiscal - and not a coroner - in front of a sheriff, and has a wider remit than an inquest. It too, can flag up systemic failures that led to a death, and precautions that should be made in future. So should the UK have a body that ensures these warnings are heeded?Also on the programme: The government has welcomed Law Commission reforms to Wills - which includes new protections against so-called "predatory marriages". And the Supreme Court case which could change the rules for all divorces in England and Wales. Presenter: Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Deborah Coles, Director of the charity Inquest Kate Stone, barrister at Garden Court North chambers Alexander Learmonth KC, barrister at New Square chambers Tracey Moloney, Moloney Family solicitors

The Victims and Courts Bill is progressing through Parliament, and will force convicted criminals to attend their sentencing hearings. If criminals convicted of the most serious offences in England or Wales refuse to attend, or are disruptive in court, they will face an extra two years in prison. There are other sanctions too, including missing out on family visits.‘Reasonable force’ can also be used to get criminals to attend. The families of three women killed in London - Sabina Nessa, Jan Mustafa and Zara Aleena - have been campaigning for a new law. In each case, the men who murdered their loved ones refused to come to their sentencing hearings. Their families are not alone; the mother of 9 year old Olivia Pratt-Korbel, who was fatally shot in August 2022, has also been calling for a change in the law. The man who murdered her daughter also refused to come to court to be sentenced. But will the changes improve the court system for the families of victims? Also on the programme: The first purely-AI legal service has been given the go ahead in England and Wales - what does it mean for the UK legal sector? And who gets the dog? Why all couples might want to consider a "pet-nup" in case they split up.Presenter: Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor Tara McDermott Contributors Charlie Sherrard KC, criminal justice barrister and judge Claire Waxman, Victim's Commissioner for London Dr Giulia Gentile, Department of Law, University of Essex and expert on AI and digital regulation Samantha Woodham, barrister and co-founder of The Divorce Surgery.

Wrongful convictions in the Post Office scandal and for train fare evasion have been described by the Government as ‘catastrophic failures’, and it's held a consultation in England and Wales to reform private prosecutions. It covers private prosecutions brought by organisations, and also, the SJP - the single justice procedure - where a minor criminal offence is decided by a magistrate behind closed doors. Tens of thousands of rail fines have been quashed, after train companies were found to have misused the SJP system. So how should private prosecutions be reformed? Also on the programme: how "No Further Action" and police cautions can leave a lasting mark on safeguarding and criminal records checks. (Note that in Scotland, the nearest equivalent to a police caution is a Procurator Fiscal warning which is usually issued for low level offences such as street drinking or breach of the peace).Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editors: Tara McDermott and Nick Holland Contributors: Dr Jonathan Rogers, part of the campaign group Criminal Justice Reform Now and Co-Deputy Director of the Cambridge Centre for Criminal Justice Tristan Kirk court correspondent at the London Evening Standard Nathalie Potter head of DBS at Olliers solicitors in Manchester

What legal responsibilities does a company have to keep your data secure?M&S, and the Co-op are picking up the pieces after their systems were hacked. The cyber criminals claim to have the private information of 20 million people who signed up to Co-op's membership scheme, but the firm have not confirmed that number. The Co-op says the breach did not include members’ passwords, bank or credit card details. However, experts say seemingly innocent information can be used to commit fraud or identity theft.Companies aren’t the only target; on Monday this week, the Ministry of Justice revealed that the Legal Aid Agency was also hacked in April. So can you sue if your private data is stolen in this way? And if you're the employee who clicked on a hacker's dodgy link in an email, how liable are you for any losses that occur?Also on the programme: How survivors of domestic violence in Scotland want to be told if their attackers make plea deals. Presenter: Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tara McDermottContributors Joe Tidy, BBC Cyber Correspondent Tim Capel, Legal Counsel for the Information Commissioner’s Office Ian Jeffrey, Chief Executive of the Law Society Brian McConnachie KC, a former crown prosecutor and now a senior advocate:

When someone passes away - legally, what do you have to do?In this episode, Dr Joelle Grogan and guests look at the host of legal obligations that have to be considered in England and Wales from declaring a death, to the circumstances in which a coroner becomes involved, dealing with a dead person’s estate and the grant of probate.Note that in Scotland, different laws and rules apply. The Procurator Fiscal investigates all sudden, suspicious, accidental, unexpected and unexplained deaths and any death occurring in circumstances that give rise to serious public concern. Also in Scotland, "Confirmation of Executors" - also known as Confirmation - gives someone the legal authority to manage and distribute a deceased person's estate. It is similar to probate, but some procedures and terms used in the process differ.Also on the programme:A teenage boy recently lost a High Court case against his parents. He was unhappy that they had placed him in a Ghanaian boarding school because they feared that he was becoming involved in criminal activity in London.The case rested on parental responsibility, and the judge ruled that their actions were within the scope of decisions that parents can make - and that the state shouldn't intervene.But what is "parental responsibility" and is there a situation where a child can divorce their parents?Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Rachel Roche, from Roche Legal in York Dr Imogen Jones, Associate Professor in Law at the University of Leeds Melinda Giles, Law Society Council member and part of their Wills & Equity Committee Tracey Moloney, from Moloney Family Solicitors

Justice delayed is justice denied - the court backlog in England and Wales has reached a record high and suspects being charged with new offences are regularly told they may not get a trial until 2027. Some courts are already booking court dates for 2028. The government has commissioned an independent review of criminal courts to work out how to cut waiting times. A victim of crime and a criminal defence solicitor tell Dr Joelle Grogan about the human cost of court delays. Also on the programme, the MP introducing a law to end the abuse of Lasting Powers of Attorney and what can someone do when their ex refuses to pay child maintenance?Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Louise Clarke Editor: Tara McDermott Contributors: Tracey Moloney, solicitor, Moloney Family Solicitors Stephen Davies, criminal defence solicitor at Edwards Duthie Shamash Solicitors Tom Franklin, CEO of the Magistrates Association Professor Carolyn Stephens, whose father was a victim of LPA abuse Fabian Hamilton, Labour MP for Leeds North East.

Since the October 7th attacks by Hamas on Israel, and the IDF military invasion of the Gaza strip, terms like 'war crimes', 'crimes against humanity' and 'genocide' have been used when discussing the conflict.Warrants have been issued by the International Criminal Court in the Hague for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defence minister Yoav Gallant, and a Hamas commander Mohammed Deif - who has since died in an air strike - citing allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.In this special episode of the Law Show, we'll ask what are the legal definitions of these terms, how victims in a conflict situation can seek justice, and we'll explain the difficulties of gathering evidence in war and proving claims in an international court. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producer: Louise Clarke Editor: Tara McDermott

Lucy Letby is serving 15 whole-life sentences after being convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others at the Countess of Chester hospital - with two attempts on one of her victims - between June 2015 and June 2016. But a campaign to clear her is being led by 14 medical experts who say there is no medical evidence for murders or attacks on those babies in her ward at the hospital. The expert witness at her trial, Dr Dewi Evans, has consistently defended the evidence he provided to the court. So what is an expert witness? When is their evidence required in court, what do they do, and who pays their fees? Also on this week's programme: Prince Harry wanted his day in court to face News Group Newspapers, but it never happened. Why did his case end so abruptly? And marry in haste repent at leisure - or not. The "legal queen" Tracey Moloney on annulment, divorce and why you can't choose between them. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Louise Clarke Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Retired Crown Court Judge Nigel Lithman KC Amel Alghrani Professor of Law at the University of Liverpool Aejaz Mussa, Barrister, One Law Chambers

A parliamentary inquiry has just started work into the law around Joint enterprise.Joint enterprise is contentious because if a person is seen to be involved in a crime, from knowing about it, to egging someone on, being present, or even being able to predict that someone is likely to use a weapon like a gun - then they could be considered as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger. It has a long history, but in recent times, it has been used as a way of prosecuting murder, especially in cases involving groups of people, when it's not known who carried out a killing. But is it being applied fairly? The CPS says “We choose the right charges for the right people based on the evidence in front of us. We look objectively at the evidence before making our own decisions.and they add that “The CPS carefully monitors joint enterprise prosecutions, with senior legal oversight over every case to ensure that our approach is fair and proportionate.”But campaigners say joint enterprise disproportionately results in working-class and black youths being prosecuted and convicted. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik, Arlene Gregorius and Bob Howard Editor Tara McDermottContributors: Alexander Hughes, Head Judicial Assistant at The Supreme Court "Cleeshay" who was convicted of murder under joint enterprise Jan Cunliffe, co-founder of Joint Enterprise Not Guilty by Association (JENGbA) Tracey Moloney, solicitor, Moloney family Law Dr Sam Fowles, a barrister and author David Duncan, solicitor and Director of the legal firm Duncan & McConnell in Dundee

The job of the Criminal Cases Review Commission - or CCRC - is to investigate cases where people may have been wrongfully convicted of a crime in the criminal courts of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The CCRC has faced criticism over it's actions - or lack of action - in a high-profile miscarriage of justice. In April this year, the CCRC offered an unreserved apology to Andrew Malkinson. He spent 17 years in prison following conviction for a rape in Salford that he didn’t commit. DNA testing which led to his conviction being quashed was not commissioned by the CCRC, and in July, an independent review found that he could have been freed five years after receiving a life sentence in 2003. After the report was published, the Justice Secretary called for the resignation of the chair of the CCRC, Helen Pitcher. However, she said she was still the “best person” for the job and that she had no intention of standing down. So how does the Criminal Cases Review Commission work? How does it make decisions about which cases should go back to the Court of Appeal, and which should be rejected?Also this week: - Are the laws around accessing social care for disabled children too complicated? - And if you’re selling your home - are you legally bound to mention problem neighbours? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Nathan Gower Editor: Tara McDermott Production Coordinator: Maria OgundeleContributors Dr Hannah Quirk, a Reader in Criminal Law at King’s College London, who also used to work at the CCRC. Professor Alison Young, Commissioner for Public and Welsh Law, the Law Commission. Catriona Moore, policy manager at IPSEA, a charity which helps parents with SEND legislation - Special Educational needs and disabilities. Tracey Moloney, from Moloney Family Law, also known as the Legal Queen on social media

Last year, more than a quarter of a million cases started in Family Court in England and Wales. Yet, to most people, the way they work is a mystery. Traditionally, they were always held in private, because they discuss sensitive information about peoples' personal lives, and to protect children from harm.Since 2009 reporters have been allowed to attend hearings. But they weren't allowed to tell anyone what was said without the permission of the court, and judges could exclude them.Now, a pilot has been operating in 19 areas across England and Wales to allow journalists and legal bloggers to report Family Court cases, subject to strict rules of anonymity. Last week, it was extended to cover both private and public family cases at magistrates courts in the pilot areas. But will it improve confidence and help people understand how the family courts work? This week, Dr Joelle Grogan is joined by BBC correspondent Sanchia Berg and Lucy Reed KC, chair of the charity, the Transparency Project, to explain how the family courts work, what people attending them can expect, and why the reporting pilot is vital.Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Arlene Gregorius Editor: Tara McDermott Production Coordinator: Maria OgundeleContributors: BBC Correspondent Sanchia Berg. Lucy Reed KC, family law barrister at St John's chambers, legal blogger, and chair of the Transparency Project. Samantha Woodham, family law barrister at 4PB chambers and co-founder of the Divorce Surgery

In this new series of the Law Show, Dr Joelle Grogan and guests look at the legislation that affects your life. One of the flagship pieces of legislation for the Labour Government is the Renters' Rights Bill - scrapping no-fault evictions, and imposing new obligations and penalties on rogue landlords. How will it benefit tenants and affect landlords? Also on the programme: a raft of new laws are coming into effect this autumn, but who decides when a law becomes active or is enforceable? And family law solicitor Tracey Moloney joins us to look at an aspect of divorce that fills many people with dread: the division of assets. Can your ex claim against property you brought into the marriage? Can they claim your pension? And how can the answers to those questions differ, dependent upon where you live in the UK? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Arlene Gregorius Editor: Tara McDermott Production Coordinator: Maria OgundeleContributors Dr Sam Fowles, author and barrister at Cornerstone Barristers Tracey Moloney, from Moloney Family Law, also known as the Legal Queen on social media Dr Christy Burzio, barrister at Tanfield Chambers Sarah Taylor, partner at Excello Law in Bristol