header-logo header-logo

26 November 2021
Issue: 7958 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Climate change litigation
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Climate refugees in search of legal protection

65084
Is the law in place and ready to protect people who are forcibly displaced by environmental disaster? Sharmista Michaels, barrister at 5 St Andrews Hill, investigates, in a fascinating article in this week’s NLJ

According to a report by the World Bank, climate change could force 216 million people to migrate by 2030. Michaels highlights that there is currently no definition for a climate change ‘refugee’ and no legal recognition for those fleeing climate-related disaster.

The 1951 Convention on Refugees uses a definition based on ‘persecution’. A new legal text may be required. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll