Larisa Astley (Student)

The Wills Act 1837 that governs wills in England and Wales is now more than 180 years old and has been branded “unclear and outdated”. Major improvements are being considered by The Law Commission consultation “to bring the law into the modern world”.

One of the controversial issues surrounding the debate is the need for a will to be in writing, with the emergence of and increasing reliance on digital technology this requirement signed into law almost two centuries ago may be the one of the first things to change.

A recent case caught worldwide attention in Australia, with the court allowing a will found in the unsent draft texts on the deceased’s mobile phone. Some jurisdictions give dispensing powers to courts, including Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and various states in the USA and Canada. There are positive signs that the laws around will-making will be modernised in some significant ways in UK too.

Another consideration is the need for a trusted advisor. In line with technological advances an increasing number of firms across the industry are taking advantage of sophisticated software to reduce costs and increase efficiencies. In fact figures show that around half of all UK law firms are already using artificial intelligence software in their businesses and another 40% of the legal service providers are planning to do the same, especially when generating and reviewing legal documents. Some firms are going a step further. With the latest technology it is now possible to make a will online without any human interaction whatsoever.

Looking more specifically, it could be argued that l so long as a will completes its four main functions (to name executors, trustees, guardians and beneficiaries) it is less important how it is generated. There has been some criticism signalling the public’s lack of trust in this new technology with clients anxious to ensure their documents are properly constructed and checked by suitable qualified humans.

Traditional will requirements would have made perfect sense in the Victorian era where the presence of a trusted adviser was important when it came to an individual’s legal affairs. However in a world where millions of people are already using virtual assistants like Siri or Alexa, and where once highly skilled jobs are now being performed by robots, robot wills could well be the answer to reducing costs and increasing accessibility.

Whilst SULAC cannot assist with the drafting of wills we can help with contentious probate matters. Please call 01782 294800 for an appointment.

Courtney James (Student)

The Government’s right to rent policy requires landlords in England to check the immigration status of prospective tenants.

In February, a British man and his family were made homeless after a letting agent turned them away under Right to Rent rules. Rory McCormick put a deposit down on a property in Suffolk and he, his wife Anna and their two children, were due to move in to the property. Days before their move back to the UK from Ireland, they were advised that Anna’s Irish residency card could not be accepted even though it showed she had a right to live in the UK. What she needed instead was a UK permanent residence card. Their denial of the rental property led to the family of four sleeping in one bedroom in a relative’s house.

A challenge has recently been brought by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCQI). They claim that the scheme causes “race discrimination against those who are perfectly entitled to rent”.

The High Court have ruled that the scheme is incompatible with human rights laws. Mr Justice Spencer said that the policy was unlawful because it caused landlords to discriminate against British citizens from minority ethnic backgrounds and against foreign nationals who have a legal right to rent. It was also reported that the government has failed to show that the scheme has had any effect on encouraging illegal immigrants to leave the country, the original aim of the scheme.

Staffordshire University Legal Advice Clinic can provide legal advice on housing matters, to book an appointment please call 01782 294800.

By Shannon-Annie Moore -Student

It has been reported that there has been a steady increase of elderly people in Japan committing crimes, as pensioner’s turn to crime with the aim of prosecution as a way of escaping loneliness and poverty.

The report suggests that Japanese pensioners are turning to crime with the hope of long stays in Japanese jails.

The BBC interviewed 69-year-old Toshio Takata who, explained that he had reached pension age and then ran out of money. As he was struggling, he turned to crime as he thought he could live for free in jail. His first crime was committed at 62 years old. He took a bicycle and walked all the way to the Police Station where he told the Police he had stolen the bike. In Japan petty theft is treated very seriously so they sentenced him to one-year in jail. After he was released, he threatened a woman with a knife. Toshio said he had no intention of harming anyone he just hoped they would contact the police so he would get arrested – which he did.

Obviously when in prison the prisoners get free accommodation. Their pension does not stop meaning it is easier for them to live once released. Once a law-abiding society, there is growing number of crimes being carried out in Japan by the over 65s. 21 years ago the age group accounted for 1/20 convictions. Today, the figure has grown to more than 1/5.

Traditionally, the older generation would be looked after by their children but with the economic opportunity, children are moving away leaving their parents to find work. The pensioners are torn between not wanting to burden their children, yet unable to live on the State pension.

The Japanese Government have expanded prison capacity, installing hand rails and special toilets and recruited extra female prison guards to support the number of elderly female criminals which is dramatically increasing. Pensioners are struggling across the world. Whilst crime is not the answer, neither is leaving these vulnerable people alone, without the ability to pay for rising living costs, fuel costs and food bills. Society has a responsibility to look after the older generation and crime should not be the answer. 

SULAC provides free legal advice to the most vulnerable in our society. Please call 01782 294800 for an appointment.

Danyaal Farooq- Student

A family in Stoke-On-Trent could possibly have their home demolished because the house is 75cm too high. To avoid this, Asif Naseem may have to pay around £200,000 to replace the roof of his new home in Lightwood. The Council issued an enforcement notice after local neighbours complained that there were dormer windows in the eaves and that the roof was too tall.  

Stoke-On-Trent City Council’s planning committee have given the owner a stay of execution of 3 months to permit discussions over the property’s future.

A breach of planning control is defined in section 171A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as the carrying out of development without the required planning permission or failing to comply with any condition or limitation of the planning order. If there is a breach enforcement action may be taken. Local planning authorities have responsibility for taking whatever enforcement action may be necessary in their administrative areas. It should be noted that local authorities have a range of enforcement powers that extend beyond planning, as do the police in certain instances.

Staffordshire University Legal Advice Clinic (SULAC) offers free legal advice to the general public. SULAC can assist with numerous problems including housing issues; eviction, property rights and homelessness. We currently have a few outreach locations; Dudson Centre, Sign Posts Stafford, Shrewsbury Hospital and HMP Stafford. Please call the SULAC office on 01782 294800 today to book your appointment.

Arieta Batirerega- Student

Since 2010, the Government has prioritised domestic abuse issues. The draft domestic abuse bill, published on the 21^st January 2019, is intended to support victims and their families. It comes as it is revealed domestic abuse issues cost the country £66 billion a year and approximately 2 million adults experienced domestic abuse in 2018.

To help tackle the crime, new legislation will:

• introduce the first ever statutory definition of domestic abuse to specifically include economic abuse and controlling and manipulative non-physical abuse. This will enable everyone, including victims themselves, to understand what constitutes abuse and will, hopefully, encourage more victims to come forward;
• seek to appoint a domestic abuse commissioner to drive the response to domestic abuse issues;
• introduce new domestic abuse protection notices and orders to protect victims and to attempt to rehabilitate offenders;
• prohibit the cross-examination of victims by their abusers in the family courts. As it stands, victims have had to come face-to-face with their ex-partners in some cases;
• provide automatic eligibility for special measures to support more victims to give evidence in the criminal courts

Justice Secretary David Gauke said: “Domestic abuse destroys lives and warrants some of the strongest measures at our disposal to deter offenders and protect victims.

By pursuing every option available, to better support victims and bring more offenders to justice, we are driving the change necessary to ensure families never have to endure the pain of domestic abuse in silence.”

Staffordshire University Legal Advice Clinic can help deal with family matters. Please call 01782 294800 to make an appointment.

Arieta Batirerega- Student

What is Forced Marriage?

Forced marriage is when you face physical pressure to marry (for example, threats, physical violence or sexual violence) or emotional and psychological pressure (e.g. if you’re made to feel like you’re bringing shame on your family if you refuse).

What  does the Law say?

The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 made it a criminal offence in England, Wales and Scotland to force someone to marry.

This includes:

• taking someone overseas to force them to marry (whether or not the forced marriage takes place);
• marrying someone who lacks the mental capacity to consent to the marriage (whether they’re pressured to or not).

Forcing someone to marry can result in a sentence of up to 7 years in prison.

The Current position

Since 2014, there have been four convictions relating to this across the UK. While legislation has seen a rise in people reporting concerns, many are unaware it is a crime and, therefore do not seek help. .

A government spokesman said its forced marriage campaign was “raising awareness amongst the public and potential victims”. The government is encouraging people affected by this to contact its helpline.

Here at Staffordshire University Legal Advice Clinic we can advise on family related issues. If we cannot help, we will be able to refer you to another organisation who may be able to assist. Please call 01782 294800 for an appointment.

Martha Elliott-Smith (Student)

The cost of cancer in the UK is now estimated to be £15.8 billion, a study by Oxford University suggests. The total apportions around £7.6 billion in economic costs and £2.6 billion for unpaid care, with one researcher commenting that; ‘time off work and unpaid care by friends and family account for 64% of all cancer costs’.

These figures highlight not only the impact on professional healthcare providers but the potential loss of earnings for patients and to those close to them who give up work in order to provide care.

New data released by Cancer Research UK now estimates that one in two people will develop cancer at some stage in their lifetime.

These figures can be highlighted locally in the September 2018 report published by Cancer Research UK on data collected from NHS North Staffordshire and NHS Stoke-on-Trent. This shows that there are around 1,300 cancer cases per year in the Staffordshire region.

Talking about your cancer diagnosis may be difficult, especially to your employer. Many people fear they will be dismissed if they ask for help and support during their treatment. 

What rights do I have as an employee?

Richard Pugh, head of services for Macmillan Cancer Support in Wales, said that with more people receiving a cancer diagnosis, ‘returning to work is not a luxury but a basic necessity’ for people.

Cancer patients may be protected by the Equality Act 2010. This means that employers must make reasonable adjustments to ensure that the employee is not at a disadvantage in their employment for a reason related to their disability (in this case their cancer). Reasonable adjustments could include allowing the employee time off work, which would allow them to attend hospital appointments for treatment. It could also include flexible working arrangements which would allow some employees to work from home. Much will depend upon the nature and size of the employer’s business.

Many terminally ill people find themselves in situations where access to justice has been greatly reduced due to the affordability of advice. Therefore, clinics like SULAC are essential.

Staffordshire University operates a legal Advice Clinic (SULAC) offering free legal advice to the public. At SULAC we can advise you on various matters, including employment, family and consumer protection.

SULAC does not provide advice on criminal or immigration matters or provide debt counselling.

We currently operate free clinics at the Dudson Centre on Mondays and Signpost Stafford on a Tuesday. We also offer a priority service to cancer patients via Macmillan Cancer Support.

If you would like any further information or would like to book an appointment, please call: 01782 294800.

Arieta Batirerega (Student)

A common law marriage is a term used where a couple live together for a period of time and holds themselves out to friends, family and the community as “being married” but without ever going through a formal ceremony or getting a marriage license.

Over the last few decades, family life and personal relationships in modern UK have changed considerably from same sex marriage to interracial marriage or young people sharing a flat. The fastest growing family are cohabiting couples with 3.3 million families in 2017. Cohabitants do not have any legal status and when relationships come to an end there are no automatic rights in most circumstances for either partner. For example, if one partner dies the other does not automatically inherit their estate.

According to a British Social Attitudes Survey, many people think that unmarried cohabiting couple have the same legal rights as a married couple. It suggests that households with children are more likely to have a misconception about their rights than those with no children. This misunderstanding can have a negative impact on the decisions people make about their lives. When relationships breakdown cohabitants can end up losing their home and income. This especially effects women who are often financially dependent on their partners.

However, there is now the option of entering into a civil partnership for those who wish to form a legal union without a traditional wedding. More awareness is needed on this subject

What is the Government doing to help cohabitant couples?

In Scotland, cohabitants who separate or in cases where a partner dies are given a set of limited rights. In England and Wales, there is little sign of progress by the Government, as there are no plans for the second reading of the cohabitation rights bill in the House of Lords.

As legislation plays an important role in addressing the problems that cohabitant couples face, it is equally important for the wider society and the public to work together in a combined effort to raise awareness about this issue.

SULAC can provide free legal advice on all family matters. Please call 01782 294800 for an appointment

Qadir Mohammed -Student

A vulnerable teenager had to be hospitalised after being housed in a tent by Cornwall Council.

The 17-year-old approached the council for help after his relationship with his family broke down and he moved to another town. The teenager had a history of drug use and also had mental health issues.

The council offered him a place to live 30 miles away from the area he knew which he refused. He spent time sleeping rough until eventually he was provided with a tent by the local authority.

The council ended up replacing the first tent with another after it started leaking. The 17-year-old told the BBC that “It was a pretty traumatic experience for me because I’ve always lived in a house somewhere. They should have done so much more. They should have put me somewhere with a roof over my head”.

Due to the council’s repeated failures, this boy became emaciated and he was eventually taken into a psychiatric hospital after he was sexually assaulted. The boy clearly had behavioural and mental health problems, but these made him all the more vulnerable.

The council should have carried out an investigation if they had “‘reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives, or is found, in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm”. The council should have assessed the needs of the child and the ability of those who currently cared for him. The parents should have also been interviewed by the council as well to get more information into the boy’s scenario. That clearly didn’t happen in this situation.

Staffordshire University’s Legal Advice Clinic can advise on family and housing matters. Please call 01782 294800 for an appointment.