Law According To A King

An NDA, or non-disclosure agreement, is a contract in which parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. These are often not enshrined in a written contract, such as attorney-client privilege, or doctor-patient confidentiality, but more formal NDAs are commonly used in commercial settings and business relationships to bind two parties to silence on issues ranging from confidential documents to accusations of wrongdoing and resulting settlements. Very few argue that NDAs being used to protect competition or trade secrets is something to be stopped, but controversy arises when victims of wrongdoing and the wrongdoers themselves enter an agreement to prevent the wrongdoing from being exposed. Employees are often made to sign NDAs after their dismissal following unacceptable practices, discrimination, or harassment, and may be paid compensation in return. While NDAs cannot be enforced in the UK and other countries if the contracted activities are criminal, they may s

Following the July Court of Appeal's decision to allow Shamima Begum to appear in court to argue her case in person, Boris has railed against the judiciary, calling the decision to grant Begum legal aid "odd and perverse", and committing the government to review not just the legal aid policy, but the entire system of judicial review. This article will set out the case for protecting and expanding legal aid provision in Great Britain, and examine the effects of an absence of legal aid on the justice system as a whole.  The case of Shamima Begum It is likely that you will already be familiar with Ms Begum - the infamous ISIS fighter who left the UK aged 15 to fight alongside the terrorist organisation in Syria. Following her discovery in 2019 by a journalist, then-Home Secretary Sajid Javid revoked her citizenship. Begum had married a Dutch jihadist a week after arriving in Syria, with whom she had three children, none of whom survived infancy. According to reports in the T

Lady Hale, the first female President of the UK Supreme Court, has long been an advocate for increased diversity at the bench. A self-avowed feminist, it is unlikely that she would have taken a different viewpoint, but when one of the finest legal minds in the United Kingdom says something, it is important to listen.  There are different kinds of diversity, Lady Hale reminds us - from race and ethnicity, to gender, socio-economic class and legal specialism. A family lawyer, Hale took the lead on some of the most significant family law cases in modern legal history, from Stack v Dowden , which established that factors other than financial contributions can be taken into account when dividing a property, to R (Gentle and Or) v The Prime Minister & Ors , where although the applicant was ultimately unsuccessful in her attempt to open an independent inquiry into the Iraq War, the position of Lady Hale as a judicial force was cemented, crediting her family specialism with her unique empa

Social media is hard to categorise into being merely a public service or a private institution. It's immense strength and popularity rival that of the largest governments, and it is increasingly used by those governments as a platform for carrying out the country's business, particularly in the age of Trump and Twitter. However, they are still capitalist, profit-focused organisations, that write their own rules and control their own algorithms. Outside of public pressure, there is no requirement for them to act in the best interest of their users, or indeed democracy.  But this has opened up social media to a whole host of criticisms, as well as the wider world of 'big tech', culminating in plans proposed by former US presidential candidate and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren to break up social media companies, and an executive order by Donald Trump to ban the use of TikTok, a popular video-sharing app, in the US unless it is sold to an American company. Social m

First of all, I have never studied intellectual property law, particularly US intellectual property law, and so I have dealt with this from a broad perspective as if it was set in the UK. Anyway, here goes... If you haven't heard of the Taylor Swift drama with Scooter Braun - get up to date on pop culture. Swift signed a contract with Big Machine Records in 2004 at the age of 15 for, presumably, 6 records before the contract could be renewed. She left BMR after her sixth album, reputation, and signed with a new record company to release her seventh album, Lover. BMR retain ownership of her masters, and the company has since been sold to Scooter Braun, who isn't exactly Swift's friend, and Swift has publicly denounced Braun and his business ethics and behaviour, and tried to get her masters back. This issue has a few legal implications in contract and intellectual property, and these will be dealt with in turn. What are Taylor Swift's options? Contract Swift sign