Weekly highlights

Weekly highlights

This subtopic is an archive of highlights from the Public Law team.

Public Law weekly highlights

Each week the team compiles a summary of key legal updates, including selected news updates and analysis on legal developments and expert commentary on:

•
case law
•
legislation
•
consultations
•
other updates including recent guidance, reports, journals, opinions and investigations

Details of new and updated materials are also included.

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Public Law News

DHSC opens consultation on tackling modern slavery in NHS procurement

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has launched a consultation on proposed regulations and guidance aimed at combating modern slavery in NHS procurement. The draft National Health Service (Procurement, Slavery and Human Trafficking) Regulations 2024 seek to ensure that NHS supply chains and business activities are free from ethical and labour standards abuses. The consultation invites views from public bodies, suppliers and the public on various aspects, including implementation strategies, impact assessment, risk management in procurement frameworks and support mechanisms for public bodies to fulfil these new duties. This initiative aligns with the government's stance that the NHS has a crucial role in addressing modern slavery through its procurement practices. The consultation closes 13 February 2025.

Public Law weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week's edition of Public Law weekly highlights includes coverage of the decisions in Hippolyte v Secretary of State for the Home Department, where Secretary of State unlawfully failed to consider discretion in the Windrush Scheme case, and R (Refinitiv Ltd) v HMRC, where the Court of Appeal upheld HMRC's diverted profits tax assessments. This edition further includes updates on Brexit highlights, Brexit SIs, Post-Brexit transition guidance, Constitutional and administrative law, Equality and human rights, Information law, Subsidy control and state aid and Public procurement.

UKSC publishes speech on why the Supreme Court matters to Northern Ireland

The UK Supreme Court (UKSC) has published a speech by Lord Reed of Allermuir, which was presented at Belfast on 13 November 2024 on ‘Why does the UK Supreme Court matter for Northern Ireland?’. The speech highlights nine important aspects of the Supreme Court with the aim of clarifying that Northern Ireland and the Northern Irish legal system are important to the Supreme Court, and that the Supreme Court is also important to them. These aspects include, visibility, independence of the judiciary, developments under the Human Rights Act, devolution, a UK-wide final court of appeal, the Supreme Court’s international role, transparency, accessibility and open justice, and diversity, inclusion and belonging. The speech further states that it does not mean that the Supreme Court is “activist” or is overreaching its powers. The legal principles which make up the UK constitution are laid down partly in legislation and partly in the common law. As the highest court has the final word on the interpretation of legislation and on the development of the common law, the Law Lords were always required to adjudicate on constitutional issues, and the Supreme Court has inherited that role.

Australian Government publishes consultation on ADM regulations for public sector

The Australian Government has launched a public consultation process to inform the development of new rules governing the use of automated decision-making (ADM) systems in government agencies. This initiative, running from 13 November 2024 to 15 January 2025, stems from recommendations made by the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme. The consultation aims to gather insights on potential regulations, including enhanced transparency requirements, mandatory risk assessments, regular system audits, human oversight provisions and expanded rights for individuals to challenge ADM outcomes. These measures seek to ensure ADM systems operate legally, fairly and in accordance with human rights principles whilst maintaining the benefits of efficiency and accuracy in government decision-making processes.