This career decision would also have a key impact upon Margot鈥檚 personal life, as she would subsequently marry one of her colleagues, Rodney Brazier, in 1974. Together the Braziers have remained at the heart of Law at 黑料网吃瓜爆料 for over 50 years.

Margot began as a tort scholar and this expertise led her to become co-editor of two key textbooks in the field. Research in this area then led her into reading North American case law on medical malpractice, which began her interest in the link between the law and healthcare. She published widely in this field to international acclaim. In recent years, Margot explored the history of medicine and its links with law, the topic of her most recent book.

In the early 1980s Margot met John Harris, a philosopher, also working at 黑料网吃瓜爆料. They discovered shared interests and, together with other colleagues, decided to set up a Masters degree in . Margot also taught undergraduate students, inspiring many to continue their studies to postgraduate level.  She supervised many PhD students who have benefited from her knowledge, wisdom and guidance. 

In 1986 Margot and John also set up the (CSEP) which has become a leading research centre.

The current Co-Directors of CSEP (Sarah Devaney and Alex Mullock) reflect: 

Margot also used her expertise in public service. Not only an outstanding scholar who made a pioneering contribution to her field, she has also made an equally outstanding contribution as a public intellectual and leader in policy debate and law reform. Margot Chaired the Animal Procedures Committee (1993-98), led a review into surrogacy for UK Health Ministers (1996- 1998), Chaired the Retained Organs Commission (2001-2004) and Chaired a Working Party 鈥楾he Ethics of Prolonging Life in Foetuses and the Newborn鈥� for the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2004-2006).

Margot was an incredible mentor to so many students and academics and has been acknowledged as a 鈥榩aradigmatic female role model鈥�.  Her enormous contribution has been recognised in many awards including an OBE (1997), Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (1993), Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences (2007), Queen鈥檚 Council (honoris causa) (2008), Halsbury Legal Award for Academic Contribution (2013), University of 黑料网吃瓜爆料 Medal of Honour (2012) and Fellow of the British Academy (2014).

Alison Wilson, former Head of School Operations, and Sarah Tiffany-Dodman, Engagement and External Relations Manager, on behalf of all the Professional Services staff who knew and worked with Margot reflect: 

This event, part of the 'Miscarriages of Justice' module, provided students with a stark insight into the consequences of corporate negligence and prosecutorial misconduct.

Rochelle Rossi, a student who attended the lecture, found it profoundly impactful:

First-hand accounts of injustice

During the event, the speakers shared their deeply personal and distressing experiences. 

Janet Skinner, who was sentenced to nine months in prison for false accounting in 2006, spoke about the devastating impact on her life, 鈥淥nce inside, I was placed on suicide watch for a week because of my state of mind.鈥� After her release, stress triggered an autoimmune attack that left her paralysed from the neck down. Although she fought back and relearned how to walk, she remains permanently disabled.

Seema Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison in 2010 after being wrongly convicted of theft and false accounting. She was ordered to pay 拢40,000 in compensation to the Post Office. 

Tom Hedges faced a 拢23,000 shortfall in 2010 and was advised to plead guilty to false accounting to avoid a custodial sentence. He was sentenced to seven months imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, and had to pay the Post Office 拢1,000 in legal fees.

Common barriers to justice

Despite the differences in each story, common barriers emerged throughout. The concealment of crucial documents, the immense financial and reputational power of the Post Office, and the systemic failures that allowed such injustices to persist all played a role. 

Both Tom and Seema used their own money to cover the deficits created by the faulty Horizon system, and when faced with prosecution, they had to rely on Legal Aid to secure defence lawyers. 

The Post Office had a dedicated in-house legal team that remained focused on the cases. The high cost of legal support made it difficult for sub-postmasters to afford effective counsel, and the deliberate withholding of evidence proving their innocence further undermined their ability to mount a proper defence. 

Each sub-postmaster was made to believe theirs was the only case, further hiding the widespread nature of the Horizon IT issues. By isolating each defendant, the Post Office was able to hide the IT issues for longer and falsely prosecute more than 900 innocent people in total. 

Addressing systemic failures

A Q&A session following the testimonies allowed staff and students to pose questions to Janet, Seema, and Tom, who gave their candid thoughts. 

When asked whether they still had faith in the system, the speakers expressed confidence in their current legal teams but scepticism toward institutional accountability. The latest news of the Home Office granting Fujitsu over 拢25 million in new contracts was mentioned, highlighting concerns over government contracts. "They are awarding bad behaviour鈥攚hat incentive is there for change?" Seema Misra questioned. 

Despite being invited to numerous meetings with government officials, including Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer, trust in government to change things has not been restored with Janet Skinner remarking: 

Since starting the fight for compensation, the sub-postmasters have renewed trust in the legal profession, even understanding why they had been advised to enter guilty pleas initially. They implored the law students to make decisions in the future with ethics and people in mind, thinking of the bigger picture and the person behind a case. 

Lessons for our law students

Professor Claire McGourlay, Director of the 黑料网吃瓜爆料 Innocence Project, emphasised the significance of hearing directly from those affected: 

The event at 黑料网吃瓜爆料 provided law students with a profound learning experience, emphasising the importance of ethical decision-making and the need for systemic reform. The first-hand accounts of Janet Skinner, Seema Misra, and Tom Hedges highlighted the human cost of wrongful convictions and the urgent need for change in the legal and corporate systems. 

As future legal professionals, the students were reminded of their role in preventing such injustices and advocating for a fairer, more just society. 

with further details on the sub-postmasters experiences.

The article was a summary of presentations and discussions at the UKELA Air Quality Challenges: Governance and Good Health conference, held in 黑料网吃瓜爆料 on 7 March 2019.

“I am thrilled to have had the opportunity to be published in UKELA's e-newsletter and I feel I have gained a lot from working with Jessica Slater," said Bethan.

“The UKELA Air Quality Governance conference had an interesting mix of views on the subject matter and it was beneficial to me to see these debates occur in real time, exposing the nuances of an area of law I had not studied before.

"It is infinitely more engaging as a student to feel involved in real time legal debate, even if it is simply being present.”

Bethan is part of the first cohort of students taking our innovative new ‘Law in Practice’ course, rolled out for the first time this semester

This optional course is for students who have volunteered on a School approved pro-bono project. The course builds on students' training and experience in various legal processes, developing transferrable skills and preparing students for further study or employment. Students on the ‘Law in Practice’ course are required to conduct self-direct research, enabling them to explore and apply legal rules, doctrines and concepts in ‘the real world’.

“Law in Practice has allowed me to approach the law in a different way; not only thinking critically about the law itself but how it functions in wider society," added Bethan.

"It has also allowed me to dedicate time to voluntary work through the Legal Advice Centre and the 黑料网吃瓜爆料 Free Legal Help Clinic and spend time reflecting on my own personal growth throughout this work.

"The skills I have learnt have allowed me to consider the nuances of legal arguments with an appreciation of wider factors.”

Following her success, Bethan is now planning on attending the UKELA annual conference this Summer, to further her understanding and appreciation for environmental issues and to allow her to apply what she has learnt from the ‘Law in Practice’ to a real-world issue which affects us all.

was the principal investigator on a project established in 2016 to demystify corruption in the UK by asking what we know about bribery in the UK, why the response to bribery varies so significantly, and what can we learn from the Dutch systems that enforce anti-bribery legislation?

Understanding why responses to bribery at home and abroad seem to vary so much was the key to informing the debate surrounding corruption in the UK, therefore informing strategic and operational priorities in the context of the Bribery Act 2010.

Dr Lord highlighted the challenges in determining the level and type of offences under the Act, as there is currently no categorisation of these crimes in the Office for National Statistics’ recorded crime data. In addition, he noted the discontinuation of the Public Sector Corruption Index has also shrouded potential bribery figures in uncertainty.

Official figures indicate an average of 23 reported cases are handled under bribery legislation annually. Dr Lord stated that these figures have plateaued since 1964.

“Where once domestic bribery was addressed more rigorously than international bribery, this may be being steadily reversed, in terms of signalled priorities, resources and institutional responses,” Dr Lord remarked.

“Our research raises concerns that, when compared with the renewed focus on addressing transnational bribery through the Bribery Act 2010, the state response to domestic bribery within the UK lacks institutional focus, central collation of data, resources, and appropriate training.”

The report concluded that every police force should commit to ensuring it has at least one bribery specialist and that the government must ensure UK companies are equipped with the support of trained officials on issues of corruption if they export overseas.

Finally, the report suggests the Ministry of Justice considers adding clearer examples to its guidance for when corporate hospitality is legitimate and when it is not.

“Given the notable issues raised in our research in relation to the absence of centralised and consistent data on bribery or corruption offences in the UK, it is pleasing the see the report reinforces the need for a centralised reporting mechanism,” Dr Lord stated.

Organised by Amicus, a charity representing those facing the death penalty in the US, Peter Pringle and Sunny Jacobs presented their harrowing experiences to students on 6 March 2019.

Pringle was convicted of murdering two police officers in Ireland and was sentenced to be hanged, but days before his execution had his sentence commuted to 40 years without parole. Pringle used this time to study the law from prison, representing himself in the Court of Criminal Appeal and eventually leading to the incredible quashing of his conviction.

Jacobs was the first woman to be incarcerated on Death Row in Florida, convicted of murdering two police officers. Her conviction was overturned nearly 17 years after her arrest, but tragically the decision came too late for her husband who had also been wrongfully convicted of the murder and put to death. Their children had to be put into care as a result of their parents' imprisonment. 

Amicus’ work helps to prevent these terrible cases of miscarriages of justice from reoccurring by raising awareness of abuse of the use of the death penalty, which the charity believes is disproportionately imposed on society’s most vulnerable. The Death Row event was a great opportunity for students to hear the devastating impact of miscarriages of justice from the horse’s mouth and proved popular with those studying Criminology especially.

More information can be found at .

The meeting, which took place on 24 January 2019, awarded Advance HE Fellowships to colleagues across the University to mark its commitment to enhancing the student experience and delivering exceptional teaching and learning.

In the School of Law, Isil Aral was awarded a Fellowship, while Sarah Devaney and Catherine Stanton were each awarded Senior Fellowships, and Deborah Madden of the School of Arts, Languages and Cultures was awarded a Fellowship.

The LEAP is accredited by AdvanceHE to award Associate, Fellowship, Senior and Principal HEA Fellowships and is open to all staff who influence teaching and learning at an institutional, national and international level.

Since the programme was launched in 2016, colleagues across the University have been evidencing their teaching and learning excellence to line them up for formal national teaching awards.

“LEAP is a fantastic way for colleagues to reflect on the teaching and the support they provide for students and gain a nationally-recognised award,” said Prof Judy Williams, University Academic Lead for LEAP. “It has also enabled people to share best practice and make connections across the University.”

The LEAP programme runs twice per year and will be accepting applicants from a LEAP Information Session on 2 October 2019. To find out more, or to book a place on the session, please visit .

Former Chief Inspector of Prisons and now National Chair of the Independent Monitoring Boards, Dame Anne presented her unmatched expertise at the Whitworth Hall on February 6^th 2019, at the fifth annual Pankhurst Lecture founded by the School of Law to commemorate Suffragette Christabel Pankhurst.

Dr Emily Turner, Lecturer in Criminology, found the talk ‘inspirational’ and added that it touched on many if the topics her students are working on as part of their undergraduate degree.

“Dame Anne’s talk reminded us of the importance of teaching and researching these issues, especially trying to consider the impacts on the criminal justice services at a time following a reduction in resources and how prisons and police stations often reflect wider issues in the community such as drug use and mental health issues,” Dr Turner explained.

Criminology students had plenty to take away on the topic of police and policing, thanks to Dame Anne’s experience of working at the Independent Police Complaints Commission, in addition to her experiences of working with prisons, providing food for thought on the penal system, our systemic approaches to punishment in the UK, and imprisonment to rehabilitation.

"I found the Pankhurst lecture very inspirational and engaging,” commented Criminology student Nadia Kennar. “I felt it linked nicely to the ‘Understanding punishment’ module and the ‘Police and policing’ module as there was a lot of talk about the complaint system, which was very interesting. I know that the other students who attended felt the same.”

"I found it fascinating to hear her views on the current state of the prison service in this country” added Criminology student Georgia Scott. “She said that prison was often the ‘default setting’ in how we deal with offenders, and described the potentially harmful consequences of imprisoning people who have mental health or substance abuse problems, particularly women. “

To view a recording of the 2019 edition of the Pankhurst Lecture, click here.

Two of the University of 黑料网吃瓜爆料 School of Law’s leading Criminology academics have been handed the prestigious for their contributions to and the development of the field of criminology.

Awarded by the Editorial Board of the British Journal of Criminology Prof David Gadd and Dr Rose Broad were handed the prize for their journal article ‘Troubling recognitions in British responses to modern slavery’, which stemmed from their ESRC-funded research on ‘Perpetrators of modern slavery offences’.

Their pioneering research on modern slavery suggests that modern slavery and immigration law intermingle, as victims are commonly those who have travelled abroad to find work but have become caught up in exploitative relationships or arrangements that are hard to escape as non-citizens, preventing them from accessing workers’ rights or legal services.

Gadd and Broad's research has identified the complex dynamic that vilification of foreign traffickers has exacerbated a stereotype idealising victims as innocent, which has hindered the development of services for victims with complex needs, including those who are reliant on undocumented labour, crime, drugs or prostitution to survive. Indeed, it seems many of those accused of trafficking have been exploited themselves.

As a result of under-regulation in the labour market and tightening immigration law, migrant workers can be liable to turn to working illegally or criminal activity in order to evade poverty and Gadd and Broad argue that ‘biblical terms’ often used by policymakers should be put aside in favour of working to understand why traffickers have hardened into becoming exploiters. Indeed, they indicate that the use of language such as ‘evil’ and ‘vile’ as descriptors of traffickers those being exploited and their captors.

Working alongside Liz Perry, a solicitor at Kirklees Citizens’ Advice and Law Centre, they represented the parents of a 21-year-old man with a learning disability living in supported accommodation. The parents had grown concerned for their son’s safety, as his trusting and compulsive behavioural tendencies would put him in harm’s way, because while unsupervised, he would disregard online warnings and access pornographic, and in some cases, illegal content, and this online footprint put him into contact with known sex offenders.

The role of the court is to determine whether people are able to make decisions and, if not, to decide what is in their best interests. On the one hand, while more vulnerable individuals might be putting themselves in danger with untethered internet access, it was made clear that access to this technology is not only a right guaranteed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, but it plays a crucial role in social inclusion.

“Advances in cyber and digital technology continue to outrun society’s ability to monitor or control it, and, to an extent, the law’s ability to keep pace with its development,” said Mr Justice Cobb. “The internet is, or can be, a dangerous place; it has a dark side, where dehumanising and illegal material (including images, pseudo-images, videos, live-streaming and text) is all too readily accessible. Internet abuse can take many forms: bullying, harassment, child sexual abuse, sexual grooming, trafficking, trolling and the theft of personal identity among them. These activities thrive when they are left unchecked. Ironically, dating ‘apps’ and social media sites may feel safe to some because they pose no immediate threat of violence; however, it is well-recognised that the more insidious threats posed by sexual predators, and those who prey on the wider vulnerabilities of the young, the learning disabled, the needy and the incautious, are no less (indeed they are potentially more) harmful at least in part because of their pervasive nature.”

In a judgment which has far-reaching implications for both children and adults, the judge had to decide how to determine whether someone has the capacity to understand the consequences of their internet and social media usage.

Because of the 21-year-old in question’s difficulty with flexible adaptive reasoning, he lacked this understanding. As a result, restrictions could be used in his best interests under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to keep him safe.

It was decided that his iPad usage was to be supervised by carers and limited each day and his mobile contract was financially capped and had no internet access, and staff could check his mobile to support him if he received any unwanted text messages and to ensure he was not engaging in inappropriate communications. These restrictions will enable him to safely use the internet and social media, protecting him from online risks.

At a time when the risks of using the internet and social media are very much the centre of political attention, the judgment will go some way to enable people to safely use the internet. The Judge also highlighted that “while it is a crime to incite hatred because of religion or race, it is not presently a crime to incite hatred because of disability” adding that those pressing for change in legislation in this regard have “a compelling case”.

The School of Law is immensely proud of the students that worked on this case and would like to especially thank Liz Perry for supporting the parents in these proceedings.

Presented by the revered Dame Anne Owers, former Chief Inspector of Prisons and now National Chair of the Independent Monitoring Boards, the event hosted by the University of 黑料网吃瓜爆料 School of Law took place on February 6th within the auspices of the historic Whitworth Hall.

The School of Law founded the Pankhurst Lecture in 2015 to commemorate Suffragette Christabel Pankhurst’s achievements.

The Pankhurst Lecture is one of the major annual events in the School of Law and shows how far women have come since Christabel Pankhurst graduated with a First Class Law Degree, but was unable to practice as she was a woman.