manu/mldr-zoomed-100char-total-queries-documents

chunk_id stringlengths 3 9	chunk stringlengths 1 100
11_32	In the Court of Appeal he was one of the first English judges to recognise the right of privacy as
11_33	an aspect of human autonomy and dignity, and was influential in developing the now well-established
11_34	principle of proportionality (which he described as a "metwand" for balancing competing rights) in
11_35	the fields of human rights and judicial review. His dissenting judgments in two appeals in 2008
11_36	concerning anti-terrorist measures were eventually to be vindicated on appeal to the House of Lords
11_37	and in the first appeal to be heard by the Supreme Court in 2009. His judgment in the Chagos
11_38	Islanders litigation developed the ambit of modern judicial review, and in a judgment in 2010 he
11_39	developed his view that the basis for judicial review is to control abuse of power. He also made a
11_40	number of judgments in the field of immigration and asylum law. Always interested in freedom of
11_41	speech his judgments also made important contributions to the modernisation of libel law. His
11_42	formulation of the real significance of freedom of expression in a case involving the unlawful
11_43	arrest of a street preacher has been much quoted: "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive
11_44	but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the
11_45	provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is
11_46	not worth having."
11_47	Sedley's Laws of Documents
11_48	He formulated what has come to be known as "Sedley's Laws of Documents" after experiencing the
11_49	tribulations of litigation:
11_50	Documents may be assembled in any order, provided it is not chronological, numerical or
11_51	alphabetical.
11_52	Documents shall in no circumstances be paginated continuously.
11_53	No two copies of any bundle shall have the same pagination.
11_54	Every document shall carry at least 3 numbers in different places.
11_55	Any important documents shall be omitted.
11_56	At least 10 per cent of the documents shall appear more than once in the bundle.
11_57	As many photocopies as practicable shall be illegible, truncated or cropped.
11_58	Significant passages shall be marked with a highlighter which goes black when photocopied.
11_59	(a) At least 80 per cent of the documents shall be irrelevant. (b) Counsel shall refer in Court to
11_60	no more than 5 per cent of the documents, but these may include as many irrelevant ones as counsel
11_61	or solicitor deems appropriate.
11_62	Only one side of any double-sided document shall be reproduced.
11_63	Transcriptions of manuscript documents and translations of foreign documents shall bear as little
11_64	relation as reasonably practicable to the original.
11_65	Documents shall be held together, in the absolute discretion of the solicitor assembling them, by:
11_66	a steel pin sharp enough to injure the reader; a staple too short to penetrate the full thickness
11_67	of the bundle; tape binding so stitched that the bundle cannot be fully opened; or a ring or
11_68	arch-binder, so damaged that the arcs do not meet.
11_69	Important articles
11_70	Sedley has provoked considerable debate about the role of government in collecting and keeping DNA
11_71	samples. At present criminal suspects detained by the police in the UK are automatically given
11_72	cheek swabs and their DNA kept, in perpetuity, by the government. This has created the situation
11_73	where different races are differently represented in the United Kingdom National DNA Database. On
11_74	the grounds that this situation is indefensible, Lord Justice Sedley discussed the case for a
11_75	blanket DNA collection policy, including collecting samples from all visitors to the UK.
11_76	Ian McEwan said of Ashes and Sparks: Essays on Law and Justice (Cambridge University Press, 2011)
11_77	"you could have no interest in the law and read his book for pure intellectual delight, for the
11_78	exquisite, finely balanced prose, the prickly humor, the knack of artful quotation and an
11_79	astonishing historical grasp".
11_80	In February 2012, the London Review of Books published an essay by Sedley in which he criticized
11_81	soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice Jonathan Sumption's FA Mann lecture. In this lecture, Sumption had
11_82	argued that the judiciary had overstepped the boundary between its legitimate judicial function and
11_83	illegitimate political decision making in the context of the remedy of judicial review. The
11_84	critique centred on Sedley's conceptions of the precise interplay of the judicial, legislative, and
11_85	executive branches, and made reference to the grey areas within which Parliament had not expressed
11_86	any set opinion.
11_87	Notable appointments and offices Member, International Commission on Mercenaries, 1976
11_88	Visiting professorial Fellow, Warwick University, 1981
11_89	President, National Reference Tribunals for the Coalmining Industry, 1983–88
11_90	Osgoode Hall, visiting fellow 1985 A director, Public Law Project, 1989–93
11_91	Distinguished Visitor, Hong Kong University, 1992
11_92	Chair, Bar Council sex discrimination committee, 1992–95
11_93	Vice-President, Administrative Law bar Association, 1992–
11_94	Hon. Fellow, Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, 1997–
11_95	Laskin Visiting Professor, Osgoode Hall law school, Canada, 1997
11_96	Visiting fellow, Victoria University, NZ, 1998
11_97	President, British Institute of Human Rights, 2000–
11_98	Chair, British Council Committee on Governance, 2002–05
11_99	President, Constitutional Law Association, 2006–
11_100	Visiting Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, 2012– Patron, Humanists UK
11_101	Trustee, Rationalist Association, 2012–
11_102	Published works
11_103	Cases Counsel
11_104	Miles v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council [1987] UKHL 15, representing employee, lost
11_105	Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority [1992] QB 333, representing employee, won
11_106	Judicial opinions
11_107	Ex parte Hamble (Offshore) Fisheries Ltd [1995] 2 All ER 714
11_108	Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 733
11_109	In Plus Group Ltd v Pyke [2002] EWCA Civ 370
11_110	Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospital NHS [2002] EWCA Civ 1041, dissenting
11_111	Collins v Royal National Theatre Board Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 144, failure to make reasonable
11_112	adjustments
11_113	Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 217, employee through agency had rights
11_114	Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College (2004) C-256/01, reference to CJEU
11_115	Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee [2004] UKHL 44, dissenting in Court of Appeal, upheld by UKHL
11_116	O'Hanlon v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2007] EWCA Civ 283
11_117	English v Sanderson Blinds Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1421, harassment
11_118	BA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State [2009] 2 WLR 1370 (upheld by UKSC)
11_119	Eweida v British Airways plc [2010] EWCA Civ 80, overturned by ECHR
11_120	Buckland v Bournemouth University [2010] EWCA Civ 121, constructive dismissal of professor
11_121	Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41, upheld by UKSC
11_122	Concurrences Bairstow v Queens Moat Houses plc [2001] EWCA Civ 712 (concurring)
11_123	Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd v Akindele [2000] EWCA Civ 502, concurring
11_124	Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883 (concurring)
11_125	See also UK labour law References
11_126	External links The Guardian BBC Online The Daily Telegraph The Register
11_127	1939 births Living people English judges English atheists English humanists
11_128	English people of Jewish descent Lords Justices of Appeal Knights Bachelor
11_129	Queen's Bench Division judges Alumni of Queens' College, Cambridge
11_130	Members of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom
12_0	Didier Ruef (born 1961) is a Swiss documentary photographer best known for his portrayal of man and

11_32

In the Court of Appeal he was one of the first English judges to recognise the right of privacy as

11_33

an aspect of human autonomy and dignity, and was influential in developing the now well-established

11_34

principle of proportionality (which he described as a "metwand" for balancing competing rights) in

11_35

the fields of human rights and judicial review. His dissenting judgments in two appeals in 2008

11_36

concerning anti-terrorist measures were eventually to be vindicated on appeal to the House of Lords

11_37

and in the first appeal to be heard by the Supreme Court in 2009. His judgment in the Chagos

11_38

Islanders litigation developed the ambit of modern judicial review, and in a judgment in 2010 he

11_39

developed his view that the basis for judicial review is to control abuse of power. He also made a

11_40

number of judgments in the field of immigration and asylum law. Always interested in freedom of

11_41

speech his judgments also made important contributions to the modernisation of libel law. His

11_42

formulation of the real significance of freedom of expression in a case involving the unlawful

11_43

arrest of a street preacher has been much quoted: "Free speech includes not only the inoffensive

11_44

but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the

11_45

provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is

11_46

not worth having."

11_47

Sedley's Laws of Documents

11_48

He formulated what has come to be known as "Sedley's Laws of Documents" after experiencing the

11_49

tribulations of litigation:

11_50

Documents may be assembled in any order, provided it is not chronological, numerical or

11_51

alphabetical.

11_52

Documents shall in no circumstances be paginated continuously.

11_53

No two copies of any bundle shall have the same pagination.

11_54

Every document shall carry at least 3 numbers in different places.

11_55

Any important documents shall be omitted.

11_56

At least 10 per cent of the documents shall appear more than once in the bundle.

11_57

As many photocopies as practicable shall be illegible, truncated or cropped.

11_58

Significant passages shall be marked with a highlighter which goes black when photocopied.

11_59

(a) At least 80 per cent of the documents shall be irrelevant. (b) Counsel shall refer in Court to

11_60

no more than 5 per cent of the documents, but these may include as many irrelevant ones as counsel

11_61

or solicitor deems appropriate.

11_62

Only one side of any double-sided document shall be reproduced.

11_63

Transcriptions of manuscript documents and translations of foreign documents shall bear as little

11_64

relation as reasonably practicable to the original.

11_65

Documents shall be held together, in the absolute discretion of the solicitor assembling them, by:

11_66

a steel pin sharp enough to injure the reader; a staple too short to penetrate the full thickness

11_67

of the bundle; tape binding so stitched that the bundle cannot be fully opened; or a ring or

11_68

arch-binder, so damaged that the arcs do not meet.

11_69

Important articles

11_70

Sedley has provoked considerable debate about the role of government in collecting and keeping DNA

11_71

samples. At present criminal suspects detained by the police in the UK are automatically given

11_72

cheek swabs and their DNA kept, in perpetuity, by the government. This has created the situation

11_73

where different races are differently represented in the United Kingdom National DNA Database. On

11_74

the grounds that this situation is indefensible, Lord Justice Sedley discussed the case for a

11_75

blanket DNA collection policy, including collecting samples from all visitors to the UK.

11_76

Ian McEwan said of Ashes and Sparks: Essays on Law and Justice (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

11_77

"you could have no interest in the law and read his book for pure intellectual delight, for the

11_78

exquisite, finely balanced prose, the prickly humor, the knack of artful quotation and an

11_79

astonishing historical grasp".

11_80

In February 2012, the London Review of Books published an essay by Sedley in which he criticized

11_81

soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice Jonathan Sumption's FA Mann lecture. In this lecture, Sumption had

11_82

argued that the judiciary had overstepped the boundary between its legitimate judicial function and

11_83

illegitimate political decision making in the context of the remedy of judicial review. The

11_84

critique centred on Sedley's conceptions of the precise interplay of the judicial, legislative, and

11_85

executive branches, and made reference to the grey areas within which Parliament had not expressed

11_86

any set opinion.

11_87

Notable appointments and offices Member, International Commission on Mercenaries, 1976

11_88

Visiting professorial Fellow, Warwick University, 1981

11_89

President, National Reference Tribunals for the Coalmining Industry, 1983–88

11_90

Osgoode Hall, visiting fellow 1985 A director, Public Law Project, 1989–93

11_91

Distinguished Visitor, Hong Kong University, 1992

11_92

Chair, Bar Council sex discrimination committee, 1992–95

11_93

Vice-President, Administrative Law bar Association, 1992–

11_94

Hon. Fellow, Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, 1997–

11_95

Laskin Visiting Professor, Osgoode Hall law school, Canada, 1997

11_96

Visiting fellow, Victoria University, NZ, 1998

11_97

President, British Institute of Human Rights, 2000–

11_98

Chair, British Council Committee on Governance, 2002–05

11_99

President, Constitutional Law Association, 2006–

11_100

Visiting Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, 2012– Patron, Humanists UK

11_101

Trustee, Rationalist Association, 2012–

11_102

Published works

11_103

Cases Counsel

11_104

Miles v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council [1987] UKHL 15, representing employee, lost

11_105

Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority [1992] QB 333, representing employee, won

11_106

Judicial opinions

11_107

Ex parte Hamble (Offshore) Fisheries Ltd [1995] 2 All ER 714

11_108

Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 733

11_109

In Plus Group Ltd v Pyke [2002] EWCA Civ 370

11_110

Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospital NHS [2002] EWCA Civ 1041, dissenting

11_111

Collins v Royal National Theatre Board Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 144, failure to make reasonable

11_112

adjustments

11_113

Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 217, employee through agency had rights

11_114

Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College (2004) C-256/01, reference to CJEU

11_115

Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee [2004] UKHL 44, dissenting in Court of Appeal, upheld by UKHL

11_116

O'Hanlon v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2007] EWCA Civ 283

11_117

English v Sanderson Blinds Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1421, harassment

11_118

BA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State [2009] 2 WLR 1370 (upheld by UKSC)

11_119

Eweida v British Airways plc [2010] EWCA Civ 80, overturned by ECHR

11_120

Buckland v Bournemouth University [2010] EWCA Civ 121, constructive dismissal of professor

11_121

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41, upheld by UKSC

11_122

Concurrences Bairstow v Queens Moat Houses plc [2001] EWCA Civ 712 (concurring)

11_123

Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd v Akindele [2000] EWCA Civ 502, concurring

11_124

Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883 (concurring)

11_125