Preparing for a moot can be stressful. The scenario you are given may include issues which you have no prior knowledge on. Don’t panic, instead break down the preparation process step by step.
There seems to be widespread opposition to the right to die from Parliament. This opinion seems to be rather consistent and entrenched as the BBC reported that 74% of MPs voted against the Assisted Dying Bill in 2015 in comparison to the 72% in 1997 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34208624).
Exam period is approaching so it’s worth stocking up on tips on how to get the best of your revision.
The Court of Justice of the European Union has recently ruled in Case C-354/13 Fag og Arbejde v Kommunernes Landsforening (‘Kaltoft’)  All ER EC 265 that obesity could potentially constitute a disability.
Mr Kaltoft was a childminder hired by the Danish public authorities. After 15 years he was dismissed on the grounds of an alleged decline in workload; but he was unable to ascertain the specific reasons for dismissal. It was agreed that his obesity was mentioned at the meeting, but the manner in which this was discussed was in dispute.
Judges have often been adamant in asserting that their judgments and decision-making are wholly independent from principles of morality. They emphasise that their role is merely to interpret the law made by the legislature, in spite of indications in case law that principles of morality are inherently factored in to the outcome of cases. This is a trend that is particularly noticeable in the area of intellectual property.
Lord Devlin in the Wolfenden Committee argued that the law should serve a normative function in excluding social changes that are yet to become dominant public norms as perceived by society at large. This therefore combines the two views that the law should adapt to our evolving society as well as incorporating the paternalistic role of the law in being a gatekeeper.
With any undergraduate education there is always a difference between theory and practice and the difficulties in transferring theoretical knowledge and adapting it to the real world. Legal education is therefore no exception.
The case of Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others  UKHL 22 is a major development in the area of causation in tort law. The House of Lords here decided that in a case where employees had contracted mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure throughout the course of their employment, but where science could not determine which of those employers was the sole cause of their disease, they could recover damages against each employer who exposed them to asbestos dust in breach of their duty of care. This decision modified the traditional ‘but for’ test for factual causation and suggested that as long as each employer’s wrongdoing had materially increased the risk of contracting mesothelioma, the claimants had proved, on a balance of probabilities, the necessary causal requirement.
Intern, Fojan Nourouzi, writes on her reaction to seeing JustisOne for the first time and what she thinks it could do for law students at university.
My first reaction to seeing JustisOne was ‘what a time-saver!”. Previously being a law student, I fully appreciate that time is of the essence and JustisOne makes it that much quicker to get specific results on the legal authorities you want.