app_store_button

google_play_button

DK - Details page - Device banner - 894x1036

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst 

BBC Radio 4


Weekly conversation that will give you an in-depth understanding of the law stories making news and the legal decisions that could have a bearing on everyone in the UK. Whether it's unpicking a landmark legal ruling, explaining how laws are made or seeking clarity for you on a legal issue, The Law Show will be your guide.


Law in Action

So-called blitz courts are being expanded across England and Wales. 

A number of courts across the two countries have been holding regular blitz hearings since April. Multiple cases are heard every day instead of just one, and are grouped by type. A set of plea hearings might be scheduled together in one blitz court, and sentencing hearings at another. 

Blitz courts increase efficiency by making sure that all the parties concerned are ready and prepared for their day in court. 

They are not a new idea. Rapid hearings are sometimes used to speed up justice in exceptional circumstances, such as after the 2011 summer riots in England, which saw large numbers of public disorder hearings.

It's part of plans by the Ministry of Justice to try to cut court delays and backlogs in England and Wales, which have reached record levels. 

But will they help ease the crisis in the criminal courts? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan
Producers: Ravi Naik and Ivana Davidovic 
Editor: Damon Rose

Contributors 
BBC news correspondent Adina Campbell
Riel Karmy-Jones, Chair of the Criminal Bar Association 
Joanne Edwards, a solicitor from Forsters who's on the National Committee of Resolution, the Family Lawyers Association.

What are Blitz courts?

The Representation of the People Bill 2026 is in the King’s Speech which means it’s on the Government’s legislative agenda and is going through Parliament. 

The Bill covers parliamentary ballots cross the UK, and contains sweeping changes, including giving 16 and 17 year-olds the right to vote in a general election and referendums.

The Bill also aims to strengthen the rules around political donations. Giving money to a political party is completely legal, if you are on the UK electoral register, are a UK registered company or UK-registered organisation, but is there a limit on the size of your contribution? Can you be an anonymous donor or pay in cryptocurrency? How are the laws about political party funding being tightened up? 

And what about individual MPs? Are they allowed to receive personal donations, and do they have to declare them?

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Ivana Davidovic
Editor: Damon Rose

Contributors:
Dr Sam Power, Lecturer at Bristol University, and an expert in political financing, electoral regulation and corruption.
Hannah Perry, Interim Director of Demos Digital, a cross-party pro-democracy think tank
Joanne Wheeler, Managing Partner at Alden legal, and a leading international expert in the field of satellite and space law.

Political donations and the law

Note: this episode contains frequent references to rape, sexual assault and physical assault. 

There's been public confusion and outrage over the sentences given to three teenage boys, who were convicted of rape. 

In November 2024 and January 2025, two girls, then aged 15 and 14, were attacked in separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, by two 14-year-olds. Another boy, then 13, was also convicted for his involvement in the second rape. 

The teenage boys were given youth rehabilitation orders and walked out of court with 10 rape convictions between them.

The Prime Minister says the case will be referred to the Court of Appeal. He described the case as distressing and said "there are questions about the sentence". One of the girls who was raped told the BBC that the judge's decision was like a "rock straight in my face".

So what are the likely reasons why the three teenage boys were given non-custodial sentences? 
What is the guidance around youth sentencing, and what are youth rehabilitation orders? 
How do youth courts - and youth custody - work, and how does the system differ from the adult courts in England and Wales? 
And does the adversarial nature of our criminal justice system lead to vulnerable victims being re-traumatised? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Ivana Davidovic 
Editor: Damon Rose

Contributors:
Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar Council of England and Wales
Dr Charlotte Proudman, a barrister who specialises in family law and human rights 
Dr Kathy Hampson, Senior Lecturer in Criminology at Aberystwyth University

Why were three teen rapists not given custodial sentences?

The Renter’s Rights Act came into force at the start of May, and it marked the biggest change to how private rentals work in England in a generation. 

There are a host of new protections and legal entitlements for renters, and many potential pitfalls for landlords to consider. 

Assured shorthold tenancies have been abolished, and have automatically been converted into rolling tenancies - sometimes known as ‘assured periodic tenancies’. 
It means that the tenancy has no automatic end date. 

Section 21 notices - also known as "no fault" evictions have been abolished, and Landlords are not allowed to ask for more than 1 months' rent as a deposit. Bidding wars for rental properties are now forbidden, and there are measures to limit rent increases. 

But it doesn't apply to all renters in all properties.

What about students? They all rent, but only some students are covered by the Act. 

And if landlords don't follow the new laws carefully, they could face fines of thousands of pounds. 

So what are the details that property owners and their tenants need to know?

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan
Producer: Ravi Naik 
Editor: Damon Rose 

Contributors: 
Siobhan Taylor-Ward, a Housing Solicitor at Lawstop on the Wirral
Nermin Suleman, an associate solicitor at Prosperity Law in Manchester
Tim Wrigley a partner at Wrigley’s Solicitors in Leeds

The Renters Rights Act - In Detail

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s Restoring Order and Control policy is underway. It's based - in part - on measures carried out in Denmark which cut asylum claims there to a 40 year low. 

From now on in the UK, people granted asylum - refugees - will face a review every two and a half years. If their country of origin is regarded as safe, they may be encouraged, or even forced, to go back. 

There are lots of other changes. If someone is refused asylum, they’ll only be allowed a single appeal. If an asylum seeker breaks the law, works illegally or can financially support themselves, they’ll lose their benefits or accommodation. 

Alongside the asylum reforms, there are also major changes to settlement in the UK, affecting both refugees and people on work and study visas. From now on, they will have to wait at least 10 years before they can obtain indefinite leave to remain, which means they can settle in the UK without restrictions. 

You may be forgiven for thinking -"these are pretty big changes, I don’t recall there being a big debate in parliament or any votes?" And you’d be correct. This was all done through secondary legislation, meaning that it’s a change to existing rules. 

But what are the possible legal battles for the government as it tries to introduce some of the toughest asylum laws in Europe? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Editor: Tom Bigwood 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles 

Contributors:
Dr Peter Walsh, Senior Researcher and lead on asylum at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford
Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Law at the University of Cambridge 
Baroness Levitt, Family Justice Minister

How tough are the UK's asylum laws?

Under international law, when can a country declare war on another?

Was it legal for Israel and the United States to have carried out "pre-emptive" airstrikes across most of Iran’s provinces, which started the war? The USA says the attacks were justfied, because of an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear programme, and Israel claims it acted in self-defence. 

The Israeli President went further - telling the BBC that focusing on the legality of the war instead of regional security is "mind-boggling" to him. 

And what of Iran's response? Was it reasonable under international law? In the last few weeks, practically all its Gulf-state neighbours have been targeted, as well as its drones or missiles landing in Syria, Cyprus, Turkey and Azerbajan. 

So does the Iranian retalliation justify the American and Israeli attacks under international law? 

And if any country breaks international laws - are there any real consequences?
 
Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles
Editor: Tom Bigwood

Contributors: 
Susan Breau, Professor of International law at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London
Christian Henderson, Professor of International Law, University of Sussex
Éamon Chawke, intellectual property, data protection and commercial law solicitor, Briffa Legal

When is it legal to go to war?

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood says she makes “no apology” for announcing the roll-out of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) to all the police services in England and Wales. 

Under a government white paper on policing, the number of Live Facial Recognition vans will increase from 10 to 50. 

Police say it’s groundbreaking technology in the fight against crime, but civil liberties groups say it’s authoritarian and a step towards a "surveillance state".

Facial recognition cameras are already used in shops; the difference with LFR is that the software used by police tracks faces against a watchlist - a specific database of faces - from a live video feed. 

But the legal framework regulating the use of the technology is a patchwork of common law, human rights legislation and police guidelines, which has been challenged in the High Court. 

There is also concern about a lack of oversight over how police watchlists are compiled, and why the number of people on the list now stretches into the thousands. 

So is LFR legal? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles 
Editor: Tom Bigwood

Contributors: 
Sonja Jessup, BBC London’s home affairs correspondent 
Professor Karen Yeung, Interdisciplinary Professorial Fellow in Law, Ethics and Informatics, Birmingham Law School
Dr Asress Gikay, Senior Lecturer in AI, Disruptive Innovation and Law, Brunel, University of London
Richard Ryan a barrister from Blakiston’s, specialising in drone and unmanned aviation law

Is it legal for police to use live facial recognition technology?

The courts system in England and Wales is in an unprecedented crisis. The backlog has reached 80,000 cases, and some defendants are being told they won't be able to have a criminal trial until 2030. 

The government has introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which contains a raft of measures to tackle delays and bring down the backlog; but the Justice Secretary David Lammy has admitted that things are going to get even worse before they get better. 

The most controversial change is a plan to restrict the number of jury trials. The right to judgement by your peers has existed for more than 800 years, but for some offences, that's going to end. 

Defendants will lose the right to choose between a jury trial or a magistrate's hearing in so-called "either-way" offences. 

Magistrates will get increased sentencing powers - up from 12 months to 18 months. 

More serious criminal cases, with likely sentences of up to three years will now be heard by a single judge - and no jury. 

And only the most serious "indictable" offences, like murder, manslaughter and rape and any other offence with a sentence of longer than three years will be heard by a jury.

But will the reforms make a difference? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles 
Editor: Tom Bigwood

Contributors: 
Sarah Sackman KC, courts and legal services minister
Chris Kinch, KC, who until 2024 was a senior judge at Woolwich Crown Court in south London
David Ford, national chair of the Magistrates Association

The plans to limit jury trials in England and Wales

The former US ambassador Peter Mandelson is on bail after being arrested on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office. 

Police have been investigating claims that when he was Business secretary, he shared market-sensitive government information with the financier Jeffrey Epstein. 

His arrest comes a few days after police arrested Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, also on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office, when he was a trade envoy. He is suspected of sharing confidential government documents with Epstein. 

The arrests come after the release of a large number of files by the US Department of Justice. These relate to the activities of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a convicted sex offender. He died in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of the sex-trafficking of underage girls. 

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was friends with Epstein. So was Lord Mandelson. 

The BBC has approached Andrew Mountbatten Windsor for a response to these claims. He has always rejected any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein and denied any personal gain from his role as trade envoy. 

Lord Mandelson has not publicly commented in recent weeks on the Epstein files, but the BBC understands his position is he has not acted in any way criminally and that he was not motivated by financial gain.

But what exactly is Misconduct in Public Office? It's a common law offence, with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but the Law Commission of England and Wales describes it as "ill-defined ". 

So how did it evolve, who does it apply to, how does it work in practice? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Editor: Tom Bigwood
Senior Producer: Ravi Naik 
Producer: Charlotte Rowles

Contributors:
Gareth Roberts, Barrister, Exchange chambers 
Kate Bex KC, Red Lion chambers 
Jeremy Horder, Professor of Criminal Law, the London School of Economics
Dr Hayleigh Bosher, a Reader in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel, University of London.

What is Misconduct in Public Office?

Politically motivated attacks on the legal profession in the UK have led to barristers, solicitors, advocates and judges being subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. 

This is according to the The Bar Council of England and Wales, the Law Society of England and Wales, the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates, the Bar of Northern Ireland and the Law Society of Northern Ireland. These organisations represent a quarter of a million lawyers across the UK, and they have come together to warn about an increasing climate of hostility against legal professionals. 

They say that law firms have been targeted by protesters, and they point out that lawyers are not their clients. So how bad has the situation become, and is it threatening justice or even democracy?

Also on the programme: 
The Scottish Parliament has passed the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill after 3 days of debates and almost 400 amendments lodged - so why is the bill so controversial? 
And using a dodgy "jailbroken-Firestick" to watch illegally-streamed TV may seem like a victimless crime - but is it? 

Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan 
Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles 
Editor: Tom Bigwood

Contributors:
Charlie Sherrard KC, criminal barrister with 2BR Chambers
Mark Evans, President of the Law Society
James Cook, BBC Scotland Editor
Éamon Chawke, a solicitor who specialises in intellectual property law at Briffa legal

The law under fire

Joshua Rozenberg hears the story of the extraordinary case that rewrote the way America is governed - giving the Supreme Court the power to overrule Congress. He discovers what American prosecutors get up to behind the closed doors of the grand jury room. And he asks whether we should be screening jurors in England and Wales for bias before they are allowed to serve on rape trials.
Producer: Neil Koenig
Researcher: Diane Richardson

How did the US Supreme Court become so powerful?

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst

Other podcasts you might like ...