: The growth of self-representation in all adjudicative settings may ultimately require a new approach to adjudication that is even more fundamental than a root and branch overhaul of procedure and practice. What legislators and courts may need to consider is the development of forums that are focused on and limited to adjudicating cases involving SRLs. Such courts would channel cases involving SRLs into a specific forum where court participants, including the adjudicator and court staff and any required wrap-around services, would exclusively plan for and engage with litigants who do not have legal representation. One such experiment has been underway . . . [more] The post Imagining a Possible Future: Self-Represented Litigant Courts appeared first on Slaw
: A longstanding choice-of-law rule known as the internal affairs doctrine has predominated over corporate law matters in the United States since at least the 1860s. Acknowledged by the Supreme Court and generally followed by the states, the doctrine holds that the internal affairs of a corporation are governed by the law of the state where it is incorporated, notwithstanding where it may be headquartered. The post Dormancy and Delaware: An Emerging Threat to the Internal Affairs Doctrine appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: Preoccupation with the ongoing armed conflict in Iran has diverted attention from the grim aftermath of Iran’s nation-wide protests that began on 28 December 2025, during which tens of thousands of protestors were killed, arrested, or disappeared. Lawyers were prevented from reaching their detained clients. Lawyers themselves were among those detained simply for trying to do their jobs. Protestors are now being tried without legal representation before courts that lack any semblance of independence or impartiality. Frequent executions are now being carried out following hasty and grossly unfair proceedings. Dissidents who flee Iran may be subjected to transnational repression in . . . [more] The post Iranian Lawyers Under Attack in Iran and Abroad appeared first on Slaw
: UT ref: UA-2026-000083-PIP In the Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber 28 October 2026 Before: Stewart Wright Judge of the Upper Tribunal Between: LC -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Anonymity Order Appellant: LC Respondents: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Tribunal: First tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) Tribunal venue: Scarborough Tribunal Case Nos: SC231/24/00181 Tribunal decision date: 29 August 2025 NOTICE: Any breach of this order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanctions under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine. It is ordered , under rule 14(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal Rules) 2008, that, without the permission of this Tribunal, no one shall disclose or publish the name, or any part of the address, of the appellant in these proceedings or publish [...]