Laura's Northern Ireland Case Has Got its Initial Hearing

[Empirical]

The BBC has a post up about this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-37452163

Towards the end, the judge's comments are noted:

Ruling on the application for leave to seek a judicial review, the judge acknowledged the Attorney General's points had "considerable force".

But he held that the arguments advanced by Ms Lee's legal team were strong enough to meet the "modest threshold" of securing the right to progress their case.

Let's hope the AG's points are demolished at the full hearing.

[The Libertarian]

The judges comments are a bit worrying!

[The Libertarian]

The Belfast Telegraph reports that round 1 has gone to Laura! It also reports the comments of Rachel Moran and her gang who were there also.
One accused Laura of putting her own financila gain over the welfare of sex workers!
Now that is a good one, I think I have heard it all now!

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/cri...-law-1-7602205

[Dom Dunn]

The Belfast Telegraph reports that round 1 has gone to Laura! It also reports the comments of Rachel Moran and her gang who were there also.
One accused Laura of putting her own financila gain over the welfare of sex workers!
Now that is a good one, I think I have heard it all now!

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/cri...-law-1-7602205

SPACE I wonder who funds this organisation? While one would have sympathy for those who have endured a bad experience when involved in sex work it takes a mighty leap of the imagination for them to suggest that what they experienced is universal. It's a bit rich that LL is accused of profiting at the expense of others when firstly the case must be costing her and secondly a successful outcome will improve the lot of most sex workers. Also I am really getting sick and tired of this conflation with trafficking argument been rattled out again and again and again when it has both little basis in reality and can be legislated for independently. The battle goes on!!!

[FatBastard]

Also I am really getting sick and tired of this conflation with trafficking argument been rattled out again and again and again when it has both little basis in reality and can be legislated for independently.

There's plenty of lorry drivers getting brown envelopes to play dumb coming through Calais with god knows who being hid in a trailer from god knows where and for god knows what reason - but they're not about to ban international road haulage because people are being trafficked in the back of wagons.

[ladiesman217]

The Belfast Telegraph reports that round 1 has gone to Laura! It also reports the comments of Rachel Moran and her gang who were there also.
One accused Laura of putting her own financila gain over the welfare of sex workers!
Now that is a good one, I think I have heard it all now!

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/cri...-law-1-7602205

I read the article and that bit made me sick to my stomach. Disgraceful comment. Best of luck to Laura and her legal team for the future.

[td1]

Good for Laura !!


Here is some write up from the Journ@l:

http://www.thejournal.ie/sex-workers...99811-Sep2016/

Posted yesterday.

[The Libertarian]

Here is an interesting informed Facebook Post on Laura's Case -

https://www.facebook.com/wendynilaig...57578017420565

' I want to make a brief, pedantic, lawyerly point about Laura Lee's court challenge because the media reports are slightly misleading and I think it's important people understand the argument she's making.

They're describing her argument as one based on a "right to privacy". That implies a sort of Roe v Wade, get-government-out-of-our-bedrooms argument. Which is not really it. Her argument is actually based on the right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which may sound like the same thing but is actually much broader. Among other things, it protects the individual's right to be free from arbitrary or insurmountable state-imposed obstacles to the exercise of lawful activities of significance in one's personal life.

When the European Court found in favour of Alicjia Tysiac, who was denied a legal abortion in Poland and subsequently went blind, and in favour of Ms C, who had no pathway to a legal abortion in Ireland, Article 8 was the basis of their decision.

Laura's legal team is arguing that the anti-sex work laws breach this right by making it more dangerous for her to engage in the lawful activity of providing sexual services for pay. It is essentially the same argument that was upheld by a unanimous Supreme Court in Bedford v Canada, under the Canadian Charter's right to security of person. Laura's team are asserting that this same right to security of person is encompassed within the Article 8 right to respect for private life.

Fundamentally it's about sex worker health and safety, not some kind of neoliberal consumerist "freedom of choice" position. I think it's important this is clarified because god knows her opponents will seize on the ambiguity.'


Public post, so feel free to share.

[Laura Lee]

Just dropping in to thank you all so much for your continued support. We are back in the High Court on December 14th and will get the dates for the full hearing then.

Onwards and upwards!

(P.S. - thank you too to Floki SuperMod for helping me get logged in here today. I thought cookies were for stuffing your face with in times of stress.
Techie isn't my thing I'm afraid. At all.)

[The Libertarian]

Just dropping in to thank you all so much for your continued support. We are back in the High Court on December 14th and will get the dates for the full hearing then.

Onwards and upwards!

(P.S. - thank you too to Floki SuperMod for helping me get logged in here today. I thought cookies were for stuffing your face with in times of stress.
Techie isn't my thing I'm afraid. At all.)

Well done Laura!
I see the legal advice given to The SWAI on The Republic's Version (which seems even more severe and is more likely to be enforced) is that it appears to be highly chalengeable to say the least!