Mark’s comments have been reproduced with kind permission.
Mark Jones, a partner at the law firm Payne Hicks Beach, said the speed at which the decision was reached after the consultation was not sufficient grounds to succeed with a challenge.
He said: “It is a high legal threshold, that the decision was irrational, procedurally unfair or illegal. Not only can such legal proceedings be costly, but such action would likely lead to public backlash as it is difficult to argue against child safety and illegal content protections.”
Mark also noted that:
The consultation closed only weeks ago, and warned that determined teenagers have a habit of finding ways around restrictions.
“A social media ban only helps if it is genuinely enforceable,” Jones said. “If large numbers of young people simply circumvent the restrictions, parents will just lose visibility into where their children are actually spending time online rather than reclaiming any control.”
The political case for the crackdown appears relatively straightforward, but the practical one is less so. The government now has to persuade social media companies to enforce the rules and teenagers not to find ways around them
Click here to read more:
UK to raise social media age limit
Britain plots digital bedtime after kicking under-16s off social media
UK to ban under-16s from ‘high risk’ social media apps | Social media ban | The Guardian
UK to ban under-16s from ‘high risk’ social media apps – AOL
UK to ban under-16s from ‘high risk’ social media apps | Richard Hartley
UK to Ban Under-16s from High-Risk Social Media Apps in Sweeping Crackdown – Brit Brief
Starmer unveils under-16 social media ban | ICLG
For further information, please contact Mark Jones, Alternatively, telephone 020 7465 4300.
