Mark Pawlowski
Mark Pawlowski is a barrister and professor emeritus of property law, School of Law, University of Greenwich. Newlawjournal.co.uk
Mark Pawlowski is a barrister and professor emeritus of property law, School of Law, University of Greenwich. Newlawjournal.co.uk
Mark Pawlowski reflects on the unsafe conviction of Derek Bentley, hanged for the murder of a policeman in 1952
Privacy or freedom of expression? Mark Pawlowski surveys the laws covering gossip & scandal
Mark Pawlowski explores some unusual aspects of the perpetuity rule
Even in times of uncivilised warfare, natural law matters—as shown so vividly in Breaker Morant and other classic movies, writes Mark Pawlowski
Mark Pawlowski uncovers examples of horror and the peculiar that have found their way into the law reports
Mark Pawlowski examines a recent case on the inter-relationship between proprietary estoppel & statute
Mark Pawlowski provides some useful guidance on how to achieve success at law school
Mark Pawlowski asks whether proprietary estoppel can be used to underpin the enforcement of mutual wills
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace
Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team
Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall
Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role
Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei
Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert
NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.
How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct?
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
