Paul Letman
Barrister
Paul Letman is a barrister at 3 Hare Court, Temple (paulletman@3harecourt.com; www.3harecourt.com)
Barrister
Paul Letman is a barrister at 3 Hare Court, Temple (paulletman@3harecourt.com; www.3harecourt.com)
The new Electronic Communications Code: James Tipler & Paul Letman share seven key takeaways 18 months on from implementation
Paul Letman analyses a recent landmark decision on residential service charges
Will a Victorian statute prevent local councils selling off our museums & libraries to make ends meet? Paul Letman investigates
Show
8
Results
8
MOVERS & SHAKERS
CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson
Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council
Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill
Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge
Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin
Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire
NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
