header-logo header-logo

21 July 2011
Issue: 7475 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail

Abesh Choudhury & Nicholas Yapp Davenport Lyons

Davenport Lyons has appointed two new partners Abesh Choudhury and Nicholas Yapp to its corporate and dispute resolution teams.

Abesh joins the firm’s corporate team from McDermott, Will and Emery LLP. Nicholas joins the firm’s dispute resolution team from Crawford Solicitors. The firm has also promoted assistants; Mark Heritage, Natasha Duffy-Jones, and Angharad Davies to the position of associate in intellectual property, corporate, and property teams respectively.

 

Issue: 7475 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

From childhood dreams of the Bar to some of the country's most challenging cases, Maryam Syed KC explains why she has never stopped standing up for others

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft significantly expands Cyber team, hiring three Cyber partners

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson appoints senior healthcare leader Professor Clive Kay as strategic adviser

NEWS
As family justice moves further away from the courtroom, collaborative law is emerging as an increasingly important route to resolving separation disputes
A busy period for employment law is producing important lessons for employers, employees and tribunals alike
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? 
back-to-top-scroll