header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 August 2024 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 8083 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way , Profession , Family , Costs , Expert Witness , Travel litigation
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 9 August 2024

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
B in cite; Expect pilotless planes; Leave expert alone; No prison for non-payment; Hadkinson reappears; MoJ liable for clamp; Commercial Court bouncing

THE B, T1, T2 & T3 TEAM

They tell me there are some differences between High Court, circuit and district judges beyond remunerative and whether or not they have to pour hot water into their own cups of tea. The National Archives, which are now the official publishers of judgments in England and Wales, have taken to rubbing salt into the wounds of the lower ranks. For Family Court citations, look out for the addition of a ‘B’ when it comes to judgments of circuit and district judges, presumably standing for ‘Basement’. So you get this: [2024] EWFC 123 (B). You will know if you are in for a thrill because the absence of a ‘B’ will mean that a High Court judge has spoken, albeit rarely.

For Court of Protection citations, the salt is granulated with three tiers: T3 for High Court judges,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll