A recent article “Blowing in the wind” published in NLJ on 13 May 2016 (166 NLJ 7698 p 8) contained an inaccurate précis of Smith v Metropolitan University. The summary should have read: “Smith v London Metropolitan University [2011] IRLR 884, [2011] All ER (D) 19 (Sep) held that a university lecturer had not made protected disclosures under s 47 B (1) of ERA 1996 because grievances that she had raised about being asked to perform duties outside the scope of her contract, in the EAT’s opinion, disclosed no breach of a legal obligation (following Cavendish Munro) and in any event were not the reason for the dismissal. However, the EAT did hold that the ET had made an error in saying that the claimant was obliged to perform such duties.” Online versions have been updated to reflect this. With apologies and thanks to Dr Smith.
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage
Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire
Druces—Lisa Cardy
Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering
Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith
Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team
NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
