header-logo header-logo

11 September 2008
Issue: 7336 / Categories: Case law
printer mail-detail

Law digest: 11 September 2008

Legal Profession

Practice Direction (Court Dress) (No 5), [2008] WLR (D) 285

From 1 October 2008, all judges and members of the High Court Masters Group (which includes masters of the Chancery or Queen’s Bench Division, district judges of the principal registry of the Family Division, bankruptcy registrars and costs judges), other than circuit judges, will wear the new civil gown without a wig, or bands, wing collar/collarette. Circuit judges will wear their existing gown and lilac tippet without a wig, or bands, wing collar/collarette. Barristers or solicitors sitting in a judicial capacity will wear their practitioners’ dress without a wig. Tabs at the neck of the new civil gown will indicate the rank of judge: Court of Appeal, gold; High Court, red; members of the High Court Masters group, pink; and district judges, blue.

Issue: 7336 / Categories: Case law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

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? 
back-to-top-scroll