header-logo header-logo

20 May 2020
Issue: 7887 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 22 May 2020

Company

Re Debenhams Retail Ltd (in administration) Rowley and another (as joint administrators of Debenhams Retail Ltd) [2020] EWCA Civ 600, [2020] All ER (D) 42 (May)

The judge had been correct to determine that, by paying only the amounts which might be claimed under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (JRS) to employees of Debenhams Retail Ltd (the company) while they had been furloughed, the appellant joint administrators had adopted the contracts of those employees with the effect that those employees had, potentially, enjoyed super-priority in the administration. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissing the administrators’ appeal, held that the question was whether the conduct of the administrators had been such that they had to be taken to have accepted that the relevant amounts falling due under the employment contracts had enjoyed super-priority. In the present case, because of the nature of the JRS, the administrators had continued the employment of the furloughed employees.


European Union

LG and others v Rina SpA and another C-641/18, [2020] All ER (D) 69 (May)

Article

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll