header-logo header-logo

Litigants in peson & divorce

09 March 2017
Issue: 7737 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The setting aside of a £3.5m divorce case is a “salutary example” of the consequences of not having legal representation.

The Court of Appeal delivered “excoriating criticism” of the way the seven-year case had been handled, in Iqbal v Iqbal [2017] EWCA Civ 19, say Shlomit Glaser, principal solicitor, Glaser Jones Law, and Tim Jones, Professor of Law at Swansea University. Writing in this week’s NLJ, they explain that media coverage missed the “elephant in the room”, namely that this was a case involving litigants in person.

“Principally, it seems that what went wrong was not caused by any defect or complexity in the law...It is highly probable that many, if not all, [of the] faults would have been avoided had one or both parties secured legal representation from the outset,” Glaser and Jones say.

Issue: 7737 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll