header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Name the wrong firm, lose the right claim

225404
Clare Hughes-Williams and James Gardiner of DAC Beachcroft highlight the dangers of misidentifying defendants in negligence claims—especially after law firm mergers—in this week’s NLJ

In Leggett v AIG, the court ruled that liability does not automatically transfer to successor firms unless a clear novation agreement exists. Despite shared insurance, the LLP was not liable for pre-novation negligence by its predecessor. Claimants must carefully identify the correct legal entity or risk strike-out, as seen in Catton v County Solicitors, where a claim failed due to late substitution after the limitation period.

The authors stress that insurance arrangements do not determine liability, and successor status under indemnity policies does not ‘magically’ transfer responsibility. The takeaway: claimants must investigate firm histories and contractual relationships before issuing proceedings—or risk losing valid claims and facing costs consequences.

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