header-logo header-logo

24 September 2021
Issue: 7949 / Categories: Legal News , Charities , Profession
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Charity reputation risks

58620
Twitter and other social media users love nothing better than a gaffe, and reputations can incur lasting damage in minutes

Reputational risk is a serious concern for charities, whether its celebrities involved with the charity sending obnoxious tweets or, as in the unfortunate case of the MS Society, an employee making an inadvertent reference to the protestant Orange Order while tweeting an appeal for people to join a sponsored walk in Belfast.

Writing in this week’s NLJ, Carla Whalen, senior associate, Russell-Cooke, offers advice on the myriad of risks, how to avoid them and what to do if the worst happens. 

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