header-logo header-logo

14 October 2020
Issue: 7906 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Civil way - Secrecy, debts & the abandoned expert

The fate of a single joint expert, an attempt to relieve the pressure on employment tribunals, and the secrecy of judgment debtors occupy the mind of DDJ Stephen Gold in his Civil Way column this week

Gold looks at a recent case in which an expert was sent on his way, and highlights provisions in force from 8 October in the employment tribunal. He covers a recent case in which a debtor sought to keep his financial affairs out of the public eye, and strikes a note of caution to lawyers who become ‘over creative’.

Be civil, read Gold, here.

Issue: 7906 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

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