header-logo header-logo

29 October 2021
Issue: 7954 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Gold for value

Trial durations are overestimated, according to research among members of the judiciary, former District Judge Stephen Gold writes in this week’s ‘Civil way’.

This may lead to CPR change. Gold also recounts a tale of debt and debtor, and a case of a contract found to be so confusing that the judge released one of the parties from their obligations.

Last but not least, pandemic guidance for judges comes under Gold’s scrutiny. He notes that it is easier ‘to skive off from the study to the gym than out of the court building back door’. 

Issue: 7954 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll