header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Professional reform

09 July 2020
Issue: 7894 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-detail
23827
Professor Chris Bones, chair of CILEx, makes the case for reforming professional regulation, in this week’s NLJ

Welcoming Professor Stephen Mayson’s review, ‘Reforming legal services’, Professor Bones writes: ‘The continuing insistence on professional differentiation based on whether or not a lawyer has qualified through academic study, or through learning on the job is entirely inappropriate in a modern society.’ 

Also in this week’s issue, Kingsley Napley senior associate Jessica Clay and legal counsel Lucy Williams look at the potential for lasting reform and predict ‘small steps, as opposed to a dramatic step-change’. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll