header-logo header-logo

No hero

23 July 2014
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The justice secretary’s “Heroism Bill” has come under fire from both sides of the House during its second reading.

The Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Bill, (SARAH) requires courts to take the context into account when deciding negligence claims, for example, was there an emergency or was the defendant trying to do a good deed? However, some of its critics say it does nothing to change the law and is therefore a waste of Parliamentary time. Others, including the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, say it encourages recklessness.

During the debate, Conservative MP Edward Garnier, a former solicitor general, predicted the Bill would become “the object of derision and ridicule”.

Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan described SARAH as “embarrassing and pathetic”.

Issue: 7616 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll