header-logo header-logo

15 December 2011 / Mark Aizlewood , Joanne Staphnill
Issue: 7494 / Categories: Features , Media , Profession , Technology
printer mail-detail

A social butterfly?

Mark Aizlewood & Joanne Staphnill fly through the risky terrain of social networking

Social networking can cause a storm of problems. Lawyers are now encouraged to use social networking tools for marketing, but are they diving in without considering the risk of liability? This article highlights the risk management challenges created by internet publication and social media.

Cyberlibel

Law firms are alive to the potential for breaches of confidence or defamation arising from clients’ confidential information being overheard or unjustified accusations being thrown across the negotiating table. Traditionally, such indiscretions rarely caused a complaint, but using the internet to reach potential clients increases firms’ liability exposure.

In the past firms’ newsletters often simply sat in reception, but now are also published on their websites, and the increased audience increases the risk of complaints. Recent examples include where a firm’s case-commentary on a reported decision arguably gave the impression that the claimant had proved its case against the defendant (the facts were only assumed for a preliminary issue of law),

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll