header-logo header-logo

12 July 2007
Issue: 7281 / Categories: Legal News , Local government
printer mail-detail

SUBSIDY STUDY

In brief

The Barnett formula of “Scottish subsidy” which has historically given Scotland a spending advantage over England is likely to be reviewed by the House of Lords. Lord Barnett, who devised the formula in 1978—which gives those north of the border £1,500 more per head spent on them than their English counterparts—says he expects to win permission for a House of Lords committee to be set up to look at how cash is divided in the regions of the UK. The government, which has always defended the formula, indicated it might allow the review last week when Baroness Ashtal, the leader in the Lords, said she would “consider it carefully”.

Issue: 7281 / Categories: Legal News , Local government
printer mail-details

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