header-logo header-logo

30 June 2020
Issue: 7893 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail

Time to invest in lawtech?

Tax breaks for lawtech could form part of a COVID-19 recovery package, the Law Society has said

Launching a campaign this week to help solicitors get back on their feet, the Law Society called on the government to invest in the profession through incentives such as research and development tax credits and allowances.

It suggested relaxing the criteria for applications to the government’s Future Fund, which loans money to UK businesses, so lawtech start-ups can apply, and giving training in lawtech-related intellectual property claims to the judiciary at the business and property courts.

More generally, it called for VAT extensions and income tax deferral schemes to help law firms with cash flow, temporary relief for employers’ national insurance contributions and a temporary reduction in the VAT rate to boost suppliers of goods and services, including legal services.

The Law Society urged the government to give law firms leeway to spend apprenticeship money on a range of support to create more jobs. For example, the money could be spent on lawtech seats and training in lawtech skills, training in secondary specialisations so people can re-train in other practice areas, and on training contracts for students about to complete the Legal Practice Course.

The Law Society’s ‘Return, Restart and Recovery’ campaign will involve: helping firms return to their offices safely; helping solicitors and firms to restart the economy; and empowering solicitors and firms to drive the recovery after coronavirus.

Simon Davis, Law Society president, said: ‘All across the country solicitors have worked tirelessly for their clients to ensure the highest standard of service.

‘As we enter this new phase of the response to coronavirus, with government beginning to lift some restrictions, it is clear that technology will play a vital role in driving the post-coronavirus recovery across all sectors of the economy, including legal services.’

Issue: 7893 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll