header-logo header-logo

28 June 2018
Issue: 7799 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Turbulence ahead for runway expansion

A group of councils have said they will pursue legal action against the decision to expand Heathrow, claiming the plan will not survive ‘independent, lawful and rational’ scrutiny. Their announcement came shortly after MPs voted this week in favour of adding a third runway to the airport. Duncan Field, UK head of planning law at Norton Rose Fulbright, said: ‘There could still be turbulence ahead with NGOs, residents and groups of local authorities opposed to expansion at Heathrow already declaring their intention to challenge the policy in court, creating uncertainty for at least a year or more.’

Issue: 7799 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll