header-logo header-logo

03 August 2011
Issue: 7477 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Veterans progress

The Supreme Court has given veterans involved in British atomic bomb tests in the 1950s permission to appeal the Court of Appeal’s judgment that nine of the ten test cases are time barred

The test cases represent more than 1,000 cases involved in the action. The veterans say they suffered cancer and other health complaints after witnessing atomic blasts on Christmas Island, in Australia and the Pacific. The Ministry of Defence denies negligence. Neil Sampson of Rosenblatt Solicitors, which is acting on behalf of the Atomic Veterans Group, said he welcomed the decision with “cautious optimism”. “We are still the only country involved in atomic yet to provide compensation and benefits to our veterans and widows.”
 

Issue: 7477 / Categories: Legal News
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