header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 July 2018
Issue: 7803 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Company

LF2 Ltd v Superstone and another [2018] EWHC 1756 (Ch), [2018] All ER (D) 86 (Jul)

LF2 Ltd’s appeal against a deputy judge’s dismissal of its application for an order, under para 74 of Sch B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986, requiring the joint administrators of another company to assign to LF2 a cause of action that the company allegedly had in relation to a claim against its former solicitors (the Firm) was dismissed. The Companies Court held, among other things, that, while the deputy judge had been wrong to conclude on the material before him that the claim against the firm was frivolous and vexatious, it was not open to the present court to allow the appeal, having regard to the terms of LF2’s appellant’s notice. The court considered the procedure to be adopted in relation to an application under para 74, and the attitude an administrator should adopt in relation to the possibility of a claim by a company against a third party.

Divorce

Thum v Thum [2018] EWCA Civ 624, [2018]

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll