THIS ISSUE
Dominic Regan casts a playful eye over (judicial) crimes & misdemeanors which made headlines in 2015
Sarah Johnson reports on the gender pay gap
In the final article of a two-part series, John Murphy asks if a truth defence in defamation can reduce the damages available in malicious falsehood?
The officious bystander rides (the Clapham omnibus) again: Jamie Sutherland & Julia Petrenko on implied terms after Marks and Spencer v Paribas
Claire Sanders analyses wasted costs orders
Peter Vaines discusses a rare taxpayer victory over residence
MOVERS & SHAKERS
NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law
Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’
Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle
Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands
Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs
Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director
NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
