header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 166, Issue 7726

09 December 2016
IN THIS ISSUE

Clare Arthurs & Richard Marshall share an (almost) A-Z of cross border disputes, post-Brexit

John McMullen discusses TUPE & service provision change disputes

In a second in a series of articles, Frank Maher advises upon how to discover rogue partners & employees

Qader and others v Esure Services Ltd; Khan and another v McGee [2016] EWCA Civ 1109, [2016] All ER (D) 156 (Nov)

Athelstane Aamodt examines the new CPS guidance on cases involving communications sent via social media

 

Jon Holland & Catherine Robert forecast the implications of Brexit for financial crime regulation

Azur Space Solar Power GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office T-614/15 , [2016] All ER (D) 14 (Dec)

R (on the application of K and others) v Secretary of State for Defence and another [2016] EWCA Civ 1149, [2016] All ER (D) 133 (Nov)

Jonathan Pickworth & Jonah Anderson examine the proposed unexplained wealth order regime

 

Hamilton v Kuoni Travel Ltd [2016] EWHC 3090 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 13 (Dec)

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll