header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 167, Issue 7768

03 November 2017
IN THIS ISSUE

The principle of digitalisation has been left without Parliamentary backing in the wake of Brexit, says Roger Smith

Ian Smith shuns immunity & considers three recent judgments which make important contributions to the development of the law

In his second article, Nicholas Bevan explains why the MIB is liable for gaps in the Road Traffic Act 1988

The trend of expansion within the law of vicarious liability is likely to continue, says Ceri-Siân Williams

In his latest update, Dominic Regan tackles lateness, excuses & Denton

Claire Darwin identifies familiar themes running through the judicial approach to disclosure failings

R (on the application of Anjum) v Entry Clearance Officer, Islamabad (entrepreneur – business expansion – fairness generally) [2017] UKUT 406 (IAC), [2017] All ER (D) 145 (Aug)

Heathfield v Staatsanwaltschaft Würzberg, Germany [2017] EWHC 2602 (Admin), [2017] All ER (D) 130 (Oct)

P v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2017] UKSC 65, [2017] All ER (D) 133 (Oct)

R (on the application of Conway) v Secretary of State for Justice (Humanists UK and others intervening) [2017] EWHC 2447, [2017] All ER (D) 22 (Oct)

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll