header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 168, Issue 7796

08 June 2018
IN THIS ISSUE

Don’t underestimate the value of a no oral modification clause, say Donald Lambert & Andrea Nicholls

Dijen Basu QC looks at the broadening scope of claims against the police

If a hedgerow or tree is a risk to motorists, can the landowner be held liable? Cathrine Grubb investigates

How can law firms protect their interests when a key lawyer leaves? David Fisher looks at current law & practice on restrictive covenants

Despite the efforts underway to bring the courts into the 21st century, a wider audit may still be required, says Roger Smith

“Robins is able to offer a holistic account & understanding of the impact of alleged wrongful convictions on those who have been so convicted”

GDPR nice bits; how to meet a LiP; ‘It was me or my wife’; company address changes

Ian Smith tackles ‘no oral variations’ clauses, zero-hour contracts & who qualifies as a ‘worker’

Uphill struggle for May in pushing through EU Withdrawal Bill

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll