header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 168, Issue 7807

07 September 2018
IN THIS ISSUE

John Gould delves into the details behind EY’s acquisition of Riverview Law: all hot air, or law firms beware?

It’s time for lawyers to get smart about artificial intelligence. Nancy Jessen reports

Suspended possession reversal; cornet holder catch up; boost for gamblers; tax penalty escape.

This week: attachment disobeyed; possession costs; questioning the expert; non-mol undertakings.

Keith Wilding reviews the Mental Health Act & considers some ambitious proposals for a brighter future

Simon Parsons reflects on the dishonesty test as the first anniversary of Ivey approaches

David Locke & Carmel Shachar consider the impact of globalised medicine on withdrawal of treatment decisions in the UK

David Burrows examines the decision in Mills v Mills & what it means for maintenance for a dependent spouse

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll