THIS ISSUE
In the final instalment of this series, Roger Smith assesses the state of not-for-profit legal tech at home & abroad
Mark Pawlowski considers some of the problems associated with territorial claims to Antarctica
Michael Zander QC on a vexed current issue
This month, Ian Smith focuses on part-time and zero hours conundrums, and shares a tale of compulsory retirement from the city of dreaming spires
In an exclusive series of updates for NLJ, Tony Allen presents an alternative thesis on the shape of future dispute resolution
David Burrows charts the highs & lows of the ‘Ancillary relief pilot scheme’ 25 years on
The EU has outlined new ‘vertical’ rules on distribution: Paul Henty reports
Alec Samuels asks whether an inquisitorial employment disputes system might be more fair
In the final article in his four-part series on access to justice and the use of technology, solicitor and author Roger Smith looks at the state of not-for-profit legal tech at home and abroad. For example, not-for-profits play a major role in US civil and criminal services, while Canada and Australia have a mix of private and not-for-profit
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace
Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team
Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall
Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role
Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei
Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert
NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.
How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct?
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
