THIS ISSUE
It’s been 15 years since the Fraud Act 2006 took effect, and the scale and types of fraud have changed considerably.
The question of how to calculate holiday pay for workers on variable hours has been addressed by the Supreme Court decision in Harpur Trust v Brazel.
They’re massive, big money, headline-grabbing and share-price rocking—and possibly coming to a court near you! At least, that’s if the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) continues on its current path of greenlighting opt-out collective proceedings.
Recent incursions by the government into the rule of law and associated citizens’ freedoms have disturbing parallels in history, and should not be ignored, Geoffrey Bindman KC writes in this week’s NLJ.
With political divisions growing ever more pronounced, demonetisation is emerging as one of the principal weapons deployed to silence debate, argues David Locke
The Competition Appeal Tribunal’s desire to breathe life into the collective proceedings regime is clear from its CPO approval rate & reluctance to strike out or summarily dismiss claims: Cameron Laing assesses the impact of its approach thus far
Sarah King looks at the various scenarios and conundrums facing employers of workers on variable hours
15 years on, can the Fraud Act 2006 keep up with the pace of change? Stewart Hey & Abigail Rushton weigh up its successes & shortcomings
Can anti-bribery & corruption compliance programmes assist corporates with environmental, social & governance risks? Liam Naidoo & Kevin O’Connor consider the evidence
Stephen Gold discovers how the law was coping with war—and how lawyers were coping with its ending—as he dips into the 1943 and 1945 archives
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson
Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor
Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips
International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law
NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning
Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes
NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
