header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 157, Issue 7277

14 June 2007
IN THIS ISSUE

Does the small claims restricted costs regime override a contractual entitlement to costs...

Shierson v Rastogi [2007] EWHC 1266 (Ch), [2007] All ER (D) 446 (May)

Hilali v Governor of Whitemoor Prison [2007] EWHC 939 (Admin); [2007] All ER (D) 210 (Apr)

Taxing times as Law Lords consider Jones v Garnett

CPS v P [2007] EWHC 1144 (Admin)

Elizabeth Fitzgerald and Greville Healey discuss the construction of leases and the property rights of cohabiting couples

Fenton v Holmes [2007] All ER (D) 12 (Jun)

The controversial Child Support Agency (CSA) is to be replaced by C-MEC, a body with greatly enhanced powers to force non-resident parents to pay child maintenance.

How can employers avoid accusations of victimisation? Elliot Gold investigates

Byrne v Motor Insurers’ Bureau and another [2007] EWHC 1268 (QB), [2007] All ER (D) 03 (Jun)

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
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
back-to-top-scroll