THIS ISSUE

Issue: Vol 161, Issue 7463

28 April 2011

View other Issues

IN THIS ISSUE

Go to page of 4

A recent Supreme Court ruling leaves working Brits abroad on tenterhooks, says Charles Pigott

How can a divorcing couple’s reasonable needs be informed
by pre-marital property? Catherine Costley investigates

Are courts ignoring “get tough” policy considerations in favour of justice where fraud is suspected, asks David Sawtell

Nick Knapman considers an appeal court decision on acquiring registered land by adverse possession

Is the Party Wall Act a statutory damp squib? Michelle Stevens-Hoare & Alexander Bastin investigate

Carl Calvert tackles the good, the bad & the indifferent

Can alternative business structures revolutionise the wills & probate world? Daniel Curran investigates

The Court of Appeal revisits the rule in Hastings-Bass. Philippa James & Stuart Pickford report

A director’s guarantee is a useful option where a security for costs application is likely to be rejected, says George Woods

Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences v Albert Court Residents’ Association and others; Albert Court Residents’ Association and others v Westminster City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 430, [2011] All ER (D) 118 (Apr)

Show

Results

Go to page of 4

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders

Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners

NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do

A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent

NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed

Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’

NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits

A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’

NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts

Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients

Error message

Issue: Vol 161, Issue 7463

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Foot Anstey—five promotions