header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 161, Issue 7473

06 July 2011
IN THIS ISSUE

Tom Walker crosses the picket line to investigate the right to strike

Dominic Regan tackles alternative business structures

Ian Smith pays respect to the latest developments in employment law

Richard Scorer on the battle to secure effective interim damages payments

One cannot rely upon one’s own wrong in the courtroom, observe Oliver Radley-Gardner & Mark Sefton

When can non-domestic rate demands be challenged ask Aidan Briggs
& Craig Barlow

Emma Davies prescribes a regulatory health check

The Civil Courts (Amendment) Order 2011 (SI 2011/1465) kills off 23 county courts and sets three execution dates over the next month.

Ruth Pratt examines the forthcoming changes to civil litigation funding

Charlotte Bradley reviews the “new” test for enforcing LSC cost orders

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

HFW—Nelson Wang

HFW—Nelson Wang

HFW strengthens global insurance practice and Greater China offering with London Partner hire

Burges Salmon—David McEwing

Burges Salmon—David McEwing

Burges Salmon boosts Energy and Utilities practice with appointment of David McEwing

Browne Jacobson—Alexander Studholme

Browne Jacobson—Alexander Studholme

Browne Jacobson adds international construction arbitration partner in London push

NEWS
Law firm trainees are choosing US firms over their UK comparators, according to Chambers’ annual report on UK trainee satisfaction
A former senior judge has warned peers against scrapping juries for fraud and financial crimes, ahead of the Courts and Tribunals Bill’s second reading in the House of Lords this week
Civil practitioners face changes spanning debt recovery, workplace harassment and possession claims, alongside guidance on insolvency challenges and children proceedings

Finding matrimonial wealth is as challenging as dividing it, as family disputes draw practitioners into asset tracing, offshore structures and insolvency

Agreement between opponents offers no guarantee that a court will approve a retrospective increase to a costs budget
back-to-top-scroll