Writing in this week’s NLJ, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former District Judge, reflects on the recent Employment Appeal Tribunal case of Chidzoy v BBC, where Judge Eady QC threw out the claimant’s appeal because she had talked to a journalist during a short break from her giving evidence. The claimant had been warned against talking to anyone about the case when the hearing broke off while she was still being cross-examined. DDJ Gold also reports that NHS employers should no longer refuse to take on an applicant for work or otherwise treat them less favourably than other applicants because they blew the whistle, whether within or without the NHS.
24 May 2018
Being civil
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams
Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant
Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias
International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner
Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven
Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth
NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
