header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 24 October 2025

24 October 2025
Issue: 8136 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Company

Pagden and others v Ridgley [2025] EWHC 2674 (Ch)

The Chancery Division dismissed an appeal against a judge’s order which had rejected the appellants’ challenge to the respondent’s remuneration and expenses as administrator of Orthios Eco Parks (Anglesey) Ltd and Orthios Power (Anglesey) Ltd. The court held that r 18.34 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 did not provide jurisdiction to challenge an administrator’s remuneration paid from the proceeds of realising assets subject to a fixed charge, as such assets do not form part of the ‘company’s pot’ available for distribution to general creditors. Part 18 of the 2016 Rules, including r 18.34, applies only to remuneration and expenses relating to the administration of the company’s assets as statutorily enlarged (including assets subject to floating charges), not to assets subject to fixed charges which remain outside the insolvency process.


Employment

Simpson v Unite the Union [2025] EAT 149

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) dismissed Mr Simpson’s appeal against the further decision of the certification officer, which decided that the disciplinary procedure followed by Unite against Mr Simpson involved

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll