header-logo header-logo

04 December 2020
Issue: 7913 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Employment , Brexit
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Confused by guidance?

33609
A ‘plethora of rather confusing “guidance” has emerged’ in response to COVID-19, but what is its legal status? 

Solicitor Juliet Carp, who specialises in English employment law, delves into the mix and highlights some concerns, in this week’s NLJ. For employers, ‘timing matters’ and ‘clarity makes a huge difference to practical day-to-day decisions’.

Carp offers suggestions to lawyers on what they may want to look out for during these unprecedented times, and looks ahead to post-Brexit transition employment law, before drawing an alarming conclusion. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

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
back-to-top-scroll