header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card

Issue: Vol 164, Issue 7603

17 April 2014
IN THIS ISSUE

Tom Walker & Richard Marshall explain why some employees may have less waiting time between jobs in future

Does the Johnson exclusion zone apply to constructive dismissal? Anna Macey reports

Robert O’Leary returns to the subject of who bears the risk for a working prisoner’s negligence

Alexander Bastin assesses the impact of Daejan Investments v Benson...a year on

Sophy Miles & Beverley Taylor highlight the problems stemming from the Mental Capacity Act 2005

Is there a right to inspect a defendant’s liability insurance, ask Rawdon Crozier & Anthony Eskander

Peter Vaines calls for greater security for taxpayers against negligence charges & a dose of common sense

R (on the application of JC and another) v Central Criminal Court [2014] EWHC 1041 (Admin), [2014] All ER (D) 53 (Apr)

Ryanair Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioner [2014] EWCA Civ 410, [2014] All ER (D) 44 (Apr)

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Test Article Upgrade

Test Article Upgrade

"Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit...""There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gateley Legal expands Midlands residential development team

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Gibson Dunn adds employee benefits and executive compensation practice in London with partner Richard Surtees

NEWS

Family lawyers cite financial disincentives for issuing child protection orders

A series of recent decisions has clarified important principles across property law, from perpetuities to lease renewals and public rights over land
A series of recent decisions has clarified important principles across property law, from perpetuities to lease renewals and public rights over land
Employers cannot rely on wellbeing services alone to defend workplace stress claims after a High Court decision awarding almost £1m to an overworked employee
back-to-top-scroll