header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 166, Issue 7707

15 July 2016
IN THIS ISSUE

Evans and another v Jones and another [2016] EWCA Civ 660, [2016] All ER (D) 36 (Jul)

Paola Fudakowska & Henrietta Mason examine recent wills & probate decisions

Campean v Administratia Finantelor Publice a Municipiului Media C-200/14, [2016] All ER (D) 40 (Jul)

David Wright considers the question of when a trial starts, for the purposes of an additional costs payment

​Supreme Court rules civil legal aid residence test draft order was ultra vires

Case highlights how far holding company can be held responsible

If Brexit withdrawal cannot be reversed the UK is at risk of a seriously bad outcome, explains Michael Zander QC​

Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

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