header-logo header-logo

12 April 2016
Issue: 7694 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail

Kathryn Purkis—Serle Court

Managing partner of Jersey law firm returns to practise at chambers

Kathryn Purkis is returning to Serle Court to practise at the Bar full-time, following a 9-year period at Jersey law firm Collas Crill, where she was a litigation advocate and managing partner from 2009 to 2012.

Kathryn was a member of Serle Court until 2005, and had a general commercial chancery practice with an emphasis on property litigation, fraud and asset-tracing work. She went on to qualify as an advocate of the Royal Court of Jersey in 2008 and became a highly regarded member of the Jersey Bar.

While offshore, Kathryn undertook a wide range of litigation, ranging from contentious trusts and foundations cases, multi-jurisdictional asset-tracing and enforcement claims through to regulatory matters and planning work. She hopes now to build a similarly broad-based practice in Lincoln’s Inn.

Kathryn says: “I am very much looking forward to re-joining Serle Court, one of the pre-eminent chancery sets. I do feel that my experience as a partner in and managing a law firm will be invaluable to my work at the Bar, and will shape how I go about providing my own services to clients.”

Chief executive of Serle Court, John Petrie, adds: “Kathryn was a very valued member of Serle Court, and is welcomed back with open arms. Her experience undertaking high-profile work in a different jurisdiction whilst being the managing partner of a firm and seeing it through a merger shows not only Kathryn’s impressive work ethic but her highly-attuned business skills too.” 

Nominations for the Halsbury Legal Awards 2016, in association with NLJ, are now open. Visit the site to view all the categories and enter online. #Halsbury2016

Issue: 7694 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll