header-logo header-logo

13 October 2023
Issue: 8044 / Categories: Legal News , ESG , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: How to avoid greenwashing & the significance of copyright in ESG

142543
‘Every time I see this focus on sustainability regulations, I want to scream,’ General Counsel Andrew Magowan, from law firm The Legal Director, writes in this week’s NLJ. ‘At best, it’s a wasted opportunity. But at worst, it’s a dereliction of our duties as lawyers’

ESG is the subject of two NLJ articles this week. Magowan advises how to make the most of the environmental aspects of ESG (environmental, social and corporate governance), and Colin Hulme, head of IP at Burness Paull, looks at copyright and making sure no business misappropriates the work of authors and artists.

First, Magowan advises that lawyers think about how they can make the biggest difference and focus on that. Rather than the lawyerly tendency to focus on the complex detail of reporting obligations in a variety of jurisdictions, he suggests lawyers prioritise, ask questions and communicate openly and honestly when evaluating anything from the perspective of sustainability.

Once they have ascertained what needs to be focused on to genuinely tackle the biggest impacts and make the biggest difference, Magowan advises that lawyers talk about these and only these, making sure they don’t get distracted.

Secondly, Colin Hulme, head of IP at Burness Paull, in an extract from a bigger article published on the Copyright Licensing Agency’s website, considers why businesses breach copyright and notes the importance of ESG for businesses pitching for work.

He highlights that: ‘As ESG policies require companies to have consideration for the communities and markets within which they operate, paying for content which will incentivise those engaged in the creative industries seems obvious.’ 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

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