header-logo header-logo

Insolvency

26 February 2009
Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Company , Law digest , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Vermillion International Investments Ltd v Charit-Email Technology Partnership LLP (Ch D, 13 February 2009)

Although the interests and liabilities of a member of a limited liability partnership are different from those of a contributory to a limited company (and those differences might lead to some changes in practice so far as petitions to wind them up are concerned), a person seeking to exercise a right to appear and be heard in court proceedings, whether as creditor or contributory, should at least claim to be a member of the class on whom that right was conferred.

Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Company , Law digest , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll