THIS ISSUE

Issue: Vol 165, Issue 7697

06 May 2016

View other Issues

IN THIS ISSUE

Go to page of 3

David Burrows shares his reflections on legal advice privilege & the Panama Papers

Lawyers ain’t what they used to be, says Geoffrey Bindman QC

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2016] EWCA Civ 376, [2016] All ER (D) 143 (Apr)

How will UK-based EU citizens fare in the event of a full Brexit? Kate Beaumont gets an expert opinion from Tim Eicke QC

Asset Land Investment plc and another v Financial Conduct Authority [2016] UKSC 17, [2016] All ER (D) 131 (Apr)

Patrick Roche examines the lessons to be learnt from Hillsborough

Do the Panama Papers really change anything, asks Philip Hackett QC

Calls for all British citizens to have right to vote in the EU Referendum

Show

Results

Go to page of 3

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS

Read All

Conveyancers celebrate U-turn over mortgage handbook fee

Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook

Are you suited to a career in prosecution?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors

LSB marks Mazur homework

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)

NLJ this week: Stuck in the past?

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

NLJ this week: No automatic bar on ‘user damages’

A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law

Error message

Issue: Vol 165, Issue 7697

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison