THIS ISSUE
Unpaid tax interest up; CPR 183rd update notched up; appeal trap you (should) know; a bit of tax avoidance; IVA protocol revised.
The Crime and Policing Bill is a monster—running to 317 pages and with 137 clauses! Helpfully, Michael Zander KC, NLJ columnist and Emeritus Professor, LSE, has summarised the key provisions. In this week’s NLJ, he presents part one of his guide.
The next pope will be chosen this weekend, but what will take place within the Sistine Chapel before the white smoke rises? In this week’s NLJ, Athelstane Aamodt, group legal advisor at Associated Newspapers, delves into the obscure and arcane rules that govern the event.
Don’t cry! Ciara Cullen, Joshy Thomas & Emma Dunnill peel back the many layers of content scraping & copyright
The amended Bill disapplies the coroner’s statutory duty to investigate, so assisted deaths would receive less judicial oversight than other unnatural deaths, writes HH Thomas Teague KC
The Supreme Court’s decision in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers has sparked heated debate and a lot of confusion about what it means exactly in practice. In this week’s NLJ, Nicholas Dobson takes an in-depth look at some of the legal arguments behind the judgment.
Nicholas Dobson examines the reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s recent decision on sex & gender
As the world waits to find out who will become the next pope, Athelstane Aamodt explains how the Catholic Church will make the decision
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has been widely criticised, notably for its mishandling of the case of Andrew Malkinson (pictured), who spent 17 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. This culminated in the Law Commission’s recent proposal that the CCRC’s ‘real possibility’ referral test be replaced. But not everyone agrees. In this week’s NLJ, Professor Graham Zellick, who chaired the CCRC from 2003 to 2008, mounts a strong defence of the test.
Can you call it? Dominic Regan plays damages bingo & enjoys a sunny day in court
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig
Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire
EIP—Rob Barker
IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
