header-logo header-logo

THIS ISSUE
Card image

Issue: Vol 175, Issue 8119

06 June 2025
IN THIS ISSUE
The logical fallacies & practical problems which arise from the Supreme Court’s ruling on sex show that a kinder & more nuanced approach is needed, argues Dr Nathan Tamblyn
The assisted dying bill, as currently drafted, risks criminalising compassionate actions and leaves too much to prosecutorial discretion, Edward Hodgson, associate, and Andrew Smith, partner, Corker Binning, argue in this week’s NLJ
Can a retrial be fair when a conviction has been at the centre of a media storm? David Walbank KC considers the Lucy Letby case
Copyright law will need a strong stomach to keep up with the web scrapers, writes Paul Schwartfeger
The UK and US sanctions regime against Russia have notable differences, and President Trump has indicated he may lift certain sanctions. In this week’s NLJ, James Clark, partner, Ian Hargreaves, partner, and James Philippsohn, associate, of Quillon Law, discuss the sanctions landscape and how it applies to businesses and individuals
Lawyers continue to grapple with the Supreme Court’s recent judgment on gender and sex definitions. In this week’s NLJ, Dr Nathan Tamblyn, senior fellow in law reform at the University of Lincoln, dives into the confusion and conundrums that arise when attempting to apply the For Women Scotland judgment to real-life situations
More oi oi than AI: Dominic Regan on fake citations, succinct judgments & bewildering costs
Web scraping and the illegal appropriation of copyrighted works is a difficult nut to crack. In this week’s NLJ, Paul Schwartfeger, barrister, 36 Stone, looks at the applicable law, including caselaw on the topic and the ongoing Getty case
The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has called for light-touch regulation and immediate legislation to reverse PACCAR, in its final report on litigation funding
Show
10
Results
Results
10
Results

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