With charities under unprecedented media interest in recent years, the consequences of not dealing with reputation matters well are myriad. Negative press coverage threatens the faith that the public have in a charity which can result in a significant downturn in donations and affect recruitment and morale. Any charity’s reputation once damaged can be difficult to restore. The resources a charity must commit to responding to media enquiries and to any regulatory inquiry can be significant and is time spent away from pursuing the objectives of the charity.
In the recent case of Secretary of State for Health (“NHS”) v Servier Laboratories Ltd (“Servier”), the Supreme Court considered whether in cases involving loss caused by unlawful means, the unlawful means must have affected a third party's freedom to deal with the claimant. This is known as “the dealing requirement”.
Alzheimer’s disease, the most common form of dementia, has been in the spotlight recently given a recent scientific breakthrough with the US approving the first new Alzheimer’s drug in 20 years. Light has also been shed on dementia and assessing testamentary capacity in the recent case of Hughes v Pritchard  EWHC 1580 Ch. In this case, Mr Hughes, who suffered from moderately severe dementia was nevertheless deemed to have capacity at the time of amending his will by his GP, a view supported by a joint medical expert later instructed in the case. Despite this, his will was overturned by the judge on the basis that he did not have the requisite capacity to make the changes to his previous will, which were much more significant than the medical professionals, and indeed Mr Hughes, had appreciated.
The price of Bitcoin and other crypto assets is notoriously unstable. Whether caused by a cryptic crypto related tweet from a billionaire inventor, or a crypto crackdown being announced by regulators of the world’s second largest economy, the rise and fall of crypto assets continues to prove that crypto can be risky business.