Blog
Supreme Court clarifies VAT group rules in Prudential v HMRC
Waqar Shah
11 March 2019
Avoiding the perils of property refurbishment – a legal opinion
Jemma Brimblecombe, Senior Associate in our Dispute Resolution department, writes for Spear's Magazine - 'Avoiding the perils of property refurbishment'.
4 March 2019
What if you’ve been left an inheritance, but not in the way that you want?
On 8 November 2018, almost 17 months out of time, Mary Jane Cowan made an application under Section 4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 for permission to make an application under Section 2 of that Act against the estate of her deceased husband, Michael Anthony Cowan (Cowan v Foreman, [2019] EWHC 349 Fam).
26 February 2019
Victims of blackmail: will your identity be protected?
For those who find themselves the unfortunate victims of blackmail, often in cases which concern sexually explicit information (‘sextortion’), the choice of how to respond can be extraordinarily difficult. As discussed in our earlier blog, one of the possible responses is to report the matter to the police, which may then result in a subsequent prosecution of the blackmailer.
21 February 2019
Was the Cliff Richard judgment really a blow to press freedom? The “Drone Couple” would likely disagree
The Cliff Richard privacy judgment was thought to be a landmark case when it comes to press reporting of a police investigation. Headlines following the judgment included “The Cliff Richard judgment is a chilling blow to press freedom” and “Cliff Richard privacy judgment threatens press freedom”. Whilst the result was a positive end to a terrible experience for Cliff Richard, has it really changed how the press report allegations? In this blog, we explore whether the ruling is taken into account when reporting on other types of investigations.
21 February 2019
Be warned - you can be held liable for the defamatory comments of another!
In the recent High Court judgment of Monir v Wood [2018], the Court held the Defendant liable for a defamatory tweet, even though he did not post or have knowledge of the tweet at the time. The Defendant was also held liable for failing to remove the defamatory material once it was brought to his attention.
- Alternative dispute resolution
- Claims against banks
- Costs Law
- Court of Protection Disputes
- Cross-border litigation
- Defamation, privacy & reputation
- Fraud
- Restructuring & Insolvency
- Intellectual property claims
- Legal updates
- Litigation process
- Professional negligence
- Shareholder and Boardroom Disputes
- Wills, trusts and inheritance disputes