Blog
Kingsley Napley’s Medical Negligence Team ‘walks together’ with the Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity
Sharon Burkill
17 May 2016
Legal Update: Court considers dismissed bankruptcy petition following party’s misleading conduct
Varden Nuttal Ltd v Michelle Louise Baker (2016)
It was decided that a bankruptcy order should have been made in circumstances where the debtor had misled the creditors when agreeing and entering into an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (“IVA”).
21 April 2016
Conveyancers’ joint responsibility for fraudulent transaction
The recent decision in Purrunsing v A’Court & Co [2016] EWHC 789 (Ch) (“Purrunsing”) may prove to be a landmark judgment in the realm of property fraud. For the first time, a defrauded purchaser has brought a claim which tests the reasonableness of the seller’s conveyancer’s conduct, even though no duty of care is owed to the purchaser and there were no allegations of dishonesty or fraud on behalf of the seller’s conveyancer.
19 April 2016
Battle of the beneficiaries
The much publicised war of words and threat of an inheritance dispute brewing between Lynda Bellingham’s adult sons and her third (surviving) husband Michael Pattemore is all too familiar. We have seen a steady increase in fall-outs over wills in part as a consequence of families becoming more complicated and in particular, disgruntled children who are unhappy with their provision or treatment at the hands of a step-parent.
8 April 2016
Submitting to the Jurisdiction of the English court
If you are a defendant to proceedings and wish to challenge the jurisdiction of the English court but you also need to take steps in the proceedings, how can you do so without losing your right to challenge jurisdiction? This issue was examined in the case of Peretz Winkler and another v Angela Shamoon and others [2016] EWHC 217 (Ch) (15 February 2016) (Bailii).
15 March 2016
Don’t you want me baby? – Setting the romantic record straight...top 7 legal “Don’ts” from a media lawyer for the broken hearted
“Beware! I bear more grudges than lonely High Court Judges”, warned Morrisey in his dark 1994 hit, “The More You Ignore Me the Closer I Get”. It has long been the case that some of the best known songs have more than a hint of the obsessive and a wink of the inner stalker about them. Over time, inhabiting such a role has become far easier. Online snooping, use of alternative online identities and personal information, that in the recent past may only have been available to the most committed of private detectives, are avenues readily available to anyone even vaguely computer literate. And with accessibility comes temptation. The sentiments felt by those who unexpectedly find themselves in opposition to the very person who was once their best friend, business partner, colleague or even loved one have not altered. But the environment in which we live in has, and thus, the law has developed to protect those who find themselves the victim of unwanted attention. If a relationship breaks down and conflicts arise, particularly if you once trusted and confided in that very same person, it can be tempting to respond in a way that in the short term feels justified but in the long term can be absolutely the wrong move and land you with unwanted legal bills and even in Court. Here are our top 7 Don’t for the broken hearted, be that in business or in pleasure.
- 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