- Business and Commercial
- Private Client
- Personal Injury
The articles in this edition of our newsletter neatly highlight the diversity of business and commercial work, concerning as they do the disparate topics of money, and art. Both are discussions of recent decisions.
Tim Polli considers the implications of a decision in a claim against a financial adviser, which casts important light on the causative effect of the financial crash of 2008; and Paul Stevenson delves into the world of art house auctions, and reflects on the complex fall-out of a painting having been attributed to the wrong artist.
These articles make, I hope you will agree, for a fascinating pair of insights as to how familiar principles are applied in what may be unfamiliar environments
Welcome to the newsletter of the Tanfield Chambers Business & Commercial Group.
Members of the Group have enjoyed some stunning successes in recent weeks, with Geraint Jones QC and Marc Glover winning another spectacular victory in the ongoing Eastenders litigation and Alejandra Hormaeche adding to an impressive string of results achieved for clients from her native Spain with victory in a jurisdiction battle. She writes about that case below; but the main article is a thought-provoking feature from Tim Polli about developments in the practice and procedure relating to freezing injunctions. We hope you enjoy these articles; if anything arises from them, or you would like to find out more about the team generally, please don’t hesitate to contact our clerk David Wright.
We continue to forge ahead. Chambers sponsored the legal week Commercial Forum on 21st September at which both Andrew Butler and Philip Aliker were speakers. we are experiencing an upsurge in commercial litigation generally: perhaps businessmen who have been putting matters off since the financial crisis first struck now feel there is nothing to lose by going ahead.
litigation necessarily means that close attention must be paid to the Civil Procedure rules. unlike the old rSC, the CPr are in a constant state of change, and legal advisors have to keep up. Andrew Butler has put together some helpful notes about three cases decided so far this year in connection with issues relating to the service of proceedings, both in and outside the jurisdiction (CPr Part 6); and Chris Maynard has written a thoughtful and insightful piece about the continuing problems arising from the operation of CPr Part 36 (making offers to settle a dispute). even this short article demonstrates the scope for unfortunate and expensive satellite litigation if Part 36 is not fully understood and followed to the letter. You have been warned. Charles Joseph
In this issue of the newsletter Tim Polli reports on a recent success in freezing order proceedings in which he achieved the rare feat of securing the appointment of a receiver; and Paul Stevenson brings us up to date with developments under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.
In this bulletin, Andrew Butler and Amanda Gourlay explore two developments highly relevant to insurers - the new Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 and a recent decision confirming the right to avoid an ATE policy for misrepresentation/non-disclosure. And Cecily Crampin looks at an interesting decision on the quantum of damages which would suggest that in some cases there will be no loss to insure.
In this issue David Daly explores the limits of mediation confidentiality, Nick Isaac reviews a recent Supreme Court case in which business practice clashed with legal theory, and Steven Walker reports on important developments in arbitration in his native Scotland.
In this issue Phillip Aliker writes on the differing standards of proof and procedure in a challenge to jurisdiction, while Andrew Butler discusses the new rules on costs capping.
This is the inaugural edition of the Business & Commercial Group Bulletin. In this issue recent cases touching on cost-effective disclosure are looked at, in particular electronic disclosure, reflecting the potential burden due to widespread internet and data use, together with an article on a significant Privy Council decision on how the implication of contractual terms can address unforeseen situations.
Winter Edition 2013
As part of the continued development and expansion of family work in Tanfield Chambers, we are re-organising to ensure that we continue to provide the very best service to all our clients.
The members of the Family Team will join one or both of two new teams: the Private Client Group and the Public & Administrative Law Group.
Our Private Client Group will cover 3 core areas: (1) matrimonial finance and privately-funded children work, (2) probate, wills and trusts (3) financial Court of Protection work. This is an area where family, personal and business interests overlap and where family and chancery expertise work in tandem.
We hope that those of you who know us purely for family work will be able to access the full range of our services in this area. I will be joined as head of the Group by Charles Joseph, who practices in the traditional chancery areas of wills, trust and probate, and whom many of you will know from his excellent talk at our last family crammer day.
The Public & Administrative Law Group will have 4 core areas: (1) public law children (2) welfare Court of Protection work (3) commercial and (4) environmental.
This brings together our strength in care work with our expertise in judicial review in care and funding decisions and those wider issues which affect children such as education, health and provision of social housing. The Group will be headed by Kerry Bretherton, who is recognised for her expertise in the directories and who is a member of the AG’s A Panel.
Both Groups will continue to be clerked by Zoe Bluck.
Welcome to the [summer] edition of the Tanfield Family Newsletter with articles on freezing orders, including the key High Court decision in O’Farrell v O’Farrell; on the latest developments in TOLATA; and on an important adoption case where John Buck successfully represented the appellant. I predict you will find these not simply interesting and informative, but very useful reading.
I am also pleased also to introduce a new member of our Tanfield team, Kerry Bretherton, recently admitted to the Attorney General’s A list, who among her other significant attributes has a considerable expertise and experience in Court of Protection work, care in the community, social housing and administrative law.
These are challenging times for family lawyers but replete with exciting opportunities and we look constantly to expanding and improving our services to clients. With this in find we are grateful for your comments on this newsletter and any other aspect of our work.
Welcome to the Winter edition of the Tanfield Family Newsletter with articles on the Supreme
Court decision in Jones v Kernott; on leave to remove following CK v MK; and on the new rules for
reciprocal enforcement of maintenance.
I hope these will be not just topical but useful and enlightening. Dick Pears has recently handed over to me as Head of the Family Group and Zoe Bluck has taken over as our principal family clerk. We are really grateful for all Dick has done and will be working hard to build on his achievements and strengthen our relationship with all our clients. We really welcome your comments on how we can improve our service to you, both in the running of cases and in our other services such as our recent crammer days.
Welcome to the latest edition of the Tanfield Family Newsletter and a warm welcome to our new family clerk, Zoe Bluck. With the recent Implementation of the new Family Procedure Rules, we hope that Gerald Wilson’s article is of assistance to you. We remain, as ever, committed to continuing to provide an efficient, effective, enthusiastic and committed service to both solicitors and their clients. The team continues to develop, with a large number of members currently training to provide mediation. We will be having the usual Crammer Days in the Autumn and look forward to seeing many of you there.
In this issue Estelle Lear discusses the Supreme Court judgment in Radmacher, Sarah Dines reviews the law on interim care orders and Timothy Shuttleworth questions whether it is possible or desirable to define 'significant harm'.
This issue contains articles from Kerstin Boyd on cohabitation and the law governing the payment of maintenance, Catriona MacLaren examines trusts of land since Stack v Dowden and Gwyn Evans discusses arrears of child maintenance under the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.
Olivia Murphy discusses Baroness Deech's call for reform of the law relating to maintenance; Charlotte Jewell provides an update on pre and post nuptial agreements and the second instalment of Philip Conrath's article on placing children abroad are all included in this issue.
In this issue Dick Pears examines the law since Xydhias in respect of upholding agreements; Philip Conrath writes about placements of children overseas; while Timothy Shuttleworth discusses solutions to cases where a Local Authority has to intervene to remove a child permanently.
Bite sized tips and a more in-depth article pertaining to money cases, along with a useful summary of the important changes in public law children work hailed by the introduction of the Public Law Outline.
This issue takes on a financial flavour, with articles covering Bankruptcy in Ancillary Relief, and thoughts on the implications of Stack v Dowden. A précis of the changes to the law surrounding non-molestation orders post 1 July 2007 is also included.
Articles covering a range of interesting topics, including thoughts on FDRs, an insight into the bedding down of the Special Guardianship provisions and the interplay between the Family and Youth Criminal Justice Systems.
This issue contains an article on Civil Partnerships, a piece on the use of ICOs in the context of private law proceedings and a case which illustrates a prime example of Judicial Independence.
Welcome to the Spring edition of the Employment Group Bulletin. First, Sarah Stanzel considers whether, in light of recent decisions, service provision changes under TUPE are working and looks at the effect of their proposed abolition.
Inside, Peter Linstead and Paul Stevenson analyse new law on the vital difference between the duty of fidelity and fiduciary duty and assess the limited circumstances in which the latter can arise.
Tanfield Employment Group is delighted with the success of its recent run of seminars and would like to thank
all those who attended and engaged with us in lively discussion and debate.
Details of a further seminar on disabillity discrimination can be found on the back page As there is plenty of reading material in circulation regarding the proposed new tribunal rules, issue fees and
protected conversations, in this edition we have decided to deal with topics which have received less airtime
but which are important in a climate with tough economic challenges, where businesses are restructuring and
employees may be moving on. Two speakers from our seminar series contribute to this edition of the Bulletin.
Stephen Heath provdes a way through the tortuous provisions on TUPE and insolvency. Paul Stevenson looks at recent decisions on damages where confidential information is misused
In tthis edition the Employment team comment on, References,Resolving workplace disputes.
Sarah Stanzel comments in this issue on Statutory employment law, as always, is rapidly evolving. This year sees in the abolition of the ‘default retirement age’. Consultation is taking place on extending the right to request flexible working and making it possible for parents to share their parental leave. The Government has also announced that it will consider putting a cap on awards in discrimination cases, reducing collective redundancy consultation periods and making the TUPE rules more flexible. It remains to be seen how far it will be restricted by EU law in the extent of any changes. But case law can also transform the legal landscape. In this edition, Stephen Heath discusses recent cases on misconduct dismissals. Peter Linstead considers recent trends in appellate decisions on costs orders and asks what impact they have in practice.
Winter Edition February 2011
Paul Stevenson comments on Springboard Injunctions, and the potential spread and misuse of confidential Information
Martina Murphy tackles the employment status of members of LLPs and controlling shareholders in this issue. You will also find Paul Stevenson's timely thoughts on pay for staff kept at home by the wrong kind of snow.
In this issue Sarah Stanzel considers the recent developments in compensation limits and the way compensation is assessed in discrimination and unfair dismissal claims. Laura Robinson and Gemma de Cordova provide a guide to the many recent decisions on employment status and consider the implications.
In this issue David Berkley QC examines TUPE Transfers on Insolvency and Stephen Heath considers Burdens of Proof in Tribunal claims.
This issue contains articles on the implications of the Employment Act 2008 and justification defences to age discrimination.
A helpful summary of the latest maternity and parental leave provisions, and some of the most recent cases on automatic unfair dismissal, agency workers and the trust and confidence term are considered. The final article provides a more light hearted view of a recent EAT case.
The effect of four recent EAT cases on the status of agency workers is considered, and a key Court of Appeal decision which re-defines the meaning of “reasonable belief” in the context of whistleblowing is examined. There are also two articles which look at a possible change of direction by the EAT in relation to ‘Polkey reductions’ and an EAT decision on equal pay.
In this edition of the bulletin Chris Bamford reviews the current law relating to preaction admissions in personal injury cases. I much preferred his original title – “Pre-Action Admissions: Fifty Shades of Grey” – but it appears that for some reason he has decided against that. Anyway I hope you enjoy reading it as much as I did.
In this edition, Michelle Marnham looks at the Court’s response to fraudulent claims and Michael Bailey examines claims against Occupiers and the voluntary assumption of risk.
I hope you enjoy the read. Sadly we have to say goodbye to Matthew Wildish, who has been the principal clerk for the PI team for a number of years. He is leaving for pastures new and takes up an appointment as Senior Clerk on the 1st October 2011. We
will miss him and wish him well. However we welcome David Wright who will be taking
over the reins of the PI clerking team.
Kerstin Boyd, Head of the Personal Injury Team
In this edition Christopher Bamford looks at food poisoning cases where injury is caused by infection or where infection has been caused by contamination. Simon Cheves article looks at the Package Travel regulations.
In this issue Kerstin Boyd writes on the government’s failure to implement legislation which would enable victims of pleural plaques to recover compensation. Michael Bailey discusses the decision in Re W (Children) and examines the question of whether any actions would lie in negligence against the various parties involved.
This issue looks at Rome II and the implications for accidents abroad, together with an article which delves into claims in respect of career-ending injuries.
A recent case relating to an employer’s liability for work related stress is considered, the amended CPR 36 is examined, together with some reports on recent cases.
Welcome to the Spring 2013 edition of the Property Group Newsletter. In this edition Nick Isaacdiscusses the rather more practical approach of the Court of Appeal in Freetown v Assethold on service in party wall cases, Amanda Gourlay covers the controversial parting shot of the Chancellor, Sir Andrew Morritt in Phillips v Francis on service charges, and Piers Harrison reports on the court’s view of validity of notices under section 27 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.
Since the last edition we have been pleased to welcome Nicola Muir to the property team.
Welcome to the Summer 2012 edition of the Property Group Newsletter. Since the last newsletter,the group has enjoyed further success, winning ‘Chambers of the Year’ at the Enfranchisement and Right to Manage Awards 2012.
The Group also welcomes back Robert Bowker, who has returned to Chambers after 4 years working as a solicitor in Australia.
In this edition, Tim Polli considers difficulties that can arise in exercising break clauses, Nick Isaac examines a recent High Court case on the Party Wall Etc. Act 1996 and Niraj Modha looks at the latest case to grapple with the question of ‘what is a house?’ in the context of leasehold enfranchisement.
Since the last newsletter, the strength of the Property Group has grown. We are delighted to announce
that Kerry Bretherton formerly of Hardwicke Chambers is joining Chambers.
Kerry’s practice, with regular appearances in the Court of Appeal, her appearance in the Supreme Court in Mexfield Housing
Co-operative v Berrisford, and her recent appointment to the Attorney General’s A Panel, will add to the range and quality of service that Tanfield provides.
We also welcome two junior members, Sara Lewis and Niraj Modha, and a new clerk, Luke Faulkner, who will be assisting Joanne Meah.
In other news, Mark Loveday has won Barrister of the Year at the Property Management Awards, and James Fieldsendhas co-authored a new book, Commercial Property Litigation. In this issue, Daniel Dovar surveys restrictions on forfeiture of residential leases, Andrew Butler comments on the new dilapidations protocol, and Kerry Bretherton considers statutory appeals for
In this our Summer issue Carl Fain considers the possibility of a summary judgment application in cases where a landlord opposes the grant of a new tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant 1954 and Tim Polli warns of the dangers of not seeking specialist legal advice
Mark Loveday looks at recent case law on Landlords intention under s.30(f) and (g) of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954
This edition looks at protecting overage rights. Andrew Sheftel discusses the pitfalls and offers practical solutions. Cecily Crampin considers the options open to leaseholders.
This edition Ellodie Gibbons reviews a decision of the Court of Appeal on Hosebay. Carl Fain looks at the principles involved in surrender by operation of law, and Paul Stevenson raises the questions over the impact of service charges.
This issue includes recent cases in the Court of Appeal involving Nick Isaac, Chris Coney and Geraint Jones QC and Tim Polli considers a method for a landlord in uncertain economic times to maximise its claim for rent from a tenant company who enters into a CVA.
This edition pilots a new look with in-depth articles, including an investigation into the implications of Watson v Croft Promo-Sport Ltd, an article on visibility splay and finally an article exploring beneficial interest in trust property.
The decision in of the LVT in Islington LBC v Lucy Shehata Abdel-Malek and on appeal, is explored, together with articles on a right of way, economic torts and the gaps in the RICS Disciplinary Rules 2007.
Developments in the law of tenancy deposits, examines the importance of claiming a leaseback in a counter notice, and the question of when compensation can be awarded for distress and inconvenience. The final article looks at building boundaries in the context of rights of access.
For further information please contact Kevin Moore
020 7421 5300