Whiplash reforms delayed until April 2021 – Legal Futures
‘The whiplash reforms have been delayed until April 2021 due to the coronavirus crisis, the Lord Chancellor announced today.’
Legal Futures, 21st April 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The whiplash reforms have been delayed until April 2021 due to the coronavirus crisis, the Lord Chancellor announced today.’
Legal Futures, 21st April 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Separated couples exploiting the Covid-19 lockdown to stop an ex-partner from seeing their child could face court action, says a senior judge.’
BBC News, 21st April 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Since announcing the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the “Scheme”) in mid-March, the Government has issued several iterations of Guidance which explain the Scheme – not all in the same way. On 15 April 2020, HMT issued the ‘Coronavirus Act 2020 Functions of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme) Direction’ (the “Direction”).[1] It is the Direction which finally provides a basis in law for the Scheme and to which close attention should now be paid.’
11KBW, 20th April 2020
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘The advertising watchdog has cracked down on three companies for implying they could provide immune-boosting IV drips that could prevent or treat coronavirus.’
The Guardian, 22nd April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘On the 28 March 2020, the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy announced a series of insolvency legislation reforms including a new court based restructing tool modelled on the Scheme of Arrangement and a short business moratorium to protect companies facing the prospect of insolvency as a result of the Covid-19 crisis.’
3 Hare Court, 20th April 2020
Source: www.3harecourt.com
‘In a judgment handed down on Monday 13th April 2020 in Re Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch), Snowden J considered the application of the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme in administrations both as a matter of principle and in respect of the logistics and practicalities involved for office holders. Matthew Weaver considers the judgment and its implications in this briefing.’
Radcliffe Chambers, 16th April 2020
Source: radcliffechambers.com
‘The guide provides an overview of some of the key challenges, as well as practical advice for making applications and submissions within the new procedural framework. Summaries of applicable case law and links to guidance and additional resources are also included.’
1MCB Chambers, April 2020
Source: 1mcb.com
‘Coronavirus has affected both the functioning of businesses and the Courts. In these unprecedented times, how are the Courts dealing with the hearings of winding up petitions?’
3 Hare Court, 14th April 2020
Source: www.3harecourt.com
‘An electronic signature is data in electronic form which is attached to or logically associated with other data in electronic form, and which is used by a signatory to sign.’
The 36 Group, 15th April 2020
Source: 36group.co.uk
‘The new reality for litigation funders in the courts in England & Wales is that they must be prepared to pay a defendant’s costs in full if the funded claimant loses.’
Six Pump Court, 17th April 2020
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘The Metropolitan police are facing legal action over the death of PC Keith Palmer, murdered during a terrorist attack on parliament.’
The Guardian, 20th April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The High Court has insisted that there must be a “level playing field” when it comes to recording medical examinations.’
Litigation Futures, 21st April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘There have been two recent thought-provoking articles on whether documents which require a signature to be witnessed (that is, wills and deeds) can be witnessed either “virtually” in real-time (with attestation[1] by the witness on a separate counterpart simultaneously, with the execution being observed online) or after the event (with the execution being witnessed online, and the document then being posted to and subsequently attested by the witness).’
Falcon Chambers, April 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘With the courts shutting their doors to the majority of litigants following the outbreak of Coronavirus, now more than ever parties and their lawyers are turning their minds to alternative dispute resolution (ADR). From virtual mediations to remote ENEs and arbitrations, there are plenty of forms of ADR which can be conducted effectively during this crisis. ADR remains a powerful tool for concluding cases swiftly and at comparatively minimal cost which in this time of economic uncertainty is crucial. In this blog we would look at the different forms of ADR and how to they might continue to operate practically during the lockdown and social distancing measures associated with the pandemic.’
Pump Court Chambers, 14th April 2020
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
‘Perhaps the first significant issue arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic to come before the Administrative Court has been the question of the continued legality of immigration detention in the face of the risks and practical difficulties arising from the crisis. The pandemic raises two stark issues affecting the legality of immigration detention; on the one hand, that detainees may face an increased risk of infection by reason of the “congregate” setting of detention centres, and on the other that removals in the short term will be impossible and that the prospects of removal are at best uncertain even in the medium term.’
Landmark Chambers, 15th April 2020
Source: www.landmarkchambers.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal addressed in this case the interesting question of when it might be possible to exclude the right of a disclosed principal from enforcing and/or relying on the terms of a contract which does not expressly exclude such a principal from its remedies. The court considered the rare circumstances in which that might be a possibility, noting that they are rare indeed, as there is a strong presumption against finding that a disclosed but unnamed principal has given up their contractual remedies. Written by Adam Heppinstall, barrister, Henderson Chambers.’
Henderson Chambers, 17th April 2020
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘On March 28, 2020 the government announced emergency insolvency initiatives to assist businesses through the CV19 lockdown and its aftermath. With UK SME’s (i.e. under 250 employees) facing an unprecedented existential threat from CV19, it is clear that help is needed to enable them to keep trading if they possibly can. The Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme will clearly help in the short term with employees but what of the underlying business structures? What help is there to keep companies away from the insolvency courts?’
Thomas More Chambers, 14th April 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
‘The last couple of weeks have seen a raft of new legislation in the United Kingdom, hurriedly passed to deal urgently with the coronavirus situation. It has clearly been drafted quickly, with guidance that goes well beyond the legislation, and so this has led to some confusion as to what exactly the law now says.’
OUP Blog, 21st April 2020
Source: blog.oup.com
‘Military analogies have been deployed with vigour in the early weeks of the United Kingdom’s battle against COVID-19. Initially the government told the public to ‘keep calm and carry on’. When the lockdown came, the Prime Minister ‘enlisted’ us all to slow its spread. A ‘war cabinet’ was formed and those in the health and social care sectors, who would be most regularly exposed to the virus, were referred to as being on the ‘frontline’ of the battle.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 21st April 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘We find ourselves in unprecedented times, daily life as we know it brought to a standstill. Professionally we are all looking at work in a different light, attempting to predict the impact Covid-19 will have on our respective areas of practice.’
Park Square Barristers, 6th April 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk