“From next month, divorce may get a little less confrontational – and cheaper. Changes to legal aid mean couples who split won’t be funded through the courts, but that could be a good thing, argues mediator Victoria Scott.”
The Guardian, 9th March 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Poll shows overwhelming support for missing Madeleine’s father on how Leveson inquiry findings must be enforced.”
The Guardian, 9th February 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A cross-party alliance of peers hasinjected new momentum into the stalling cross-party talks on the future of press regulation by passing a law to implement a key plank of the Leveson report.”
The Guardian, 5th February 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“If you glanced at the front page of The Times for 1 February, with its headline ‘High Court opens way to Sharia divorces’, you could have been forgiven for thinking that the court had made some important pronouncement on the role of Sharia (Islamic law) in divorce proceedings. The story’s first paragraph would also have led you naturally to that conclusion. ‘The prospect of divorce cases being settled by Sharia and religious courts’, it says, ‘has been opened up by landmark legal decision.’ So it would have come as a bit of a jolt to read the start of the next paragraph: ‘A Jewish couple have had their divorce settlement under Beth Din, rabbinical law, approved by the High Court.’ As this indicates, the case (AI v MT [2013] EWHC 100 (Fam)) says nothing whatsoever about Sharia.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 4th February 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“Frustration in the Lords at the lack of progress over the Leveson report has led four peers to table measures to introduce a low-cost arbitration service for defamation, as recommended by Lord Justice Leveson in the defamation bill.”
The Guardian, 4th February 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Much has been written about this subject but for the uninitiated this taking of oral evidence (usually from experts) ‘hot tub’ style, means having expert witnesses being questioned and cross-examined together – firstly by the judge or arbitrators and then by the parties’ representatives themselves – and indeed even by each other! Known in polite circles as concurrent evidence, hot tubbing can be used to great effect in construction related disputes, such as those involving design and build issues, measurement disputes, delays, and financial loss.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 7th January 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Lord Justice Leveson’s report recommends that claims against the press be resolved fairly, quickly and cheaply by means of an arbitration scheme established by a new (statutory) regulator.”
The Guardian, 19th December 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Tang Chung Wah and others v Grant Thornton and others [2012] EWHC 3198 (Ch)
In Tang, the Honourable Mr Justice Hildyard dismissed a claim under s. 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 that a final LCIA Award should be found to be of no effect on grounds that the Tribunal had lacked substantive jurisdiction to determine the dispute in question.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th November 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Amina Somers, a consultant and mediator with Goodman Ray, asks whether the implementation of the Family Justice Review recommendations will see the court usurped by mediation as the primary dispute resolution process following relationship breakdown.”
Family Law Week, 26th November 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“The Supreme Court’s equal pay ruling yesterday will lead to ‘billions and billions worth of claims’ Labour’s former lord chancellor has predicted. Lord Falconer … suggested that such claims be mediated rather than leaving them to the ‘vagaries of the legal system’, which he said would be costly and could take years.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 25th October 2012
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A complaint to the European Commission that the supreme court’s decision in Jivraj v Hashwani breaches European laws against discrimination may have major implications for equality and religious freedom.”
The Guardian, 3rd October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The Daily Telegraph has successfully defended a libel action over an article about the Duchess of Cambridge’s hair, which was heard by an independent arbitrator rather than a high court judge.”
Daily Telegraph, 3rd September 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Earlier this year, Mr Edward Davey MP, Minister for Consumer Affairs at BIS, announced the launch of a 12 week consultation regarding the reform of the application process for bankruptcy and company winding up. The Insolvency Service noted that: ‘The consultation sets out proposals that aim to provide the most appropriate and efficient route into bankruptcy and winding up, and to ensure that the Court’s focus is on dispute resolution.'”
Hardwicke Chambers, 27th July 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“In Sulamerica Cia Nacional De Seguros S.A. v Enesa Engenharia S.A. [2012] EWCA Civ 638 the Court of Appeal explored (amongst other things) the question of how the law governing an arbitration agreement in the absence of express choice is to be determined.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 18th July 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Johann MK Blumenthal GmbH & Co KG and another v Itochu Corpn [2012] EWCA Civ 996; [2012] WLR (D) 225
“The Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a judge who had made a decision under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and had refused permission to appeal under section 18(5) of that Act.”
WLR Daily, 24th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Under the still claimant-friendly CFA costs regime, a claimant who has a weak claim against a professional still stands a good chance of recovery if the case is well managed: follow the Protocol; keep costs down; then offer mediation pre-issue with the threat of an ATE if there is no settlement. In this frequent scenario it takes a tough insurer to withstand the pressure to pay some of its notional defence costs to the claimant just to make the case go away.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th June 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Co (No 2): [2012] EWCA Civ 855; [2012] WLR (D) 186
“Act of state doctrines did not go so far as to prevent examination of the substantial justice available in the courts of foreign jurisdictions, whether in a particular case or on a systemic basis. Where there was a jurisdiction to enforce a foreign award, it was open to the court to look at whether the case had been fairly decided. Where a party to the litigation was asking the English court to recognise a foreign court decision, the English court must be entitled to decide whether or not to enforce the foreign court decision.”
WLR Daily, 27th June 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“PowerPoint slides by Professor Nelson Enonchong which were used at the 145th anniversary of the Budapest Lawyers Association.”
Slides (PDF)
No. 5 Chambers, 1st June 2012
Source: www.no5.com
“Where a commercial contract contained a choice of law clause exclusively in favour of one country and a jurisdiction clause giving the courts of the same country exclusive jurisdiction, but an arbitration clause by which the seat of the arbitration was to be in a different country, the issue of the proper law of the arbitration clause was a matter of contractual interpretation. The proper law depended on all the terms of the particular contract, when read in the light of the surrounding circumstances and commercial common sense.”
WLR Daily, 16th May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025