Search Results for

On 30 October Andrew Warnock QC and Maurice Rifat were successful in the Supreme Court in the case of Stoffel & Co v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42 which concerned the impact of the “illegality” defence to a claim against a solicitor for professional negligence in the context of a mortgage fraud. In this webinar Andrew


The Personal Injury team at 1 Chancery Lane bring you an early Christmas gift to usher out 2020: The Highways Compendium. A high point we hope as a difficult year draws to a close. We recognise that normally our busy clients appreciate briefings that are just that: brief and informative. We also know however that


The Weekly Roundup: the CJEU Edition

It’s been another busy week in the courts for travel practitioners; no sooner did we have the judgment of Griffiths J in Troke v Amgen Seguros Generales [2020] 11 WLUK 67 (the incidence of penalty interest a matter of procedure for the law of the forum and not of the substantive law of the tort),


This week we learned that the Court of Appeal has declined permission to appeal in Swift v Carpenter [2020] 10 WLUK 74, but that the Supreme Court has managed to find time in its busy schedule to hear the leapfrog appeal in the FCA business interruption insurance litigation, which will be heard from 16th November


The Lord Chancellor’s Letters

On Friday the Lord Chancellor once again found a letter he wrote to The High Court Enforcement Officers Association (the “HCEOA”) plastered across the news. This letter is the second such letter that has been sent to the HCEOA in recent weeks. As those who tuned into 1CL’s webinar last week will know, the first


1 Chancery Lane has long had a reputation for appellate advocacy at the highest level. Last week Andrew Warnock Q.C. and Maurice Rifat were successful in the Supreme Court in the case of Stoffel & Co v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42 which concerned the impact of the illegality defence to a claim against a solicitor


The normal role of the courts is to decide cases according to the law, and in doing so to provide a just resolution to the dispute between the parties. The illegality defence operates to prevent the courts from providing the claimant with the rights or remedies to which she would otherwise have been entitled because


Property lawyers are well-versed in the difficulties the defence of “illegality” presents. Tinsley v Milligan itself concerned whether a party could establish a resulting trust if they did not need to rely on an unlawful motive behind putting property into the name of another. That decision was subject to extensive criticism; the outcome depending on


As well as the very strong public interest in deterring mortgage frauds, another very important public interest was in issue in this case: that conveyancing solicitors (and by analogy other professionals) who are legitimately and lawfully retained should perform their duties diligently and without negligence and, where a professional has been negligent, the client should


The facts of Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust [2020] UKSC 43 are undeniably tragic: whilst in the grip of a severe psychotic episode Ms Henderson killed her mother.  She subsequently pleaded guilty to the offence of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility and was sentenced to a hospital order under s. 37


Subscribe for our newsletters, updates and seminars


Subscribe