Search Results for

This week we had good news for Claimants and Defendant insurers alike in the form of the judgment in the judicial review on recoverability of benefits in R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on the application of Aviva Insurance, Swiss Reinsurance [2020] 11 WLUK 282, as well as good news for hoteliers

Tenancy Announcement: Roger André

1 Chancery Lane is delighted to announce the arrival of Roger André. Roger is an experienced personal injury practitioner, with a particular specialism in defending against alleged insurance fraud.    

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 their webinar yesterday, Andrew and

“a top professional and excellent at cross examination”

In this webinar Christopher Pask and Richard Collier provide a comprehensive overview of Section 41 of the Highways Act. They cover: the statute important cases things to look out for useful evidential pointers less typical situations, e.g. transient material, drains, verges You can view the slides here – All you need to know about section

Sarah Prager and Conor Kennedy will be speaking at this webinar hosted by Irwin Mitchell, exploring what the legal landscape could look like post-Brexit. Along with Cheryl Palmer-Hughes and Jane Anderson of Irwin Mitchell, they will discuss the following and more: The current position on a Brexit deal vs a no-deal scenario How cross-border claims

There have been a number of recent developments of interest to those who practice in the coroners’ courts. As a result the 1 Chancery Lane Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence groups have joined forces to provide an update for your assistance.   Henk Soede considers the recent Supreme Court decision of R (on the application

Welcome to 1 Chancery Lane’s Autumn Casenote Bulletin. In this edition: Henk Soede explores how the Supreme Court interpreted section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 on the first occasion this provision has been considered by our highest appellate court in Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd [2020] UKSC 45

Introduction In Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd [2020] UKSC 45, the Supreme Court was required (for the first time ever) to decide an appeal on section 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (“LPA 1925”). The provision in question was the public interest limb of section 84(1)(aa) and, in particular,

Well, that’s a relief

When a landlord forfeits a lease of commercial premises for non-payment of rent and does so by peaceable re-entry the tenant can seek relief from the forfeiture by applying either to the County Court under section 139(2) of the County Courts Act 1984 or to the High Court under its inherent jurisdiction.  The county court

Subscribe for our newsletters, updates and seminars