“The right to keep correspondence and documents relating to legal advice secret does not exist when the person giving the advice is an accountant, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th October 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
from the Inner Temple Library
“The right to keep correspondence and documents relating to legal advice secret does not exist when the person giving the advice is an accountant, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th October 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
High Court (Chancery Division)
Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski & Ors [2010] EWHC 2570 (Ch) (15 October 2010)
High Court (Family Division)
A County Council v SB & Ors [2010] EWHC 2528 (Fam) (15 October 2010)
High Court (Administrative Court)
High Court (Commercial Court)
REC Wafer Norway AS v Moser Baer Photo Voltaic Ltd [2010] EWHC 2581 (Comm) (15 October 2010)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Cooperative Group Ltd v John Allen Associates Ltd [2010] EWHC 2300 (TCC) (14 September 2010)
Source: www.bailii.org
The Scottish Parliament (Disqualification) Order 2010
The Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) (Amendment No. 2) Regulations 2010
The Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) (Amendment No. 2) Regulations 2010
The Statutory Payment Schemes (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) Regulations 2010
The Social Security (Contributions) (Amendment No. 5) Regulations 2010
The Statutory Payment Schemes (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) Regulations 2010
Source: www.legislation.gov.uk
“Lord Young’s health and safety report shows that balancing the rights of defendants and claimants is a delicate business.”
The Guardian, 15th October 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The government pledged today to tackle the UK’s ‘damaging’ compensation culture with a shakeup of health and safety measures, including an end to ‘senseless’ rules and regulations.”
The Guardian, 15th October 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Considerations that the institution of proceedings for relief under s 244 of the Insolvency Act 1986 in respect of a transaction to which the company was a party was extortionate when the issue was only triable and the consequences of thereby rescuing the company less than reasonably practicable were relevant to the existence or otherwise of good reason to remove the administrators under para 88 of Sch B1 to the Act but were not themselves sufficient to preclude good or sufficient reason.”
WLR Daily, 14th October 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.