The High Sheriff awards of Hertfordshire
See
Council Members 2025
President Massimo Trebar of Lawtons (Criminal Lawyer)
Vice President Michael Scutt
Crane & Staples, Employment and Dispute Resolution
Hon Secretary and Treasurer Judith Gower
Immediate Past President
Kirsty Richards of National Legal Service (Family Lawyer)
Members
Steve Hamilton Taylor Walton LLP (Harpenden)
Private Client
Marilyn Bell SA Law (St Albans) Family
Paul Davies
Hamilton Davies (Stevenage) Employment, Family and Litigation
Claire Sharp Debenhams Ottaway (St Albans) Private Client
Penny Carey (University of Hertfordshire)
Neil Johnson Gisby Harrison
Suna Duzgan Fish & Co
Alexander McDowall Hertfordshire County Council
Nicola Smyrl of Taylor Walton (Luton and an Employment Lawyer)
(From January 2025 until 31 December 2025)
Laura Woolard of Taylor Walton (St Albans and a Family Lawyer)
Amanda Thurston University of Hertfordshire
Jane-Louise Burrows Fullers Family law
Amy Hodgson Whiskas LLP
National Council Member
Josephine Duchenne
National Council Member for Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire (from 15th October 2021)
From the President...
It has been a busy time since taking over as president in January 2025. Since our last committee meeting on the 21st of January; I have attended a number of events on behalf of Herts Law Society.
On 20th of March, I attended the Beds, Bucks & Herts ACCA annual dinner at Sopwell House. This was a very well attended event, of course this was the Chartered Accountant event for the three counties and there were jokes made at the expense of lawyers. The headline speaker was John Sills , Managing Partner at The Foundation. Author of The Human Experience. Trustee of Young Enterprise. He gave a very impressive speech in relation to the positive effects of Seeking to embed the human experience within the transactional marketplace; which of course would have immediate advantages within a legal context; as well as the chartered accounting context. I sought to interest him in our annual dinner; but unfortunately he is already booked up for our date.
On the 26th of March 2025; was the SQE event arranged by University of Hertfordshire. It set out the comprehensive way in which the SQE is being taught at the university; and had question and answer sessions with current students; and a previous student who has now passed the course; and is qualified as a local
government solicitor. There was also very helpful feedback from the course tutors; and this event has been recorded so that it could be utilised in due course.
On 27th of March I attended the High Sheriff awards of Hertfordshire, at the university of Hertfordshire campus. Vice President Michael Scutt was also in attendance, and indeed received an award for his Park Run commitments.
On the 2nd of April, Michael very kindly deputised for me, for a teams meeting for SAALs; in which he reported that there was a lively discussion in relation to what the Law Society should do in relation to the Axiom Ince case.
On the 3rd of April, I was due to attend the local law societies meeting in Birmingham, and had taken specific steps to book a train journey. Frustratingly for me, outside of Birmingham; at Tile Hill station, there was a fire on the embankment, and I ended up being stranded there for over 3 hours. I did get my train ticket refunded, but unfortunately missed out on that event which I was particularly looking forward to.
Webinar series, 33 Bedford Row: I have been liaising with Geoff Carr , following an introduction by Immediate Past president Kirsty Richards , with a view to arranging a webinar series of lectures. He has offered the following lectures;
Simon Hill “Business rates" Teri Howell “contempt in civil court” Carl Buckley “human rights claims, JR case stated appeals, actions against police, inquest etc.”
They are also due to revert to me in relation to possible lectures in employment and family law.
Further to this, I am aware that our Treasurer Judith Gower has responded to a proposal by Amanda Perroton of BHPtaxlaw, specifically for conveyances in relation to managing tax risks for conveyancing; which would appear to be a very useful course.
Herts Law Society Awards & Annual Dinner
Our sub-committee has had a number of very useful meetings in preparation of our annual dinner, scheduled to take place at Hatfield House on Friday 6th June. Formal invites and full details of the evening will be coming out to all members shortly.
This year’s full list of awards are as follows:
Trainee/Paralegal of the Year
Junior Lawyer of the Year Award 2025
Solicitor of the Year Award 2025
Law firm of the Year Award 2025
Lifetime Achievement Award 2025
Hertfordshire Law Society Community Engagement Award 2025
At the time of publication nomination forms should have already been issued to all members of HLS. However, please get in touch if you have not received a form and would like to make a nomination.
Massimo Trebar President, Hertfordshire Law Society
Michael Scutt
Update from Josephine Duchenne –National Council
It has been an honour to represent Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire as a Council Member at The Law Society for England and Wales since October 2021. If you recall, I took over from Paul Davies who had diligently represented Hertfordshire for over 12 years, not only as a Council Member but for a fair amount of time as Chair of the Membership and Communications Committee.
Just to give you flavour of what goes on at TLS, there are quarterly meetings of the full Council, which consists mainly of geographic seats, but also certain characteristic seats, as they are called –such as family, housing, civil litigation, junior lawyers, employment, in-house, and many others besides. We meet in the Council Chamber at Chancery Lane, which is a hybrid event, but I find I feel more involved by attending in person and always try to contribute to the discussions as well as ask questions. We get a bulky set of papers by email around 10 days before a Council Meeting, which usually includes reports from the CEO, President, Board Chair, other committees and matters which require discussion and voting upon. Business of the day is divided into Part One and Part Two matters, the former can be disseminated to the membership, the latter is confidential.
The committee structure at Hertfordshire Law Society is such that at the quarterly meetings, which I have mostly attended (unless unwell or there is a clash), I usually provide a written report of what been going on at The Law Society, including a summary of Part One business, sent to Council Members by TLS. Hertfordshire
Member
Law Society welcomes members living or practising in Bedfordshire, of which I am one, and I am pleased that we also have a member on HLS who works in Bedfordshire, Jane-Louise Burrows.
Since taking my role as Council Member there have been four Presidents at TLS, each with a different set of priorities, but all very hard working and committed to the future of TLS as well as supporting solicitors. The Presidents have extensive commitments including travel schedules. First of all, there was I. Stephanie Boyce, who took on the role of acting President earlier than originally expected, followed by Lubna Shuja, Nick Emmerson and currently we have Richard Atkinson, a solicitor working in criminal law, who is guest of honour at our Annual Dinner in June.
The Presidents of HLS are also very hardworking, and in addition to attending functions at neighbouring law societies, they are invited to a twice yearly ‘Town Hall’ style meeting with the national President of TLS and other office holders. I have attended some of these meeting as CM. There are also regional meetings of the Southern Area of Local Law Societies, to which office holders of the national LS have not been invited, I think it is fair to say that these informal meetings, both of Teams and in person have been beneficial in benchmarking HLS against other local law societies, getting ideas to possible sponsorship and seminars. Paul Davies kindly acts as Hon. Secretary and keeps all in order.
An annual event at TLS is the Strategic Planning meeting held in February and aims to monitor or set the strategic objectives on a 3-year basis. This year only, the event was held over two days, with view to setting objectives for the period November 2025 to October 2028. Unfortunately, on this occasion, I was unable to attend.
There have been various Consumer Consultations during my time as a Council Member, which I have tried to respond to as well as other ad hoc meetings at TLS for Council Members, including a recent webinar on Reframing Justice (for which see further details on TLS website). Essentially the message is how to talk about access to justice and the rule of law.
Bicentenary
In 2023 I joined a working group for the bicentenary, which is being celebrated throughout this year. I have worked with a number of TLS staff and other council members to capture a wide range of views. There is a digital history exhibition on the TLS website which I hope you may get a chance to look at, showcasing stories in blocks of 50 years, highlighting key milestones and legislation. It is worth a read, I think. The President is making a significant number of visits to extended parts of England and Wales this year in support of the anniversary.
‘Get Involved’
Last year I joined the Membership and Communications Committee as a committee member and there are likely to be some changes in due course, to the way TLS engages with its members and how you can participate. TLS will be launching opportunities for many more solicitors than presently make up the various committees, to volunteer, share opinions and support the profession in various ways such as joining a focus group, a short-term working group, contributing to surveys and online panel. The project is in its early stages and an update will follow.
However, it is not all work – last year I managed to do the London Legal Walk with a number of Council Members. Good atmosphere and support followed by a street party at Carey Street! This year the date is 17th June.
Finally, I would say the last few years have been an interesting and rewarding experience – I have made many new friends at TLS and beyond and I do hope I will be able to continue in this role. I am fortunate in that I can now work part-time. There is a time commitment in being a Council Member and I am pleased to be able to do so at this juncture. As I write in mid-April, the next significant event on the horizon at TLS are the hustings in early May, for the Deputy Vice President. Thank you for taking the time to read this article and if you do have any questions or comments, please get in touch.
Josephine Duchenne Family Solicitor at Pictons
http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/
Josephine Duchenne
Freedom of Speech in the workplace –finding the balance
Brodie Pearson
In the recent case of Higgs v Farmor’s School, the Court of Appeal found that a school worker’s dismissal for gender-critical social media posts was discriminatory.
The judgment, which has been described as a landmark decision, considers the extent of a worker’s right to freedom of speech and to express their beliefs, and the limits of an employer’s right to interfere where a worker expresses their views in a way others complain is offensive or inappropriate.
The decision is an important development in employment law, clarifying the extent to which an employer may be able to objectively justify direct discrimination because of religion and belief.
Facts of the case
Kristie Higgs, a devout Christian, worked at Farmor’s School (“the School”) as a pastoral assistant and work experience manager. Ms Higgs added posts to her personal Facebook page to voice her concerns about the teaching of gender identity and same-sex marriage in schools stating that children were being “brainwashed”. Ms Higgs’ Facebook account was a private account, in her maiden name and did not link her to the School in anyway.
The posts were viewed by a parent of a pupil at Farmor’s School who perceived them as “homophobic and prejudiced” and subsequently complained to the School.
The complaint triggered an internal investigation and Ms Higgs was dismissed for gross misconduct on the basis that her actions could harm the School’s reputation. Ms Higgs comments on Facebook were described by the School during the disciplinary process as offensive and inappropriate. They also stated that the comments were discriminatory and could be regarded as harassment.
Ms Higgs unsuccessfully appealed the decision to dismiss before bringing her claims in the employment tribunal. Ms Higgs brought claims for direct discrimination and harassment based on her gender critical beliefs.
ET Decision
The Employment Tribunal decided that Ms Higgs held philosophical beliefs which were worthy of protection under the Equality Act 2010. This followed other recent case law which had decided that gender critical beliefs were protected as a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal considered that Ms Higgs social media expressed protected philosophical beliefs including that gender is binary and not fluid; that samesex marriage cannot be equated with traditional marriage between a man/ woman; and it is not appropriate to teach anything different to young children.
However, the Tribunal did not agree that Ms Higgs had been subject to discrimination or harassment. The Tribunal considered that Ms Higgs was dismissed due to the manner in which she had expressed those beliefs on Facebook which they considered to be inappropriate and inflammatory, not because of those beliefs.
EAT Decision
The EAT allowed Ms Higgs’ appeal, holding that the Employment Tribunal had failed to question whether the School’s conduct was because of, or
related to, the expression/manifestation of Ms Higgs’ protected beliefs and that they should have considered whether there was a sufficiently close or direct nexus between her protected beliefs and her social media posts. As such, the EAT concluded that the ET had failed to carry out a proportionality assessment of the School’s actions against Ms Higgs’ rights to freedom of belief and freedom of expression, which are important and fundamental human rights.
The case was, therefore, remitted back to the Tribunal, but Ms Higgs appealed to the Court of Appeal. She disagreed that the case should be remitted and argued that the EAT should have made a decision on her case.
The Court of Appeal’s Judgment
The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Ms Higgs determining that her dismissal was discriminatory.
In essence the Court of Appeal found that the decision to dismiss was disproportionate to the issues. Whilst the Court felt that Ms Higgs Facebook posts used offensive language, it was reiterated that there is no legal right “not to be offended”. The Court weighed up the circumstances which included:
• Her views did not impact her work at the School or affect her treatment of staff or pupils. The context of the posts was that she was expressing personal views and would not have made similar comments in the workplace, which the Court felt was important.
• There was no evidence that there had been any damage to the School’s reputation, in particular it was noted that Ms Higgs Facebook account made no reference to the School and she used her maiden name, meaning that it was not obvious that the account belonged to her. Ms Higgs had only 100 ‘friends’ on Facebook
meaning the prospect of the posts becoming widely viewed was limited.
In these specific circumstances, dismissal was a disproportionate reaction to the posts. Whilst the Court did discuss that it was reasonable for the School to investigate the posts, it was not specifically considered whether a lesser disciplinary sanction would have been acceptable in this case.
Key points for employers
The key take away from this case is that in some situations, the actions of an employer which amount to direct discrimination because of the employee’s religion or beliefs can be objectively justified. This is different from other types of direct discrimination such as race or sex which generally cannot be justified in any circumstances.
This case points out that the holding
of a belief is fundamentally different from the way that an employee or worker may choose to manifest that belief. Dismissing an employee just because they hold a protected belief is unlawful discrimination. However, dismissing an employee because of something objectionable in the way they express the belief is potentially justified. However, the dismissal must be a proportionate reaction and this requires the employer to carry out a balancing exercise of the relevant circumstances.
With many employers now having to deal with conflicting views in the workplace, this case makes it clear that careful thought needs to be given on how to approach a situation where one employee is offended or upset by the views of another. Employers are obliged to provide their employees with a safe working environment and protect
them from harassment. However, this case makes it clear that there is no right not to be offended and that a balance needs to be struck, taking into account the fundamental rights to freedom of belief and expression.
Before an employer considers taking action against an employee for expressing what they may consider to be offensive or inflammatory views, issues to consider will include: have the views been expressed in a personal or workplace setting; does the way in which an employee expressed their views have any impact on their work or their interactions with work colleagues and contacts; and is there any evidence of a genuine risk to the reputation of the business.
Brodie Pearson , Trainee Solicitor, Taylor Walton LLP
ReviewSolicitors Responds to SRA’s Call For ‘Universal Approach’
Study on consumer vulnerability in the legal market
ReviewSolicitors, the UK’s leading legal-specific review platform, has welcomed calls by the SRA to make the sector more accessible for vulnerable consumers.
Following a recent study on consumer vulnerability in the legal market, SRA Chief Executive Paul Phillip said: “It is clear that, in order to improve accessibility, build trust, and reduce complaints, the legal sector could look at designing services that are accessible and inclusive for everyone.”
The research, carried out by Professor
Harriet Pierpoint and Dr Paolo Baffero (University of South Wales), highlighted the complexity of defining and quantifying client vulnerability.
Instead of focusing on individual adjustments, the study recommended a ‘universal practice’ approach, encouraging legal services to break down barriers to become more easily attainable.
Adam Hall, Head of Partnerships at ReviewSolicitors, said: “We’re delighted to see the findings of this study. At ReviewSolicitors we’re proud to offer a widely accessible and user-friendly platform,
supporting vulnerable individuals to find reliable legal recommendations.
“The report also encouraged law firms to seek more ‘opportunities for consumer feedback’. This approach aligns closely with our commitment to transparency and client engagement, which is key to empowering informed decision-making.”
For more information on how to best approach upcoming SRA regulations, please email Adam, Head of Partnerships at ReviewSolicitors.
Adam.hall@reviewsolicitors.com
http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/
A fundamentally dishonest claimant
Summary
This case concerns a fundamentally dishonest claimant. The judge held that the experts in the case were reliant on selfreporting by the claimant, who the judge found to be wholly unreliable, as to the extent to which the alleged injuries suffered had impacted her life.
Learning points
Learning points for experts:
• The medical and psychological experts in a personal injury case will often need to rely largely on the self-report of the claimant,
• If an expert’s report is built on a false factual basis (e.g. the client is found to be wholly unreliable), the expert evidence can be rejected
• Consequently, the credibility of the injured person is of central importance.
Learning points for instructing parties:
• The rule determined by the Supreme Court on uncontroverted evidence in Tui v Griffiths does not apply in certain circumstances. Seven circumstances are cited in the judgment including where the report is founded on a false basis.
The case
The claimant was seeking damages for soft tissue and psychological injuries she claimed to have suffered while a passenger in 3 separate car accidents between 2015 and 2016. She also claimed to have suffered tinnitus as a result of the second and third accidents.
Expert evidence in general
The judge noted that these types of soft tissue and psychological injuries are rarely susceptible to objective proof, and that a medical expert must instead rely almost exclusively on examination and the history provided by the apparently injured party. As Mr Justice Martin Spenser had noted in Molodi v CVMS [2018] EWHC 1288 (QB) if the history is not materially accurate, then the medical opinion expressed must be unreliable.
Key to any history is the impact of the injury on the person’s life, with an injury that prevents or limits pursuit of a loved pastime likely to be seen as more serious that one that does not. Therefore, the judge noted, the credibility of the apparently
injured person is of central importance. The judge noted that the factors referred to by Mr Justice Spenser in Molodi as likely to be present in a genuine claim, concern credibility, including: seeking medical assistance and acting in accordance with medical advice.
The expert evidence in the case
The claimant instructed Mr Farhan, who dealt with shoulder and back issues, and Dr Whittington, who dealt with the psychological injury. She also saw experts in tinnitus and rheumatology, and a pain consultant.
Mr Farham found some generalised restriction of the claimant’s cervical spine and, based on the claimant’s accounts of the psychological impact, referred to her a psychologist after concluding that the psychological reactions to the accident overshadowed her physical injuries.
Dr Whittington diagnosed mixed anxiety and depressive disorder (‘MADD’), body dysmorphic disorder (‘BDD) and bulimia, attributing them to the accident. He relied on the claimant’s account that before the accident she had “attended the gym 6 times per week, twice daily and regularly competed in fitness events” but after the accident “she was unable to exercise”.
The experts did not provide oral evidence.
The claimant’s evidence
The claimant had held a number of roles in legal firms. In cross-examination, the claimant accepted that in her Linkedin profile and CV she held herself out to be far more qualified than she actually was, leading her, the judge determined, to preemptively resign from a role ahead of a disciplinary meeting about her qualifications.
The judge determined that the claimant was “a wholly unreliable witness who gave evidence without any regard for the truth guided only by what she perceived to be her own interests. She made things up when asked difficult questions and on occasion gave patently false answers.”
Documentary evidence
The court considered documentary evidence on the number (Continues on page 12)
A fundamentally dishonest claimant (Continued)
of times the claimant accessed the gym after the accidents and Facebook posts showing that she had competed in several strenuous runs and hikes in 2017 and 2018, which were inconsistent with the self-reporting of the impact of her life.
Findings of fact
The judge made several findings of fact including:
• The Claimant deliberately lied about her academic achievements on her CV and Linkedin profile.
• She deliberately lied about her professional status.
• She made up a story about being effectively blackmailed by a witness in the case who she maintained had threatened to share an intimate video of the 2 of them with the Claimant’s long-term boyfriend.
• She deliberately failed to give Dr Whittington the full story of her recovery from any injury sustained in the accidents by failing to mention the fact that she had completed an ascent of Ben Nevis and the Yorkshire 3 Peaks.
• The claimant is a generally dishonest person.
Tui v Griffiths
Counsel for the claimant submitted that the defendant’s had to
“undermine the factual substratum of the claimant’s uncontroverted evidence” and that the points ought to have been raised in questions to experts.
The Supreme Court held in Tui v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48 that generally, if a conclusion expressed in an expert report was to be challenged, the expert should be given an opportunity to respond to the challenge. However, this rule would not apply in certain circumstances including where the report is founded on a false basis.
The judge found that he was entitled to reject the expert evidence in this case because it was built on a false factual basis, i.e. the claimant’s untrue history.
Findings in respect of injuries suffered
The judge dismissed all parts of each claim, rejecting the claimants account of the injuries in its entirety as the entire case was based on her credibility.
Sean Mosby, EWI
Link to the Judgment
Celebrating our 1st Birthday as FHM Forensic Accounting
In April we celebrated our first birthday as FHM Forensic Accounting. Although only founded a year ago, our expert Fiona Hotston Moore has over 20 years’ experience as a forensic accountant and expert witness. Our Associate Director, Tom Arnold, is a qualified accountant and has worked alongside Fiona as a forensic accountant for almost five years.
In addition to Fiona and Tom, who lead on all client assignments, we have Graham Hines who is our Managing Director and co-founder. He looks after all the back-office including technology, website, finance and compliance.
In May we were delighted to welcome our fourth team member, Kirsty Shuckford . She joined the FHM team as an Assistant Manager. Kirsty is a qualified accountant with five years’ experience working both in accountancy firms and also as a financial accountant in a global business.
In addition to the core team, we are delighted to work with other professionals. This includes tax and corporate finance specialists and allows us to provide a first class and seamless advisory service to our clients. We do not provide ongoing accounting or tax compliance but we can suggest appropriate firms.
As a team we have adopted fully remote working. This delivers an excellent work-life balance for the team and means we operate in a sustainable way by eliminating the need for dedicated office space… and the daily commute.
Year one statistics
Of course, as forensic accountants, we do like numbers and financial analysis so here are a few of our statistics.
In our first year, we accepted 102 engagements. Of these 48 were appointments as Single Joint Expert in matrimonial cases or shareholder/ commercial disputes. Thirty
engagements were as Shadow Adviser or Party Expert and another ten were company valuations for tax or strategic planning purposes. About a quarter of the instructions came from law firms based in East Anglia.
FHM Forensic Accounting Instructions
The FHM team: Kirsty Shuckford, Graham Hines, Fiona Hotston Moore and Tom Arnold.
Businesses we have valued for dispute, divorce and tax planning cases have been in a wide variety of sectors. These include dentists, wealth management, law firms, accountancy practices, technology, media, farming, property, construction, industrial services, fashion, hospitality and retail.
What next?
We plan to continue focusing on our mission to help clients resolve financial disputes and problems in an efficient and cost-effective way. Whether the case is large or small, we provide opinions that are clear, relevant, credible, informed and cost-proportionate.
Our specialist forensic accounting services include:
• Business valuations
• Divorce and matrimonial matters
• Shareholder and commercial disputes
• Professional negligence claims
• Private client and family matters
By continuing our focus on business valuation and forensic accounting we hope to further expand our law firm network and to recruit additional qualified accountants who would like to specialize in forensic accounting.
Over the next few months, we will continue our webinars series for our legal contacts and, if you would like an inhouse training session or virtual meet-up, please do let us know.
Further information
Our website has details of our services and also lots of relevant articles on business valuation and forensic accounting. You can also download our brochure, CVs and tax cards.
Book Reviews
Arbitration And Mediation In Nineteenth-Century England
By Francis Calvert Boorman and Rhiannon Markless
ISBN 978 1 91963 184 4
HOLO BOOKS/ THE ARBITRATION PRESS www.holobooks.co.uk
The Last In The Series Of Great Arbitration Series Of Books From Holo And From Derek Roebuck
We owe a debt to the late Derek Roebuck for his excellent series of books on the history of mediation in England, finishing off with this work entitled ‘Arbitration and Mediation in Nineteenth-Century England’ published by Holo Books and the Arbitration Press.
This new title has been written by his collaborators on the previous volume, ‘English Arbitration and Mediation in the Long Eighteenth Century’, by Francis Calvert Boorman and Rhiannon Markless. It is a great final tribute.
Modern lawyers realise that arbitration remained a vital institution in nineteenthcentury England. The book investigates how the settlement of disputes changed from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the Arbitration Act 1889. It was a time in legal history of substantial upheaval “in the demographics, society and economy of England” which has, of course, repeated itself since.
There was a booming population in Victorian times unlike today, linked together with emerging urbanisation and the growth of factory production. The Victorians created newly enriched industrialists from the wealth they generated, which also produced a burgeoning working class with squalid urban conditions which has been well
Appreciations by Elizabeth Robson Taylor MA of Richmond Green Chambers and Phillip Taylor MBE, Head of Chambers, Reviews Editor, “The Barrister”, and Mediator
documented
As the writers observe, the growth in new technologies and industries such as the railways expanded for everyone. The introduction of massive change from what we now call the ‘Industrial Revolution’ with flourishing new business organisations and opportunities led to change. Along with production and international trade growth in England, came its imperial ambitions and social unrest… and disputes!
And these changes led to new forms of “dispute” to go with the age-old differences over land and debts, and within the family. The authors explain how arbitration continued to be used and was adapted to suit novel and diverse challenges in the nineteenth century. This included an overloaded legal system which needed modernisation (as today), the rise of anonymous credit transactions and an increasingly organised labour movement. So, nothing much has changed!
The relationship of arbitration to the legal profession and the commercial community is well explored, with their different positions on the visions of how arbitration should be structured and regulated as an emerging alternative dispute resolution process.
The expanding use of arbitration as a tool of governance is usefully examined, with the increasing use of statute based law for both national and local issues.
We liked Francis and Rhiannon’s description of the international perspective, viewing arbitration as a separate process to bring peace between nations on the international stage, and also used in various aspects of the slave trade as attempts to end it increased.
For those reading the book, the elucidation of “the varied experiences of both parties, from aristocratic mine-owners to widowed businesswomen, and arbitrators” is most usefully explained.
This final work is a worthy tribute to the lasting impact of Derek Roebuck’s scholarship on this important and yet
often ignored or sidelined area of the legal process. We own enormous gratitude to Derek and to his widow Susanna Hoe for his enduring works. Thank you.
The date of publication of the hardback edition is cited as June 2024.
Legal Aid Handbook 2024/25
The 2024 Standard Civil Contract and The 2025 Standard Crime Contract
Edited by: Vicky Ling, Sue James and Simon Mullings
ISBN: 978-1-913648-68-8
Legal Action Group
Supported by The Law Society www.lag.org.uk
ConfusedByTheComplexitiesOfLegal Aid?
This Is The Only Comprehensive Guide To The Legal Aid Scheme -- Now In Its New Annual Edition For 2025
“Without legal aid, there is no access to justice.” In their terse and to the point introduction to this latest edition of the celebrated ‘Legal Aid Handbook’ (published annually), editors
Vicky Ling, Sue James and Simon Mullings have certainly set out to remind everyone involved in the justice system of this painfully obvious and uncomfortable truth for the 2020s.
Legal aid and advice, as they rightly insist, is a public service, critical, indeed, to ensure the fairness of the justice system. One might add, in tandem with the editors, that legal aid is chronically and consistently underfunded, while at the same time, its complexity increases. All the more reason why dedicated practitioners in this challenging and vital area of law should acquire this latest edition of the ‘Legal Aid Handbook
2024/25’ published annually by the Legal Action Group (LAG).
The statement has been made -- and who could disagree -- that all busy practitioners involved with legal aid cases should have a copy of this Handbook permanently on their desks -- and so many do. Always have the most recent edition because the rules do change quite often. As the publishers point out, this is ‘the only comprehensive guide to the legal aid scheme.’ Within almost 800 pages the handbook provides all pertinent and specific advice on the conduct of cases, as well as advocacy and the practicalities if financial and contract management, plus advice on getting paid.
As the subtitle indicates, this new and updated edition provides advice on ‘The Standard Civil Contract 2024’ and ‘The Standard Crime Contract 2025’ -- and there’s a new chapter on “what you need to know at a glance” which we found most helpful. Other new sections of the text include key resources and key points to note.
As a work of reference, including key chapters written by a total of thirteen expert contributors, including the editors -- this is a handbook that is more than useful, as it includes tables of cases, statutes, statutory instruments -- and a table of EU and international legislation. Straightforward to navigate, it also provides a list of abbreviations (very useful, that), a glossary, an index of seventy-five pages -- plus five appendices, which include advice on what you can claim for in civil, as well as criminal costs.
For all practitioners who handle legal aid cases, this newly published up to date and information-rich handbook should be regarded as an absolutely essential purchase.
The date of publication is cited as November 2024.
Tribunal Practice And Procedure
Tribunals under the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 6th edition
By Edward Jacobs
http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/
ISBN: 978 1 91364 868 8
Legal Action Group www.lag.org.uk
Confused By The Complexities And Contradictions Of Tribunals? This Definitely Is The Definitive Guide Now Published In A New 6th Edition
There is many a lawyer whose practice generally -- and almost invariably -- is concerned mainly with court work. But, while this is mostly the case, most lawyers, more often than not, do find themselves involved, often frequently, in the workings and procedures of a tribunal -- which generally differ somewhat from the procedures of the courts.
Fortunately the clarification of this important point is dealt with extensively, authoritatively and in detail in this book which, now in its 6th edition, has proved itself over the years as an essential and certainly authoritative source of reference for any and all practitioners finding themselves dealing with tribunals, as it clarifies what a tribunal is and what it does -- while pointing up the often subtle differences between the two.
In which case, the sensible and well informed course of action on the part of the practitioner is to acquire this book. Recently published by the Legal Action Group (LAG), it has over six editions, emerged as the definitive work on this often confusing area of practice, with an authority that is largely unchallenged.
The fact that it has acquired such a lengthy publication history offers assurance that it’s the definitive work indeed in this often complex subject, as the practice and procedure of tribunals has undergone certain changes over the years. As LAG confirms, this is “the most comprehensive and authoritative guide to the integrated
Tribunal system, created by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.”
So what then, are the differences between a court and a tribunal?
There’s many a lawyer who has, almost inevitably, enquired as to what the precise difference actually is. The immediate answer is that there is ‘no general definition in this specific sense of its general features.’ Or, as pointed out in the past by another member of the judiciary, “the word ‘tribunal’ has not, like the word ‘court’ an ascertainable meaning in English law.”
This is arguably a traditional view which some might dispute. But whatever the argument, knowledge of the workings of contemporary tribunals is nonetheless essential for the interested and committed practitioner. And this is the assurance that this book provides.
It is certainly an impressive work of reference, offering extensive tables of cases, statutes and statutory instruments, plus a table of European and international legislation and -important this -- a table of abbreviations! Plus, the book is easy to navigate, with a detailed table of contents, numbered paragraphs throughout, a detailed index and for further clarification and for those doing research, a wealth of footnotes on almost every page.
Most importantly, there are two appendices, commencing with Appendix A, which features over seventy pages -the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Equally vital is Appendix B -The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008.
This thorough, useful and informative text certainly deserves the definition of indispensable -- for any practitioner embroiled in the often complex issues which characterise contemporary tribunals.
And also, in the tradition of LAG, this is a work of reference which can certainly prove helpful to litigants in person.
The date of publication is cited as 2024.
Online wills more likely to include a charitable gift
Legacy Futures (https://www. legacyfutures.com) has released key findings from its 2024 research into online wills. The study, conducted as part of Legacy Futures’ Digital Legacy Insights programme*, looked at online wills from a consumer perspective to shed light on the motivations and behaviours of those choosing to create wills online, as well as the role charities play in the space.
Almost one in ten wills made are now made online, a figure that is set to grow over the next few years as online channels become increasingly viewed as a more convenient and affordable way to make a will. For a large number of charities, online wills are being used to attract and engage would-be donors, providing an effective, scalable and measurable way to generate legacy gifts.
The research brought to light opportunities and challenges associated with the increasing popularity of online wills.
Key findings
• Nearly one in ten (9% of) people who have created a will have done so online, and one in five who have yet to make a will plan to do so online.
• Wills made online are more likely to include a charitable gift.
• Online will makers are more likely to be younger, have a higher household income, be working, single and have children than the average will maker; however, a significant proportion are aged 65+.
• Charities’ association with online will providers and products lend credibility and trust, serving to endorse them.
Key Challenges
• Confusion exists around the role of the charity in the online will making process, with some people unsure whether they are ‘supporting’ the charity just by using the service, or believing the service is part of the charity’s provision.
• Many consumers assume that all online will products are broadly the same. When carrying out research to decide which provider to use, their focus is more likely to be on ensuring the company is reputable and that the process of making the will is smooth rather than the finer details and terms and conditions of the individual product and whether it fits their requirements and circumstances.
• The research also found that a consumer’s journey to making an online will is not linear; long time lags were reported between the initial consideration (to leave a legacy gift) and the action (to commit to the gift in a will).
• As consumers go through the online will making process, moving from consideration to execution, the visibility of the charity often reduces, with the online will provider becoming more prominent.
Anna Turner , head of research and insight at Legacy Futures, said: “These findings provide valuable insight into how consumers are using online wills and highlight their growing significance in legacy fundraising. As more people opt for digital will creation and providers enhance their offerings, this trend is set to continue, shaping the future of charitable giving through online wills. This is potentially very exciting for charities, for whom the
trend presents further opportunities to garner legacy supporters.
“With younger people being increasingly digital first and more likely to turn to the internet for advice and conduct their financial affairs online, it is likely that a significant proportion of new people entering the will making market will gravitate towards an online option.”
Considerations for charities
• The research flagged areas for charities to be aware of when forming online will partnerships and promoting this service.
• Clarity and transparency: charities need to be clear about their offering, why they are offering it and their role in the process, so consumers understand their motivations and how to support them.
• Optimising the potential for gifts: given that online wills are attracting a larger proportion of younger consumers, charities need to consider how to effectively steward supporters over a longer period.
• Managing risk: as consumers are more likely to trust an online will provider due to its association with a charity, charities must make sure that they understand the finer details of each of the products and that their chosen partners are offering quality, ethical and compliant products.
Download the public briefing
The Digital Legacy Insights 2024 public briefing can be viewed here: https://www.legacyfutures.com/ resources/online-wills-through-theeyes-of-the-consumer/
(The full research findings are available to programme members only).
*https://www.legacyfutures.com/ services/legacy-foresight/research/ digital-legacy-insights/
