Herts Law Society Magazine issue 43

issue 43 Summer 2019

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Hatfield House Revisited

Annual HLS Dinner and Awards Evening - report on page 6 Also this issue: • Money Laundering Regulations - Probate and Trust Committee • Wales & Scotland are seeing fastest growth in charitable bequests • Shift in attitudes to gifts in wills and much more...

▲

Contents

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Contents issue 43 Summer 2019

4

Council Members for 2019

12

Lawyers in the Movies Quiz

23

The importance of IT in Schools

5

From the President

14

Probate and Trust Committee

26

Experts and their evidence

6

HSL Annual Dinner 2019

16

Navigating the Challenges Ahead

30

Report to the SAALS Meeting

10

Money Laundering Regulations

18

Growth in charitable bequests

33

Quiz Answers

11

University of Herts Law School

21

Letter to the Editor

34

Solving the back office puzzle

Published by: EAST PARK COMMUNICATIONS Ltd. Unit 27a, Price St. Business Centre, Price St., Birkenhead, Wirral CH41 4JQ Tel: 0151 651 2776 simon@eastparkcommunications.co.uk www.eastparkcommunications.co.uk

Advertising Simon Castell Laura Seymour

Design Phil Grindley East Park Studio

Managing Editor Jeremy Chandler-Smith

Accounts Tony Kay

Published: Summer 2019 Legal Notice Š East Park Communications Ltd. None of the editorial or photographs may be reproduced without prior written

permission from the publishers. East Park Communications Ltd would like to point out that all editorial comment and articles are the responsibility of the originators and may or may not reflect the opinions of East Park Communications Ltd. Correct at time of going to press.

DISCLAIMER: the views expressed by the writers in this magazine are not necessarily those of the Hertfordshire Law Society

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

3â–˛

Council Listings

Council Members 2019 President Judith Gower Hertfordshire County Council (Hertford) Local Government

Members

Jessica Moseley Debenhams Ottaway, Private Client Solicitor

Vice President Neil Johnson HRJ Foreman Laws (Hitchin) Civil Litigation

Nicholas Belcher Nockolds Solicitors Limited (Bishop's Stortford) Agricultural and Liquor & Gaming Licensing

Hon Secretary and Treasurer Claire Sharp Debenhams Ottaway (St Albans) Private Client

Marilyn Bell SA Law (St Albans) Family

Immediate Past President Attia Hussain Crane & Staples (Welwyn Garden City) Family

â–˛4

David Bird Crane & Staples (Welwyn Garden City) Private Client & Trusts

(From January 2019 until 31 December 2020)

Penny Carey University of Hertfordshire (Hatfield) Academic

Gary Smith Nockolds Solicitors Limited (Bishop's Stortford) Employment

The Law Society Relationship Manager – East

Jeremy Chandler-Smith JCS Solicitors (Codicote) Sole Practitioner

Amanda Thurston Curwens (Hoddesdon) Family

National Council Member

Paul Davies Hamilton Davies (Stevenage) Employment, Family and Litigation

Parliamentary Liaison Officer

Steven Hamilton Taylor Walton LLP (Harpenden) Private Client

Jack Dunkley

Judith Gower

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Editorial

From the President...

I hope that those of you who attended the annual dinner on 6 June 2019 enjoyed the evening as much as I did. The excellent speakers were Christina Blacklaws President of the Law Society and Eric Knowles from the Antiques Roadshow and Bargain Hunt. I would like to tank again all those who helped make it such an excellent event. I would like to thank Debenhams Ottaway for their assistance with the organisation. A full report is on pages 6-9.

Hot on the heels of our annual dinner is the President and Secretaries Conference at the Law Society and another black tie dinner. I have been asked to be a presenter at one of the sessions and on the panel for the last plenary session so hope to increase the profile of Hertfordshire Law Society.

I have been having discussions with the University of Hertfordshire, the High Sheriff and the Hertfordshire community Foundation around an exciting CPD event on 3 October. Please put that event in your diaries now. Invitations will follow soon.

The Law Society and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) are working hard to manage the cost of delivering their work to the profession. Theirr plan for 2019-2020 is that the individual practising fee will be £278, staying at the same level as last year.

Every year they consult members about the practising certificate fee (PC fee) and how it is split between regulation, public interest and representation.

Judith Gower President Hertfordshire Law Society Twitter @judith_gower Linkedin Judith Gower Instagram @judithgower

Mewsings of the President’s Cat

My name is Gigi or to give you my full name Princess Gigi. I will be 2 in July and have lived with my human parents since September 2017. My hobbies are catching birds and mice and giving them to my mother in the bedroom, preferably in the middle of the night. I also like to wake them up at 6.15am every day as I don’t want them to be late for work.

I enjoy playing in the garden, climbing trees and trying to get fish out of the pond. Daddy has put a new fence round the pond so I can’t get at his fish! When I get wet I find the easiest way to get dry is to jump on one of them and dry off that way. I also like nice clean bedlinen to roll on when I am wet and dirty.

As you can see I enjoy helping them when they work at home.

You can follow me on Instagram and I might even follow you! @princessgig2019 #catsofinstagram

They are asking members to complete a short survey and share their views on the work the fee supports.

Read the consultation document at: https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/ news/stories/practising-certificate-fees-2019-20/ You can complete the short survey by midnight on 28 June 2019.

As part of the Law Society’s ongoing criminal justice campaign, they have launched a petition calling for the government to increase investment in the criminal justice system. To add your digital signature to the 3,000+ already on the petition, and for further details on the campaign, please visit the campaign webpage at https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/policy-campaigns/ campaigns/criminal-justice/ We are always looking for new members of the Council or help generally so if you feel that you can help your local law society please do get in touch with me judith.gower@ hertfordshire.gov.uk

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

5▲

Editorial Annual Dinner

Hertfordshire Law Society Dinner 2019 T

he HLS returned to the splendid and historical Old Palace at Hatfield House for the 2019 Annual Dinner. Hosted by this year’s President Mrs Judith Gower, over 120 guests gathered for an evening of entertainment and inspiration. We were delighted to welcome as guest speakers Christina Blacklaws, President of the Law Society of England and Wales, and Eric Knowles, Antiques Expert and Television Presenter.

Christina Blacklaws echoes Judith Gower on gender equality and diversity

Guests enjoyed a sunny drinks reception in the beautiful gardens against the magnificent backdrop of Hatfield House before Toastmaster Reg Parsons announced dinner.

President Judith Gower used The First Hundred Years campaign to set the theme of the evening. She delivered a compelling speech about the journey of women in law since 2019. The First 100 years is a ground-breaking history project, supported by the Law Society, Bar Council and CILEx. It is powered by Spark21, a charity founded to celebrate, inform and inspire future generations of women in the profession. 2019 marks the centenary of the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919 which paved the way for women to become lawyers and hold public office for the first time. The first four women to pass the Law Society examinations were Carrie Morrison, Maud Crofts, Mary Pickup and Mary Sykes. However the way the Law Society used to decide who would be first on the roll was not by any logical method such as the highest mark but who could win a race running down Chancery Lane to the Law Society!

Christina Blacklaws, President of the Law Society for England and Wales, continued the theme, stating how honoured she was to be the 5th woman of 174 Presidents and urged all legal professionals to support the recently launched new Women in Law pledge to support gender equality and diversity.

Judith Gower's passionate speech about equality and the first century of women in law

Eric Knowles sharing cases of mistaken identity

Antiques expert and TV presenter Eric Knowles spoke with genuine affection about his serendipitous connection with Judith, going back to 1962. Their love of antiques has continued to ensure their paths cross, leading to a joint TV appearance. Guests were entertained by his tales of the Antiques Roadshow as well as a number of cases of mistaken identity, including gardening expert Alan Titchmarsh!

Gold sponsor Index’s magician dazzled guests throughout the drinks and reception, and the popular Time Flies – fronted by His Honourable Judge Perusko - returned for a second time for guests to dance the night away.

▲6

The Old Palace with 'First Hundred Years' themed decor

Official photography by Jeremy Banks www.jeremybanksphotography.com and available to download free via https://jeremybanksphotography.com/herts-lawsociety-dinner-2019

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Editorial Annual Dinner

Gemma Windle of Taylor Walton (pictured with Christina Blacklaws) ensured the firm continued their winning streak as winner of the Hertfordshire Law Society 2019 prize for the trainee solicitor with the highest LPC score.

Hertfordshire Law Society Prize to Enehuwa Adagu, a second year law student at the University of Hertfordshire, pictured with Christina Blacklaws.

Newly Qualified Solicitors Amy Brown

Sharpe Pritchard

Sumaiyya Parkar Hertfordshire County Council Hannah Shareef Hertfordshire County Council Alice Simpson Debenhams Ottaway Anna Bithrey

Taylor Walton

Shreena Parekh Taylor Walton Deborah Milne Hertfordshire County Council

â–˛8

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

T

hree inaugural Hertfordshire Law Society Awards were presented. Nominated by members of the HLS the awards focused on the exceptional work and impact made by an individual or firm within the legal profession, public service or the community in Hertfordshire, going above and beyond what one would usually expect within or relating to the working environment.

Junior Lawyer of the Year Award 2019:

Outstanding Contribution of the Year Award

Legal Team of the Year 2019: Private Client

Crane and Staples

Owens Solicitors

in the Private Client team accepts the award.

Georgina Donellan,

2019: Yomi Oni-Williams,

department Taylor Walton's Richard Crocker, Partner

Thank you to our generous sponsors: GOLD sponsors

SILVER sponsors

BRONZE sponsors

Please follow, post and share news @HertsLawSoc

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

9â–˛

Editorial Advertorial

Complying with Money Laundering Regulations

D

ue to the clandestine nature of money laundering, it is almost impossible to understand the true scale of the problem. But we do know it is on the rise; the FCA estimates that around ÂŁ60billion is laundered through the UK every year.

intermediary business or contact. It is therefore imperative to identify the true beneficiary of the transaction to ensure the funds are legitimate.

Law firms are a key target for launderers, but Donald Toon, director of economic and cybercrime at the National Crime Agency (NCA), recently questioned whether lawyers were taking their obligations seriously enough after the number of Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) the NCA received from lawyers fell by 10% last year.

Undertaking money laundering checks is a time consuming and expensive process, with many law firms struggling to put the right processes in place. And even for those that do have AML processes in place, fake documents used by money launderers are now so sophisticated, that even if you do meet clients face to face and they produce identification such as passports, driving licences etc. you still cannot be 100% sure they are who they say they are.

Regulated law firms must, under the Money Laundering Regulations, undertake customer due diligence. This is not only to verify the identity of their clients, but also the identity of the beneficial owners of any businesses they work with and the nature of business transactions, which includes identifying the source of the funds.

The reason the BO and source must be identified is because where a Politically Exposed Person (PEP) or sanctioned individual is looking to make a financial transaction, they will do it through an

â–˛ 10

If your firm is not undertaking proper checks, you will be vulnerable to money launderers.

The only way you can be certain that your checks are compliant is by using an electronic money laundering checking systems to complete AML checks, Global Sanctions and PEP screening.

Electronic verification is not obligatory, but the 5th money laundering directive stipulates that electronic checks should be done where possible, so it is only a matter of time before electronic

checks become compulsory.

Good electronic verification platforms will allow clients to do all their anti-money laundering checks in one place, negating the need for manual checks and therefore saving time and money. They will also be constantly updated to ensure they are always compliant, making legacy systems a thing of the past.

It is more than likely that the directive will mandate electronic verification by 2020, and with the technology available now, there is no reason for law firms not to have the correct AML processes in place. Electronic AML platforms save time, money and are more reliable than manual checks ever can be. This gives law firms the peace of mind that they are stopping money launderers in their tracks, are fully compliant and able to prove that to authorities.

Index Property Information can provide electronic anti-money laundering and Identity checks that are comprehensive, robust, reliable and accurate.

For more information and to arrange a free trial please can contact Index Property Information on T: 01462 507005 E: herts@indexpi.co.uk or W: www.indexpi.co.uk

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Education

University of Hertfordshire Law School APPLICATIONS NOW OPEN FOR SEPTEMBER 2019 TRAIN TO BE A SOLICITOR

LLM IN LEGAL PRACTICE If you want to be a solicitor and work in the legal profession, the full time one year LLM Legal Practice offered by the University of Hertfordshire is the course you need! Our course not only offers the primary route into the legal profession but also enables you to obtain a prestigious LLM. You will leave us with the knowledge and skills required to be a practising solicitor, skills that are highly valued by potential employers, to bring in new business and also to better serve your firm’s existing clients.

How to apply You should have either a Qualifying law degree, with a minimum 2:2 classification or have successfully completed an undergraduate degree in a subject other than law and have successfully completed the GDL qualification.

Visit go.herts.ac.uk/llmlpc to find out more information and apply.

● LLM in International Human Rights Law ● LLM in International Law ● LLM in Intellectual Property and Data Protection Law ● LLM in International Commercial Law ● LLM in IT Law and Policy ● LLM in Law (We also offer a number of combined pathways) How to apply Visit go.herts.ac.uk/pglawto find out more information and apply.

Course length: Full Time, 1 Year; Part Time, 2 Years Contact lawadmissions@herts.ac.uk Visit us: Register for a postgraduate open day online at go.herts. ac.uk/opendays *List of modules may be subject to change (please see website for additional details)

Contact For admissions enquiries please email: lawadmissions@herts.ac.uk Telephone: 01707 284800 For further course information please email: Mike Howells, LLM Legal Practice Course Admissions Tutor m.howells2@herts.ac.uk Christopher Menzies, LPC Programme Leader c.menzies@herts.ac.uk

LLM Masters in Law The University of Hertfordshire’s diverse and flexible LLM in Law lets you study four modules of your choice, from a wide range of modules that are on offer, plus a dissertation. All of our modules are taught by specialists in their field, and are supported by up to date, cutting edge research and practice, so you can be sure that your studies will be relevant to your chosen future career.

The first class teaching is supported by real world, hands on exercises and discussions, to consolidate and deepen your learning. Our courses aim to give you the intellectual, transferable, practical skills and experience you need to follow your career goals. You may wish to pursue a future in the private or commercial sector, business, industry, academia or research. The possibilities are endless!

Pathways* offered in: ● LLM in Business Law ● LLM in Governance, Risk Management and Compliance ● LLM in International Financial Law

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

11 ▲

Quiz

ANSW E ON P.3 RS QUIZ F 3 ANS!

Lawyers in Movies Quiz Name the actor, character and Film.

Legal History Quiz 1. In which US State did Abraham Lincoln practice law before 6. Magna Carta is known as the World’s first Statute. In what year was it signed? he entered politics?

2. In what year did the last hanging take place in the UK?

7. In which country was Mahatma Ghandi called to the Bar?

3. Who was the first female Lord Chancellor of the UK?

8. Which French lawyer and politician was nicknamed the seagreen Incorruptible?

4. In what year did all women aged over 21 get the vote in the UK?

9. In which year did the Supreme Court replace the House of Lords as an appellate court?

5. In what year was the death penalty abolished in the UK for forging wills and powers of attorney?

10. Which country first gave women the vote?

â–˛ 12

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

13 â–²

Editorial Articles

Probate and Trust Committee

Minutes of the Meeting held on 4th June 2019 at the offices of Crane & Staples LLP, Welwyn Garden City Present: David Bird Chairman – Crane & Staples LLP Steven Hamilton Taylor Walton Richard Horwood Longmores Eileen Ismay Crane & Staples Nicholas Turner Debenhams Ottaway Apologies were received from Ruksana Kaskar, Angela Lever and Claire Sharp 1. Minutes of the Meeting held on 4th December 2018 These were approved as drawn.

2. Proposed increase in Probate Registry fees It was noted that there was no further news in this respect and Committee members agreed that it is unlikely these increases will be introduced very soon, given other Parliamentary pressures. However there is always a risk that the Order to increase them could be laid. Fortunately at least one MP has promised to vote against the increase so that a debate is likely to be triggered.

3. New Probate Registry Procedures All Committee members were finding very long delays now in receiving Grants after applications had been made. Delays are still being encountered as far as HMRC Inheritance Tax receipts are concerned, although the Probate Registries do continue to accept applications on the basis that the tax receipt will follow.

Although the Probate Registries no longer issue a copy of the Will attached to the Grant, it appears they still insist on receiving two photostat copies of the Will together with the application. Committee members were disappointed that a copy of the Will is no longer attached to the Grant, and it was agreed best practice is for the Executors to sign a copy of the Will being submitted to the Registry, that copy being kept in the file.

4. Inheritance Tax residence nil rate band (RNRB)where the death of the first spouse to die took place in the estate duty era

▲ 14

One Committee member was dealing with a case where a husband died in 1968, leaving a life interest in his house (which was in his sole name) and remaining residuary estate to his widow, who is still alive. The Life interest Trust is now worth approximately £2 million and the widow’s free estate is likely to be worth less than £2 million. It was agreed that estate duty would have been payable on the husband’s death in 1968 and as a result, there will be no inheritance tax payable in respect of the value of the Life Interest Trust under the estate duty surviving spouse exemption rules on the wife’s death.

Committee members were not certain whether for the purposes of the RNRB rules the value of the house which she had a right to occupy rent free under the life interest would be treated as exempt (meaning that for the purposes of the RNRB the value of the house would be included in the wife’s estate) or whether it would be treated as excluded property. If it is treated as excluded property then it would not be included in the wife’s estate and the RNRB would be lost. Committee members agreed that this was the more likely result but the detail in the legislation needed to be checked to confirm this.

On the basis that the value of the house is excluded property, a discussion followed about possible steps to be taken to secure the benefit of the RNRB for the widow’s estate. It was agreed the best option might be for the widow to purchase £350,000 worth of the house, although this would give rise to a Stamp Duty Land Tax liability. If so, consideration would also be given as to whether the widow would be a “first time buyer” for that purpose.

There was also the possibility that the price could be left outstanding as a loan but probably unsecured to avoid it being deducted from the net value of the interest in the property for IHT RNRB purposes. In that case it would also seem that the Transferable RNRB would also be available as it had not been used by the husband in 1968, hence the need to acquire £350,000 worth of the property. It was likely that the value of the Life Interest Trust should not be aggregated for the purposes of assessing whether or not the value of the estate was more than £2m but again this would need to be checked at the appropriate time.

5. Advice to clients in the context of making Wills as to the obligations of Trustees One Committee member had met some

criticism from the surviving spouse of a late client who had included in her Will gifts of part of her residuary estate to very young children, contingent upon their reaching the age of 18. The amounts involved were quite modest – around £20,000 for each infant child. While the late client had clearly understood that the funds would need to be held by the Trustees for some years and had discussed arrangements for successor Trustees, having chosen two close relatives to act initially, it had been suggested that she should have been given much more detailed advice as to the obligations of the Trustees and the practicalities involved in persuading other relatives/friends to take on the trusteeship. Committee members agreed that it is not appropriate, especially where the Trust Fund is modest, to spend a very long time explaining the technicalities to the client. While most Committee members would urge clients to check that their chosen Executors and Trustees are willing to act, this is not always appropriate where close relatives are concerned particularly in cases where they have in previous Wills been appointed as Executors/Trustees. It was agreed that in each case a judgement had to be made, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, as to the amount of detailed advice to be given on this subject.

6. Position of professional Executors/Trustees whose appointment is not welcomed by family members Committee members had all come across cases where a testator appointed a professional Executor and Trustee (in many cases as Trustee of a Discretionary Trust) to protect the testator ’s first family where there had been a subsequent marriage. It was agreed that clear Letters of Wish are important in this connection and that there can be merit in ensuring that the testator rather than professional advisors draw up the Letter of Wish, preferably in the testator ’s own handwriting. In any event professional Trustees can be placed in a very difficult position with opposition from the second spouse/family members to the professional’s involvement.

Attendance Notes and other information in the file relating to the preparation of the Will can be important, in addition to a clear Letter of Wish.

7. Date and place of next Meeting The next meeting will be on 10th September 2019 at the offices of Longmores, Hertford.

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Advertorial

Navigating the challenges ahead

I

t has been widely reported that the insurance market place is challenging, and practices preparing for renewal may find a toughening stance from insurers.

A number of factors are influencing the prevailing market conditions, but the two most impactful are: Market conditions Lloyd’s of London financial performance showed that between 2016 and 2018 60% of syndicates were unprofitable and underperforming. This identified non US PII as the second worst performing class of insurance within Lloyd’s and corrective measures are taking place. Many syndicates have reduced capacity, along with having an expectation to carry rate increases into 2019; when you combine these two factors it results in many of the syndicates having a limited new business appetite or ability for growth.

this to insurers. You can do this by following these steps: Step 1: Act early - begin the process early, capacity may diminish closer to the renewal date so it’s imperative not to close off potential avenues due to poor timing.

Step 2: Completion of your proposal form – do so with utmost care and attention, ensuring that your work split adds up to 100% and that you answer all the applicable questions. If any question specifically requests additional or supporting information, please make sure that you provide this. If a yes or no answer does not quite work for your practice and the way that you do things, please make clear reference and provide further explanation. Wherever possible complete the proposal form on a computer to ensure that it is legible and easy for an underwriter to understand.

Claims An increase in claims severity - with multiple loses breaching the compulsory primary layer of insurance. The most sizeable claims emanating from the following areas of practice:

Step 3: Claims information - Provide updated claim summaries even if you have had no claims as insures will require this information to satisfy their underwriting file. Your representative should be able to obtain these for you with your writing permission.

• Commercial Work • Depositor Funded developments • Escalating Ground Rent provisions • Litigation • Wills and Probate • Cyber Crime

If you have had claims or there are open reserves then an overview of what happened, and what lessons have been learned to prevent these from occurring in the future. If you have notifications open with no reserves, provide your view on both merit and quantum.

A number of these practice areas have generated losses that have impacted both primary and the first excess layer insurers which could have a bearing on some insurers’ rates. It has already led to significant reduction in willing insurers to provide coverage for the first excess layer above the compulsory primary layer, often described as the working layer so premiums for this layer of insurance are guaranteed to rise.

Step 4. Distinguish yourself from the crowd - As a proposal form generally provides the numeric data that an insurer can use to load up their pricing tool. It is the softer facts about your practice along with some expert broking that provide them with the necessary ingredients to deviate away from their technical pricing with this in mind, it would be prudent to provide a foreword about your practice.

Despite the challenges highlighted above, practices can still navigate through any potential insurance market turbulence ahead, proving that they present a detailed presentation and they are supported by some expert broking. Ultimately those active insurers will wish to align themselves with good businesses. It is therefore important that you take a proactive approach to demonstrate

This may include, a brief history how you have got to where you are today, the management and structure of the practice, your client base, along with your approach to quality control and risk management it is however important to be proud of the accomplishments of your practice.

▲ 16

It is likely you will be vying for the attention

of underwriters with hundreds of your peers. With this in mind, it is important to provide a quality presentation that provides the underwriters with a good insight and understanding of your practice but do so succinctly and do not drip feed information as this will put underwriters off.

Select the right representative for your firm Direct access to leading insurers It is incredibly important to prevent unnecessary links in the chain. Ignoring the delays that this may create in the event of a claim materialising, the immediate issue could well be in the forthcoming negotiation.

Additional and unnecessary links in the chain distance your practice from the underwriter and insurer. It can create unnecessary delays in the process and could result in your message to insurers being diluted too.

The more people in the process can mean increased premiums or that you don’t get appropriate service.

Experience and expertise Work with a broker, who has an understanding of the legal and the ability to appropriately articulate your practice to insurers. Choose a broker who can guide your practice and provide appropriate advice to you on policy and issues that may affect you. Furthermore, whilst no practice wishes to experience claims, you may wish to select a representative that has the appropriate resources and expertise to help you, when you will need it most should the need arise.

Strategy and timing We recommend approaching the market in good time, but it is equally important to present your practice well, so do take time over this. An underwriter will put their company’s capital at risk when they insure a practice so it is important that you help them make a positive decision about your practice.

If you provide your chosen representatives your detailed presentation 6 weeks prior to your renewal date this should be enough time to explore the market and present terms to you. The later you leave matters, there is more risk of encountering reduced capacity and less choice for your practice.

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Charity

Wales and Scotland are seeing fastest growth in charitable bequests Rob Cope - Director, Remember A Charity

and friends, a charitable bequest can be a surprisingly easy and efficient way to give.”

Currently, one in six probated estates include a charitable gift, but with the latest consumer tracking poll indicating that four in ten of the over 40s would like to do so, Remember A Charity believes there is significant potential for further growth.

Challenges of a post-Brexit world

I

nheritance Tax affects a small proportion of estates and yet the tax incentive for charitable estates has a huge impact. Why does it matter Wales and Scotland are Seeing Fastest Growth in Charitable Bequests Charities in Wales and Scotland are seeing faster income growth from gifts in Wills than other parts of the UK according to a new research report published by the 200-strong charity coalition Remember A Charity.

The UK Legacy Fundraising Market 2019 summarises income from gifts in Wills to the nation’s top legacy-earning fundraising charities, exploring the impact of the recession and subsequent economic recovery.

While charities across the UK have seen legacy income growth of 10% over the past decade, the smaller markets of Wales and Scotland have risen by 23% and 35% respectively. Health charities receive the largest share of donations, but the market is diversifying with many smaller and community-based organisations now being named in Wills. Overseas aid, environmental and services charities are increasing their space in the market, while those in the religious and social care fields are losing ground.

Rob Cope, director of Remember A Charity,

▲ 18

says: “Charitable bequests are often linked with the largest household name charities, but the market is growing and changing with non-profit organisations of all sizes and causes coming to the table. For many of these charities and their beneficiaries, a legacy gift can be completely transformational.”

Legacy income patterns tend to mirror the shape of the economy and reflect the number of estates going through probate. When property prices increase, inevitably estate and legacy values do too. While the report highlights that the 2008 recession led to a notable fall in income to charities, the market was quick to recover and growth continued in the subsequent years.

Looking to the future, the coalition expressed some caution about the years ahead. With the impact of Brexit as yet unknown and a rapidly ageing population facing rising care costs, estate values may well suffer and that could have a considerable impact on the nation’s charities.

Importance of legacy giving Underlining the importance of bequests to charities across the country, the research finds that legacies now account for 28% of the UK’s voluntary donations. For the top 1,100 fundraising charities alone, this equates to over £2.2 billion of vital charitable funding. For charities such as RNLI, legacies fund 6 in 10 lifeboats and a third of Cancer Research UK’s life-saving research.

Cope adds: “As awareness about legacy giving increases and the professional Will-writing community continues to make their clients available of the option of including a gift in their Will, we’re seeing a long-term increase in the proportion of estates including a charitable gift 1.

Cope adds: “Charities are increasingly reliant on gifts in Wills and although the number of donors is on the rise, we can see that legacy income is being stretched across a broader marketplace. The charity sector is likely to feel that stretch all the more as we deal with the uncertain economic future of a post-Brexit world. It’s vital that charities work collaboratively with the legal sector and government to normalise legacy giving and provide a more stable basis for this vital income stream for the years ahead.”

The proportion of probated estates including a charitable donation increase from 12.2% in 2007 to 15.7% in 2017. (Source: Smee and Ford).

1

“There is growing appetite for people to support the good causes they care about long after they are gone. Once supporters understand that gifts in Wills don’t have to be particularly large and can fit around their wishes to look after family

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

S

F

rom September 2018 the University of Hertfordshire’s Law School will be

Both

Letters

Letter to the editor With only a small percentage of LPC graduates gaining a training contract, competition has never been tougher and both trainees & junior lawyers have never been more replaceable. This is emphasised by the Resilience and Wellbeing survey published by the Junior Lawyer Division on 8 April 2019 which stated that 1 in 15 junior lawyers “regularly” felt unable to cope. In light of this ruling how are junior lawyers and trainees to proceed if a senior member of staff asks them to do something that they don’t feel comfortable with? Do they risk the career that they have spent a fifth of their life working on?

What do other solicitors advise, both professionally and personally, in these circumstances?

From struggling to understand Dear Editor,

Kind regards,

Having attended the National Junior Lawyer Division Conference, the Emily Scott Solicitor Disciplinary Tribunal ruling came up as a massive discussion topic. As a whistle-blower Emily Scott was not given protection for admitting to over-billing under the instruction of a more senior associate whilst training. This decision has made a large amount of junior lawyers uneasy to think of the consequences of reporting malpractices for fear of losing their careers before they’ve even begun.

Lizzy Trueman Trainee Solicitor Family Department

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

If you have any unanswerable questions, pressing concerns or just a bee in your bonnet, why not write a missive of your own? Emails to: jeremy@jcssolicitors.co.uk

21 ▲

â–² 22

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Education

The importance of IT across the curriculum Eliot Williams teaches Computing at Merchant Taylors' School. He talks of how Information Technology has become integral to the academic life of the school.

A pupil working with a 3D printer

W

e are fortunate at Merchant Taylors' to have exceptional IT provision and also that Computing occupies a strong position within the academic faculty. We teach Computing to all pupils in the Lower School which ensures that all boys, regardless of year of entry, receive appropriate tuition. In the Lower School we have a broad curriculum

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

which tries to incorporate the three main areas of computing: digital literacy, IT and computer science. The aim is to provide pupils with the skills to make use of the IT resources in all subjects hence the study of video editing, data analysis and programming. For those who wish to take the subject to a higher level we offer Computer Science at GCSE and A Level.

What has maybe changed most of all is the extent to which IT is now widely used across the different subject areas. Our new Edward Evans Geography Building has a dedicated Virtual Reality room as well as an Augmented Reality longform wave projector which aids pupils in the study of different terrains. In the Design Centre there are a number of 3D printers including two industrylevel machines and industry-standard CAD software which powers a full range of computernumerical controlled machinery that rivals the resources available in top universities. Clearly, to boys studying engineering or product design at university, this is the very best preparation they can have. More generally, we are making growing use of One Note class notebooks as a means of

distributing resources to students and allowing teachers instant access to all pupil work.

In terms of extra-curricular activity, there are two cyber-security clubs, one focused on protecting computers and the other on hacking. Boys who take part in these clubs can enter the National Cyber Centurion and the Government's Cyber Discovery Programme, both of which are coordinated in association with GCHQ. There is also a Unity Games Development Club which makes 3D games using the Unity Development Engine. The Computing department works with the Design & Technology department to offer a robotics club which also allows boys to enters national competitions.

This mix of IT both within and without the curriculum gives pupils the chance to develop their skills in a variety of contexts. It has helped the perception of Computing as a subject at Merchant Taylors' which, given the government focus on STEM subjects and the importance of technology in the global economy, can only be a good thing for the boys' future prospects.

23 ▲

Expert Witness

Experts and their evidence: some recent guidance W e are half way through the year and there have been a number of interesting first instance decisions which should be of interest to any litigator involved with the use of expert witnesses.

It is clear that the authors of these judgments have sought to provide some sound practical guidance.

I shall attempt to distil this into five things to think about, when discussing these authorities and others of no more than about a year’s vintage.

1. Failures by experts to adhere to the orders of the Court could have dire consequences The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) is one which caused quite a stir amongst litigators when it was published at the end of January 2019.

Here, the Court effectively struck out large portions of the Claimants’ case (said to be worth several hundred million Euros) without peremptory order or warnings (i.e. no ‘unless order’). When this issue was raised by counsel for the Claimants, Males J held that “...a party is not entitled to disregard the rules, secure in the knowledge that until an unless order is made it will always get a second chance”!

This matter came before the Court on 14 December 2018 ahead of trial due to commence on 22 January 2019. It was argued by the Defendant that Professor Kilgallon, the Claimants’ expert for the Turkish pharmaceutical industry, had failed to properly engage with his opposite number pursuant to the Court’s order for a joint meeting and a joint report ahead of trial. There was no application for relief from sanctions and no solution to the reality of the situation proposed by the Claimants which found favour with the Court.

It was held: “13. ...When an expert fails lamentably to comply with that order the whole procedure for further expert evidence in the case is thrown into disarray. The purpose of the supplemental reports is to enable the experts to comment on and express their further views upon the points on which they remain in disagreement, having had the benefit of a proper experts’ discussion at which they can properly understand the point of view of the opposing expert.

14. That has simply not happened in this case. It is impossible for the Defendant’s expert to say anything further in a supplemental report until he knows what Professor Kilgallon has to say about the matters on which he has expressed his opinion.

16. It seems to me that the position is that the Claimants have failed to comply with the terms on which they were given permission to adduce evidence of the Turkish pharmaceutical industry in this case. The burden is on them to provide a workable solution which they have not done. It is for them too to apply for relief from sanctions.

Again, they have not done so. They would need, if they were to do so, to give a proper explanation of why it is

▲ 26

that Professor Kilgallon has taken this approach on not one but two occasions. He must have been told, he certainly should have been told after the LMM expert memorandum was produced, that this was not an acceptable way to proceed.

17. The order which I make therefore is that as matters stand the Claimants do not have permission to adduce evidence of the Turkish pharmaceutical industry at the trial. The burden will be on them to come forward, as I have said, with a proper and acceptable procedure which will include a proper joint meeting and will meet the criteria of relief from sanctions if they wish to pursue this evidence. If they have simply left it too late to do so in an acceptable way then that is something for which they must take the consequences.”

The consequence of Males J’s ruling was dire in that the Claimant had no evidence upon which to prove substantial portions of their case as to quantum.

The lesson is that it should be anticipated that Courts will hold litigants responsible for failures by their experts who must be required to comply with the orders of the Court, probably particularly in relation to the production of so crucial a document as a joint report following a meeting. Close and active management of experts would seem prudent to ensure compliance. In default of this, the party needing to seek relief would be advised to do so promptly and put forward practical suggestions as to how to proceed without jeopardising any trial date whilst allowing such expert evidence to be timeously adduced with reasonable time for it to be considered.

2. Every effort should be made to cooperate to agree concise agendas for experts’ joint meetings In Saunders v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 343 (QB), the Claimant’s claim for damages in respect of an iatrogenic injury was dismissed on the basis of the expert evidence.

Mrs Justice Yip in her judgment made specific comment as to the Parties’ expert colorectal surgeons’ joint reports which were produced following the inability of the Parties’ legal teams to agree a joint agenda for discussion. As a result, at trial the Court was presented with a joint report of more than 60 pages, containing repetitive questions.

The Court pointed out that this approach did little to further the objective enshrined in paragraph 9.2 of the Practice Direction to CPR 35 “to agree and narrow issues”. It was held that “Parties should adopt a common sense and collaborative approach rather than allowing this stage of the litigation to become a battleground” and commented that “[p]erhaps greater input from Counsel may have assisted”.

A few months later, Yip J again came across the same problem when trying the clinical negligence case of Welsh v Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust [2018] EWHC 1917 (QB). Again, the joint statements were “not as useful as they might have been. The difficulty was caused by the inability of the parties to agree a single

agenda for the experts’ consideration”.

Expressing certain exasperation to once again be coming across this issue and seeking an explanation, the Court was referred to paragraph 13 of the model order which states: “... solicitors shall use their best endeavours to agree the Agenda. ... In default of agreement, both versions shall be considered at the discussions. ...”.

The learned judge proffered some guidance as to the proper interpretation of this at paragraph 36 of her judgment: “36. It was suggested that the form of the model order encourages more than one agenda to be sent to the experts. I cannot agree with this. The standard direction makes it clear that the solicitors are required to do their best to agree a single agenda. In the vast majority of cases, any disagreement ought to be capable of resolution through a bit of give and take. It may be appropriate to insert some additional questions into the draft at the Defendant’s request. It certainly should not become routine to provide two versions which, as here, travel over much of the same ground. That approach tests the patience of the experts (and frankly of the Court); produces a lengthier joint statement; potentially increases costs and is simply not the best way to focus on the issues. I do not think that anything further needs to be said or done in this case. However, if this worrying trend continues, parties may find that Courts begin considering costs consequences.”

These dicta are likely to be of some use in justifying the use of counsel or indeed more senior fee earner time at this stage and the allowance for the same at the costs budgeting stage. It is also likely to be a useful authority for a party seeking to encourage the cooperation of their opposite number when seeking to agree agendas.

An issue-based costs order is certainly possible, should such an attempt meet with intransigence.

3. Think hard before seeking to restrict the scope of an opponent’s expert evidence rather than leaving the matter for trial The case of Moylett v Geldoff & Anor [2018] EWHC 893 (Ch) was an intellectual property matter litigated between members of the Boomtown Rats about the authorship and copyright of the hit ‘I don’t like Mondays’.

In this case, the first Defendant applied to strike out parts of the Claimant’s expert dealing with the significant issue in the case, namely whether the music was more likely to have been composed on a guitar or a piano. It was argued that the Claimant’s report was objectionable as it contained opinions from professional guitarists, for which permission had not previously been granted and further went beyond what was permissible by expressing an opinion on the ultimate question in the proceedings.

Mrs Justice Carr gave judgment on 14 March 2018. In relation to the first issue, she held that she should apply the ratio of Rogers v Hoyle [2013] EWHC 1409 Continues on p.27

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Tel: 0117 403 7799 Mobile: 07831 784006 Website: www.david-bunker.com Email: davidbunker@david-bunker.com Address: 66 Gloucester Road, Bristol BS7 8BH

David Bunker is a member of the Academy of Experts and is an experienced mediator, arbitrator and a member of the President’s Appointments Scheme panel. He is appointed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants to deal with disputes referred to it.

For over fifteen years David Bunker has been applying his expertise as a Chartered Accountant to the resolution of business disputes.

This can take a number of different forms:

Acting as an Arbitrator

David is a member of the chartered institute of Arbitrators and is experienced in acting as a single or joint Arbitrator in disputes between shareholders and business partners.

Acting as an Expert Determiner

David is a member of the Academy of Experts and is called upon as an independent expert to report and determine the outcome of disputes arising out of accounting issues, such as the valuation of a business or the agreement of the proceeds on a business sale.

Party Expert

David is experienced at acting as an expert for one party to a dispute, preparing reports for consideration within that dispute, and working with the appointed legal team.

Mediator

David has wide experience as commercial mediator working with parties in dispute.

â–² 28

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Expert Witness

(QB) and hold “it is much preferable for the Court, rather than picking through expert reports, seeking to excise individual sentences and engaging in an editing exercise, to allow the trial judge to consider the report in its entirety, assuming that it is genuine expert evidence, and to attach such weight as it sees fit at the trial to those passages in the report.” In the instant case, she held that the Claimant’s expert had been entitled to rely upon professional guitarists and was obliged to set out that he had done so in his report. It was held that although one paragraph was on the margins of admissibility, in the context of the whole report, the expert was forming his own view based on what had been demonstrated to him and not pursuant to any suggestion that the professional guitarists themselves were providing expert opinion upon which anything turned.

As to the second question, Carr J was forthright in holding that this expert be allowed to express himself as he wished to and the weight to be placed upon such evidence be a matter for the trial judge. Insofar as it dealt with whether the music was more likely to have been composed on a guitar or a piano it was admissible evidence and might well be the subject of expert opinion in reply.

Mrs Justice Moulder made a similar ruling in A v B [2019] EWHC 275 (Comm) in a judgment published on 15 February 2019. Here, in a case where the Defendant challenged the Claimant’s claim for an arbitral award, the Defendant took issue with parts of an expert’s report. These parts of the report purported to deal with questions of construction or the application of the law to the facts – these in part were said to cut across arguments which the Defendant would wish to make at a hearing listed for March 2019. The Defendant sought to distinguish and limit the scope of Rogers on the basis that this can be distinguished from a report about applicable foreign law. This submission was rejected with Moulder J holding that the Court of Appeal’s guidance was of general application. She held that the arguments run by the Defendant should properly be made before the judge at the March hearing and to determine the matter now would be an undesirable pre-emption.

Rogers remains of general application. Unless so obviously or grossly inappropriate that it should not be permitted to form the basis of a party’s case at trial, the Courts should allow such expert evidence as a party wishes to adduce and leave the questions of admissibility and ultimately credibility and weight to the trial judge.

4. Beware of pre-emptively obtaining and utilising expert evidence for which permission has yet to be given On an application from the Claimant for permission to rely on a report from a neurosurgeon in the clinical negligence case of Hall v Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 3276 (QB), Master Thornett, with unabashed frustration at the manner in which various aspects of this case had been presented over two hearings, emphasised the risks of presumptive steps being taken by a party in respect of expert evidence obtained but upon which the party had no permission to rely.

The Courts are understandably and properly keen to stress the need for proportionality, expedition and

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

proactivity in the prosecution of claims. No doubt with this in mind, when the Claimant party in this case read in the report of its neurologist (in respect of which permission had been obtained) that the report of a neurosurgeon was required. The same was obtained and sent to the already instructed experts for comment.

This neurosurgical opinion did not support any causal link relevant to the injuries in this case. The neurosurgeon considered the Claimant’s ongoing symptoms to be related to a psychiatric reaction. The Court thus assessed that his evidence when viewed in isolation was limited to whether the Claimant may require certain future treatment which was a minor aspect of the Claimant’s claim. Permission to rely upon this evidence was thus refused. The Claimant was put to the expense of having to excise all reference to that evidence in the addenda reports of her other experts.

This appears a harsh judgment and open to criticism from the perspective of the Claimant’s solicitors. They no doubt would have felt their client exposed by not having obtained evidence recommended by another expert, if only to assist in providing a diagnosis and prognosis by eliminating a neurosurgical aetiology.

This case however serves as a stark reminder that the exercise of a Court’s discretion as to expert evidence should not be taken for granted and to do so is liable to lead to costs being wasted. This must be a risk for lawyers to consider and clients and insurers to be warned about.

The more liberal approach taken on the facts of Mays (a Protected Party by the Official Solicitor) v Drive Force (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 5 (QB) by Deputy Master Hill QC on 4 January 2019, however, shows us the specific nature of the judgment as to which experts a party would be advised to instruct.

This was a high value personal injury case in which the Claimant had sustained traumatic brain injuries and orthopaedic injury pursuant to an accident at work. As a result, he lacked litigation capacity and was unable to return to paid employment. The Defendant argued that the Claimant’s life-expectancy by reason of his pre-existing co-morbidities (smoking, hypertension, obesity, colitis) was an important factor in the case and sought permission to rely on expert evidence as to the same. This was opposed by the Claimant.

The Deputy Master allowed the application on the grounds that this was an appropriate case for such free-standing statistical life expectancy evidence.

The fact that the value of the case was high and such evidence could make a significant impact upon quantum was taken into account, as was the existing neurologist experts’ inability to address all the factors potentially pertaining to life expectancy absent the index accident.

The Court emphasised that this would not lead to the opening of any floodgates for the instruction of such experts. It is however difficult to deny the utility (probably mostly to Defendant parties) in obtaining such statistical evidence in any case where there is a substantial lifetime claim for damages, such as for care, accommodation or services, where the claiming party had some comorbidity known to downwardly affect life expectancy and where this is not wholly addressed by other experts.

5. Imposing retrospective conditions upon reliance upon expert evidence is likely to be very difficult The case of Bowman v Thompson (2019) (unreported, QBD, Dingemans J, 21 January 2019) concerned a situation probably familiar to many of those involved in litigation where expert evidence is prevalent.

This was a clinical negligence claim brought against a general practitioner where it was alleged that the Claimant’s cauda equina syndrome had been mismanaged. The Claimant obtained permission to rely upon the report of a consultant urologist who provided an initial ‘advisory only’ report and then a substantive report following the issuing of the Claim.

Thereafter, the Claimant instructed a further urologist expert, having lost confidence in the first expert.

During the course of the disclosure of the latter report, the Defendant discovered the involvement of the earlier expert and sought disclosure of this report.

This was resisted by the Claimant on the grounds of litigation privilege but disclosed the earliest report on a ‘without prejudice basis’.

The Defendant thus made an application to the Court that the Claimant only be allowed to rely upon his served substantive report should he disclose the one not served. This was refused on the basis that the judge held that there was no discretion to impose retrospective conditions on a party’s permission to rely on expert evidence already granted.

Mr Justice Dingemans dismissed the Defendant’s appeal of this decision. He held that there was no vehicle for the retrospective imposition of a condition on existing orders and even if it had been argued that the judge below should have varied the order pursuant to CPR 3.1(7), in the absence of mistake or misstatement, such an exercise of discretion would not have been appropriate.

The lesson from the Court is that the time to seek such a condition as sought by the Defendant in this case (see also Edwards-Tubb v JD Wetherspoon PLC [2011] EWCA Civ 136) was at the permission stage, before which is the time to seek confirmation as to whether any other experts had been instructed by their opposite number. An affirming answer should lead to the seeking of an order conditional upon the disclosure of the earlier evidence. A negative answer should be reassuring if correct and if not, potentially grounds for a Court to exercise a discretion to vary under CPR 3.1(7).

Thomas Crockett Hailsham Chambers, March 2019 Disclaimer: This article is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted.

29 ▲

Articles

Report to the SAALS meeting

By Bhavni Fowler, Relationship Manager, The Law Society

Probate fees

• Government announced the fee increase in November 2018. We responded quickly, criticising the move and calling the steep increase a stealth tax.

Stakeholder engagement

• We continue to work with a range of stakeholders, to improve practice around various issues, including: testamentary capacity assessments, joint accounts and our banking protocols.

• We are feeding into the APPG on IHT alongside our Tax Law Committee.

• We continue to work with the MoJ to develop their online probate service.

Consultations

• We briefed the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, who echoed our concerns and drew special attention to the Order. We also briefed Peers ahead of a debate on the order in December, encouraging them to support both the motion to decline and motion to regret the order.

• We continue to represent our members by responding to relevant consultations across government. We have responded to consultations from the Charity Commission, Law Commission and HMT.

• We briefed members of the Delegated Legislation Committee in February ahead of their consideration of the Order. We also briefed members of the House of Commons, including the Labour and Lib Dem front bench teams, urging them to vote against the motion to approve the Order when it is brought to a vote.

• We have also responded to the Scottish Government on its consultation on Scottish Trusts to highlight potential cross border implications.

• We have also launched a campaign inviting our members, as well as the public to write to their MPs, highlighting our concerns that the fees amount to a tax on grieving families. To date, over 2,500 people have engaged with this campaign. We would encourage members to join our campaign if they haven’t already.

Bhavni Fowler 26th June 2019

• We continue to engage with the Law Commission’s wills project.

• We have briefed well over 400 MPs on our concerns • We’ve been quoted in discussions around the order 12 times in Parliament (9 in the Lords, 3 in the Commons).

• We have briefed, and are continuing to brief, parliamentarians ahead of debates in Parliament • We have engaged with and secured the support of key MPs for our campaign, including the Labour and Lib Dem front benches and several key Conservative backbenchers • •We’ve been very vocal in criticising the plans through the media.

Members of the Wills and Equity Committee have been interviewed on radio and quoted in various national newspapers, including the Guardian and the Financial Times.

• We’re also working with other organisations to ensure consistency in our messaging. E.g. we worked with STEP and ICAEW to publish a joint letter in the Telegraph highlighting the dangerous precedent set by government in how this increase has been introduced.

• We’ve also met with the MoJ and HMCTS to discuss the need to work with the profession to ensure clarity around key issues e.g. how the increase will be implemented, what support will be available to help executors pay the fees etc.

• On Friday 26 April, we published a Q&A prepared by HMCTS through our private client section website. Further information will be made available as and when we can share it.

• The Government has not brought the Order to a vote.

Practice notes

• We’ve reviewed and updated a number of practice notes over the last year e.g. we’ve updated guidance on disputed wills, file retention for trusts and lasting powers of attorney.

▲ 30

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Expert Witness

â–² 32

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Quiz

Lawyers in the Movies Quiz Answers 1.

Gregory Peck Atticus Finch To Kill a Mockingbird

8.

Charles Laughton Sir Wilfred Roberts Witness for the Prosecution

15. Robert Duvall Tom Hagen The Godfather

2.

Jack Thompson Major J F Thomas Breaker Morant

9.

Spencer Tracey Judge Dan Hayward Judgement at Nuremburg

16. Nick Nolte Sam Bowden Cape Fear

3.

Dirk Bogarde Sydney Carton A Tale of Two Cities

10. William Shatner Captain Byers Judgement at Nuremburg

17. Maximillian Schell Hans Rolfe Judgement at Nuremburg

4.

Richard Widmark Col Tad Lawson Judgement at Nuremburg

11. Reese Witherspoon Elle Woods Legally Blonde

18. Keanu Reeves Kevin Lomax The Devil’s Advocate

5.

Joe Pesci Vinny Gambini My Cousin Vinny

12. Matthew McConaughey Mick Haller The Lincoln Lawyer

19. Tom Hanks James B. Donovan Bridge of Spies

6.

Tom Cruise Mitch McDeere The Firm

13. Julia Roberts Erin Brokovich Erin Brokovich

20. Michael Douglas Mark Hunter Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

7.

Paul Newman Frank Galvin The Verdict

14. Susan Sarandon Reggie Love The Client

Legal History Quiz Answers 1. Illinois 2.

1964, 13 August (Peter Anthony Allen and Gwynne Owen Evans for the murder of John Alan West)

3.

Liz Truss

4. 1928 (1918 was for women over the age of 30 who met a property qualification) 5. 1837 (Forgery Act 1837) 6. 1215 7.

England (Inner Temple) in 1891 – he practised in India and South Africa

8.

Maximilien Robespierre

9. 2009 10.

New Zealand (1893)

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

33 ▲

Advertorial

Solving the back office puzzle

By Julian Bryan, Managing Director, Quill

T

rue professional ‘cradle to grave’ solutions are difficult to find. It’s rare that suppliers to the legal sector offer everything needed in a modern-day law firm’s back office – that’s software to manage accounts, matters and documents, and outsourced services to take over core administration functions. At Quill, however, that’s exactly what we do – provide a single platform that combines the applications and outsourced support required to operate a high-performing legal business.

You only have to look at our website’s home page to meet the entire series of software and services available from Quill. Users can pick and choose from: Interactive – case management, legal accounts and document management software with in-built risk management functionality; Pinpoint – outsourced legal cashiering service using Interactive; Payroll – outsourced payroll and pension management service; Type – outsourced typing service delivered in association with Document Direct; Precision – outsourced legal cashiering service on any software; and Bookkeeping – outsourced bookkeeping service for all sectors.

But before diving into more detail about our software and services, we’d like you to join us on a mini history tour of Quill in order to show you how this full service provision has come about. You see, we actually first started out in business way back in 1978 – over 40 years ago. Right from these early days, our systems were being designed to help practices avoid unnecessary repetitive paperwork tasks for which the law is renowned.

In the intervening 40-plus years, the legal industry remains our absolute focus, our technology has developed to the current complete cloud-based practice management system it is today, and our offerings have been extended to also include outsourced cashiering, payroll and typing services. 1978 to 2019 has been a truly remarkable journey.

To quote some statistics from the present day: our Interactive software has earned over 7,000 current users; our Pinpoint division posts over 2 million transactions every year; our Payroll team processes over 100,000 payslips annually

▲ 34

and last year transferred over £54 million in salaries as an accredited BACS bureau; every other department just keeps growing.

Going back to why Quill’s so unique, our lengthy heritage, privately owned status and one-stop-shop portfolio really set us apart from our competitors. Few of our contemporaries can boast a comparable expansive background.

Fewer still can make claims about independent ownership. And even fewer can proffer a total back office product range.

Moving on to our clients, many of our users have been with us from the very beginning.

Their continued loyalty speaks volumes about the close relationships we’ve formed together over a period of four decades and the quality of our various solutions which they use on a day-to-day basis.

Browse through our multiplying number of case studies online and you’ll see how our clients wax lyrical about our personable, longserving employees who are ambassadors for Quill; ethical stance evidenced by multiple accreditations and charitable giving; technologically advanced software that’s won awards; and catalogue of outsourced services which allow them to concentrate on their business-critical responsibilities without distraction.

Clients repeatedly tell us that, simply by choosing Quill as their principal business partner, they’re able to become “digital by default”, “compliant to the letter of the CLC Accounts Code”, “free to do what I do”, “a successful, profit-making firm”, “focused on matter management and business development”, “revolutionised”, “100% assured of regulatory compliance”, “more economical and productive [with] use of resources – both human and material”, “able to work flexibly when out of the office”, “committed to the cloud concept” (note: their words, not ours!) and much more besides.

Allan Hunt, Senior Partner at MPP Solicitors, expresses similar sentiments: “[With] Quill we have trusted relationships. [We use] Payroll as a bolt on to Quill’s Pinpoint service and Interactive software which we already subscribe to. With Quill firmly behind us, our back office operates smoothly and integrates seamlessly.”

By utilising our extensive time-saving, efficiency-enhancing, cost-reducing, securityboosting, compliance-assured products, an ever-growing list of benefits are achieved.

Through heavy investment in R&D, we ensure this is the case. Our ongoing software and service development is a future-proofing promise that, whatever changes and challenges are faced by the legal profession, Quill’s got every client’s back.

We know that not all firms are the same.

Each has differing demands which are best overcome with a differing mixture of software and services. It’s our role to ascertain what this is, thereby providing the proper tools to take control of processes and optimise performance, both now and into the future. We find nothing more satisfying than empowering law firms to do just that.

To discover more about Quill, please visit www.quill.co.uk, email info@quill.co.uk or call 0161 236 2910.

Julian Bryan joined Quill as Managing Director in 2012 and is also the Chair of the Legal Software Suppliers Association. Quill has been a leading provider of legal accounting and case management software, and the UK’s largest supplier of outsourced legal cashiering services, to the legal professional for over 40 years.

Nick Timmings, Partner at Petersfields LLP, perfectly sums up what clients think about Quill: “By relying on Quill for all our main software and service needs, we have one monthly payment, one point of contact and one primary store of our electronic files. It’s so convenient and so much easier to run our business in this totally integrated way”.

Hertfordshire Law Society Gazette

Education

S

F

rom September 2018 the University of Hertfordshire’s Law School will be

Both

http://www.hertslawsoc.org.uk/

35 ▲